A Special Invitation to 'Odyssey'...

Last night I  met a woman and her three-year-old grandson. The woman's daughter, and the boy's mother, is currently deployed overseas in the US military. The boy has  not seen his mother, or his father, since he was born. Both his mother and father are  receiving treatment for physical, psychological and emotional injuries  they suffered  while serving in two consequtive wars.

There are countless other American military families in similar situations. Do we really 'honor their sacrifice', as is so often proclaimed by politicians in speeches, or by celebrities before sporting events, with jets flying over the field to thunderous applause? Are these authentic and sincere displays of support, or are they just political and social artifice?    

 Even just attempting to answer the question requires a suspension of belief in what we know to be real and authentic in life. If you want to play with it on your own, go ahead. I'll pass.

Roughly 1% of our population participates in the active 'military' defense of our nation. Can you, with a straight face, tell me that you believe we are, as we so proudly and smugly proclaim to the rest of the world,  a representative democracy -- a community of people who share the hard work of being a nation equally? 

I'll pass again on that debate.  So rather than discuss it,  I'd like to extend a special invitation to people serving us in our military (and their families and friends) to share their 'odysseys' -- their stories, thoughts, and anything else they like on this page.  I, in turn. will do my best  to provide links to resources and information  related to your needs, as well as disseminate your stories as far and wide as I possibly can. 

In 2009 I was diagnosed with a post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). No, it was not due to service in the military. Sometimes the domestic American landscape can feel like a battlefield. It did for me. In my book, An Odyssey in the Great American Safety Net, I describe in candid and graphic detail how I dealt with the condition and my recovery. It was therapeutic, if not life-saving, for me to write about my experience. Therefore, I'm not going to rehash that experience here. (My book is available as an e-book on Amazon; and if there are any service persons who cannot afford to buy the book, contact me directly and I will send you a free copy of my original manuscript.)

But mostly I, we, want you to tell us your stories. Please tell us as honestly and as graphically as you want to what it is like to be stationed overseas in a foreign land; how it feels to enter combat; and how, if it did, did the experience change your life or your perspective on life.  We truly, sincerely, want to know.  ( No jets just flew over my apartment wasting thousands of dollars of fuel.)

Allow us to honor you by listening; let us support you by providing information about other supportive groups and organizations. And lastly, let us feel you; let us in so we can know you better like a brother or sister.

Thank you.
 

'Advocates" & "Odyssey' Complement One Another

When I was thinking of what ways might be best to represent the themes in my book, An Odyssey in the Great American Safety Net' I was originally torn between the personal story of my 'odyssey' and the  broader social and political meanings that could be drawn from my experience. 

In the end I decided to do both because I feel that the two sides of the story complement one another and together provide a more holistic understanding of the American 'safety net' than either one on its own could provide.

When Alexander Solzhenitsyn wrote One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovic --   a largely autobiographical work -- he didn't have his character opine on the fairness or lack thereof of the Soviet penal system. He simply described what one day of life there was like. I'm not equating the American 'safety net' with a Soviet penal colony, I'm just making the analogy that we both used the same literary form -- simple realistic storytelling -- that allows the reader to make their own judgements about the experience described. 


My experience of American social services, however,  did not end where the book did. I've gone on to advocate -- as best I can as a private citizen -- for a social services that work better at realistically investing in people, rather than just providing them with enough financial assistance to exist and survive. The later approach doesn't do society or the people receiving the inadequate assistance any good. It's a waste of time and money.

 I've had to deal with bureaucratic ennui: social services is a large, overloaded system and the workers there, like the clients they serve, seem to just be treading water. They are too overloaded by the sheer numbers of people receiving assistance to find time to think period, let alone think about more creative solutions to the overall problem. 

That's one factor, and a major one. Ironically, federal and state governments are cutting budgets on the funding of people and resources for social services at the very same time that the number of people needing assistance is growing. This will, inevitably, out of necessity, lead to changes. Odds are, however, as it stands now, those changes will not alleviate the problems and will most likely lead to even more social instability and economic unfairness.

Those are some of the 'concrete' reasons why social services are not really working to alleviate poverty in America.  Aside from the economic factors, which is a whole other topic unto itself,  there is something I pointed to in earlier blogs: the social human factor. As I wrote previously, in the same way that a generation or so ago Americans looked upon  people of color, women, and gays as inferior, inept or odd, these types of attitudes  exist among Americans today about people who are in need of assistance. Basically, 'there must be something wrong with them'. (It's never because there might be something fundamentally wrong with our social or economic systems.)

