Moral Poverty

In the home of the free and the land of the brave, we have people who are without homes, some by choice, but most because "the system" has failed. Systems like family systems, health systems, human service systems, in other words, the social safety net has sprung a huge leak.

I was surprised to learn while watching 20/20 the other night, that charitable giving of time and money is not necessarily a strong suit of liberals. It appears that studies show that poorer persons who are religious tend to give a higher percentage of their earnings than those who are middle-class or higher. According to Arthur C. Brooks a professor at Syracuse University, who has just published "Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth About Compassionate Conservatism ", "strong families, church attendance, earned income (as opposed to state-subsidized income), and the belief that individuals, not government, offer the best solution to social ills-all of these factors determine how likely one is to give." Brooks as states that "approximately three-quarters of Americans give their time and money to various charities, churches, and causes; the other quarter of the population does not. "

A couple of statistics he provides:

Conservative households in America donate 30% more money to charity each year than liberal households.

If liberals gave blood like conservatives do, the blood supply in the U.S. would jump by about 45%.

If these and other suppositions of Brooks are true, the left as a group, progressives in particular, are engaging in the worst type of pandering, using the plight of the poor to create a base of power. I'm looking forward to reading his book to unravel how he arrives at his conclusions. In the mean time, I am going to evaluate my own behaviors.

This is a good time to take stock of what is really important--people taking care of people.

Next Issue: Affordable Housing

The housing bubble has burst. According to Harvard University "Across the nation, government cutbacks on construction, maintenance, and subsidies for low-income housing, combined with the booming economy's overheated real-estate market, have created what many experts are calling an affordable housing crisis. They predict that the problem is likely to get worse because of a widening income gap and a shrinking stock of low-income units." There is little doubt that those in need of affordable housing (Housing is generally considered "affordable" when its cost does not exceed 30 percent of the median family income in a given area.) were left out of the mix in the early With the median price of housing hovering in the $200,000 range, there are a significant number of lower income families (earning less than 50% of the median annual income) that have housing insecurity.

Why does housing matter so much. Stable family situations are recognized as one factor of student success in school housing stability, particularly in the early grades. Stable housing and is tied to lower domestic abuse rates, more community involvement, and lower crime rates.

Add to this the social justice aspect of persons having a basic need met. Affordable housing should not be a privilege, but a civil liberty, just as adequate food and clothing are necessary to sustain life. All persons should have access to safe, clean housing. The question is, how do we accomplish the goal?

One possibility is to take away the incentives to own rental housing, unless for the specific purpose of providing to housing to those who would otherwise be unable to afford it. In college towns it is a widely accepted practice to purchase real estate for investment purposes. The effect is to push up the rents for housing by relying on a captive audience who can afford a higher rent than the local lower income person can.

Another is to work with public/private partnerships to build housing that is affordable and can be financed creatively to allow those who are "high risk" to have a home and the informed responsibility to keep it.

Your thoughts?