This is why I felt it equally important to emphasize the 'odyssey',or the personal journey, that any one of us could embark on if we get into a situation of needing assistance from others at some time in our life.

If I had to choose another literary analogy, it would be John Howard Griffin's book, Black Like Me. The book was written in 1959 by a White writer who posed as a Black man, traveled throughout the country,and recorded his experiences in order to show what it felt like to be Black in America at that time. I could have called my book, Poor Like Me (though I surely would never do that). The main difference, though,  is that I was not posing to be something I was not. I did not enter the American 'safety net' on some kind of 'journalistic mission' in order to see how poor people are being treated these days. The 'safety net' was literally just that for me; if it didn't work out, I'd likely not be faring so well right now.  In  my book, I  candidly recount the story of how I got into the 'safety net'. In my case,  I willingly chose to put the welfare and security of a family member ahead of my own and paid a price for it.  That's something that could happen to anyone -- and especially among people of my generation whose parents are living longer than ever. So, in that sense,  my book is similar to Griffin's in that I'm aiming to re-humanize a part of the population that's been marginalized, misunderstood  and stereotyped.  I'm honest about the range of emotions I experienced while negotiating my way through the 'safety net'. 

The point is, I think it is first of all critically important to understand and empathize with the human stories that make up the tangled web of the 'safety net'. It's only when we can do that, that we will he able to make  social and political reforms to social services that will actually help people help themselves better in the future. Compassion breeds understanding, and understanding leads to real, lasting solutions. 

If you have a story, or a comment, please share it now.

An Invitation to 'Odyssey'

Most of us at some time in our adult lives are going to experience a personal crisis -- be it from an illness or accident; or the death , loss or irrevocable separation from a loved one.

By and large, society does not support us at these times. There's a strong cultural bias, especially in America, toward 'feeling good all the time'. This feeling often translates into an unease and aversion toward people in our society who happen to 'not be feeling so good' at a particular time in their lives.  It's as if 'feeling good' is so fragile that it might be contaminated or spoiled by contact with a different emotion.

That begs the question, 'How strong could 'feeling good' have been in the first place?' But that's a different question, perhaps, to be examined at another time.

What I'd like to focus on here is how we get through these times when we are left largely on our own to do so?

Because of all the negative and fearful attention we receive from society when we are in a personal crisis, it is often very difficult to work through our emotions in order to see exactly what happened that got us in to the situation we are in. One first has to get over the guilt of 'not feeling good'. And that's often much harder to do than it might seem on the surface because  the unsolicited advice we receive often has more to do with the solicitor's own issues of avoidance, fear and insecurity. Though in the process of 'caring about us' they are transferred to us.

What a dilemma? Now we are not only dealing with our own troubles, but those given to us by others close to us. Which is why others often get angry and blame us for 'not feeling right' -- as if we are feeling that way  on purpose to annoy them, or to remind them how fragile their own sense of well being is.

This is where it becomes vitally important to take a step back and sort out what has actually happened to us --  without the guilt or fear that we are hurting someone else by feeling the way we do.

I'm not saying that writing is the only way to sort these things out. I'm just saying that it worked for me, and it's why I share those experiences very candidly in my memoir: An Odyssey in the Great American Safety Net.  I invite you to read an excerpt by clicking here

And then share with us your story on my Facebook Page: An Invitation to Odyssey.  (I know you've got one.)

Why Create A Social Media Platform of Advocates for Social & Economic Reforms

For the last few weeks I've been struggling with the challenge of how to utilize social media in order to promote my latest book, An Odyssey in the Great American Safety Net.

My primary reason for doing this, frankly, is that I am told by professionals in the publishing business that it is now absolutely essential for an author to have a social media platform for their work if they want to see it published.


But that also begs the deeper and more profound question: Why create a social media platform for 'Advocates for Social and Economic Reforms'?

The first thing that comes to mind is that we are living in an age when much if not the majority of our information and opinions about social and cultural issues comes from people working in 'think tanks'. 'Tank' is the operative word in this case because most of these people are 'professional thinkers' who seem to live and operate from a  secure 'tank' safely distanced from the realities they are describing and commenting on.  That's a cultural problem in and of itself and not something I want to address on my site. My site will be dedicated to presenting what I feel is a much needed alternative to that perspective.

Again why? In addition to having lived in the 'safety net' I also work as an advocate and activist on the issue of economic fairness in America. That experience leads me to believe that there is a need for a site that can become something of a hub for all the different groups trying to tackle this issue in various ways. There are a lot of them; but, by and large, they act independently of one another and are not coordinated.    

The most obvious reason for this is that most of these groups are professional institutions -- for profit or not -- with a vested interest in holding on to their 'territory'. Believe it or not, there is a competition going on between many of these groups  as to who does the better job or has the superior approach.

Seeing as my site doesn't have any reason for being other than presenting all the information about what these groups offer makes it the perfect, by default, hub-site. And, trust me, when you are entangled in the safety net all you really want to know, as simply and quickly as possibly, is what to do to next not to make your  life any more difficult, and what steps you can take to enhance your situation. You could care less which group does it best or why.

So that's one specific goal for my site: to provide simple practical guidance on how to navigate the safety net when you are in a personal crisis situation. (My book does the same.)

This is perhaps something you don't know if you have not been  in an extreme crisis situation: almost as much as you need a solid footing underneath you, you also require some forms of personal support  in order to keep going. You need empathy and hope as much as you need air.

How can an online site provide that? Simply put, as best it can. Most people in the safety net have access to the internet; often, it's required for mandatory job searching a set number of hours every day.

In addition to posting local jobs, which I plan to do,  I will also be posting stories by people who have gone through similar difficult circumstances and overcame them, as well as those who have gained from the experience of helping out. I don't want to limit this only to verbal expressions. I invite participation by people who feel inspired to express themselves about these issues and experiences through poetry, music, photography and film.

Many of us will face an extreme personal crisis at some times in our lives; I'd like my site to a be a place where it can be embraced and resolved, not hidden from or made to feel ashamed of. A site that recognizes that we are all in this together and  that we benefit mutually from helping one another. That's the real 'why' for my site.

I welcome any and all (especially technical) suggestions on the 'how'.     

Why Crete A Social Media Platform for 'Advocates for Socfial & Economic Reforms?

A View From Inside the 'Safety Net'

In my last blog, Why Social Services and the Safety Net Simply Can't Work Right Now, I posted my thoughts about why the Safety Net can't work at this present time in America. I pointed out two major reasons: One, is that I feel Americans have a skewed view of people who are now living at or near poverty levels of income.  These attitudes -- generally speaking, that there is something 'wrong' with poor people -- goes back far in our history and runs deep. It's a mix of a Protestant work ethic, and a ruggedly romantic individualistic "John Wayne' notion of what it means to be an American, and particularly an American man.  And, last but not least, racism. I've been voting for more than 30 years, and every Presidential campaign I have witnessed  -- including the most recent one -- provided some references, subtle and not so subtle, to the social services safety net being some kind of  poor man's country club for Blacks and Hispanics.

Trust me, I have lived in the safety net and it is anything but a country club. (More on that later.) And although most of us know by now -- statistically speaking -- that Whites make up the largest proportion and percentage of Americans using social services; well, if you've ever talked with a bigot then you know already how much they value facts and stats. Racism's heydays seem to be waning, but to pretend that it's not still there, doesn't remain deeply ingrained in the American psyche,  is delusional and counter-productive to solving the poverty problem in America. As long as those needing help are a 'them' and not an 'us', the problem will persist. 

When one is in the safety net it is akin to being in a leper colony:  First, you are isolated or 'ghettoized' among yourselves; and then treated as though you inhabit some horrific and contagious disease. What country club does that?

As it works now, Social Services is good at maintaining people at a survival level of existence, but does not, or does very little, in the way of helping them become self-sufficient and productive members of society.   In that sense, it's not a complete waste of taxpayers money, but close to it. 

The specific reason for this is a lack of willingness to invest in people who are in the safety net. Maintaining a person in the safety net is expensive -- subsidized rent and food. Having a place to live and something to eat is of course vitally important -- for survival, but not for living.  Most of us are not living in a jungle where we can turn to Mother Nature for sustenance. We have to make money in order to get the things we need to live, and in order to do that we need to have the financial wherewithal to be able to look for work. It takes money to find or create work -- for transportation, clothes, toiletries, health care and, in this day and age, access to the internet.

Try doing all that on $140.00 a month -- the average general assistance allowance. It's nearly impossible.

The reason most new businesses fail is because they started up without enough capital; the same is true for individuals. It is much more common for people on Emergency Assistance to stay in the safety net for a short period of time, and then go back to the living situation that caused their emergency. The money invested in them during that period of time was almost completely wasted; it returned next to nothing on the investment.

The hurdle to jump over in order to deal with this problem is, unfortunately, once again an invisible one, coming from our core beliefs about ourselves as a society: Mistrust of poor people to make good decisions, invest properly, in themselves.

I'll get into the reasons for the mistrust shortly, but let's look at this first from a monetary or business perspective. If you, as an investor -- in this case state and federal government -- are getting a zero, or near zero, return on your investment than shouldn't you think about changing it? You can't invest any less or those you are investing in will lose their places to live and ability to eat rendering them a complete zero  - and more than likely they'll revert to criminal activity in order to get what they need to survive.  Now you are in the minus column on your investment. But if you invested a little more -- and you do have the capital to do so -- you might  get a much better return on your investment.

Sound reasonable? So why not do it? That brings us back to the issue of mistrust. The bias against 'giving people something for nothing'(getting nothing in return for your generosity)  is an understandable one. No one likes to do that. But it is exactly what Social Services is doing by not investing enough -- it's getting nothing in return.  So why else would these services hold back on investing? Because -- and this is a Major One -- there's a rock-solid belief that most people in the safety net would use the cash-money for nefarious purposes, i.e. drugs.

Of course a certain amount of people in the safety net use drugs. We're a drug addled society -- why would the poor be immune?  But that's another kettle of fish, how to deal with that societal problem.

The point I am making here, and this will be my final one, is that we need to start looking at people in the safety net as underused or under-functioning resources and find better ways of investing in those resources -- for their good and our own good. I'll leave you with a quote from Corey Booker, mayor of Newark, N.J.: "When we empower someone to succeed, we all succeed."

Right on! Right on...
               

'Why Social Services or the Safety Net Simply Can't Work Right Now.'

The title of the blog might make it seem as though I am pessimistic about the role that social services or the safety net can play in American society.

I'm not.

I'm simply pointing out that it is going to take time. Why? Because there first needs to take place a paradigm shift in the social cultural and political attitude of Americans towards people who are living at or near the poverty threshold.

America did once have a more fluid and egalitarian economy -- following the end of World War II up until roughly the 'Reagan Era' in the 1980s. Reagan's eight year conservative reign oversaw a political shift away from an egalitarian model of economics (we are all in this together) to  a more Darwinian  'winner take all' one.

As a result of that, which subsequently also led directly to the outsourcing of American jobs to cheap or slave labor markets, and the crushing of labor unions, there are more Americans living in poverty now than any time since the Great Depression.

At that time, however, it brought about a political leader, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who, given his personal patrician background, became an unlikely but very effective executive advocate for those living in poverty.

In fact, the social programs or safety net we currently have in place could largely be attributed to his administration. His most effective and enduring programs were those that provided people with public works employment and free or affordable higher education.  At that time, it was also recognized that labor unions played a positive role in not allowing the working class to become second- or third-class economic citizens.

Historians looking closely at the social reforms of these times also point out that these economic changes were not made out of benevolence but from a real fear of social rebellion and revolt. That's what masses of abused, hungry people do -- they revolt.

The social services we have now are enough to stave off revolt, but not enough to foster a shift in Americans' attitudes toward people living in poverty. That's going to take time.

Why am I not pessimistic about this change taking place? Because in my lifetime I've witnessed and experienced major shifts -- out of necessity, one might argue -- in America's attitudes toward people of color, women and gays.   Those changes didn't happen overnight. 

To end poverty the same type of attitude change has to take place toward people living at or near poverty in our society. It seems to me that our society has three directions it can go in in this matter: increase wages in the country in order to provide a viable living wage (doesn't seem likely) or accept the fact that we do have a two-tier economic system and that social services are going to have to become a larger and more accepted  part of American life.  The latter path will necessitate not only a major paradigm shift in American attitudes toward people living at poverty levels,  but in our core belief (or delusion) that we are a society that provides equal opportunity and fosters economic self-reliance.  And, of course, the third course is that if you are unable to provide a level playing field, and refuse to acknowledge the necessity of adequate social services, than we will end up fostering social unrest and revolt and suppressing it in the name of law and order. (Way  more costly financially and socially than providing a living wage or adequate social services.)

Most people living at or near poverty in America are not there because of some character defect or unwillingness to work hard. They are there because there has been a systemic change in the American economy in the last four decades.

If the economy is unable or unwilling to provide a living wage to its working citizens then it will inevitably have to face increased numbers of its population receiving some form of financial assistance from the government, or otherwise abuse or neglect  them and face revolt. It's really as simple as that.

If we are going to become a society that embraces economic fairness by taking taking care of its citizens more through social services then directly through the economy, then we are going to have to face a major change in our attitude toward those living at the lowest notch of the economic totem. And that's going to take time.  

For starters, however, please read the following petition and consider signing it an passing it on to others. 
             Help Improve Social Services to Reduce Homelessness