Dahon.Steve

>>Misti Davison, 28, recently told her supervisors at SunBridge Care and Rehabilitation in Tuscumbia, Ala., that she's looking for a job closer to her home in Morris Chapel, Tenn. The activities assistant, who says she loves her job planning events at the senior center, has been driving 66 miles each way to work in her 1998 Nissan Altima. Davison makes $7.25 an hour.

"I'm spending almost half my paycheck every two weeks on gas," Davison says<<<<

>>>>Single mom Esther Guzman is used to juggling her family finances. But lately, it's gotten harder to make ends meet. The 38-year-old mother of four's monthly gasoline bill has jumped to more than $300. Guzman, of Monmouth Junction, N.J., makes $11 an hour helping others apply for low-income energy aid, and receives $400 a month in child support<<<<<

This is insanity.

According to the article, the poor living in the burbs are at the breaking point because of the high price of fuel. The lowest of household spent 9% of the their incomes on gasoline. This is not what's breaking the back of the poor because I spend almost 8% of my income on public transit. However, what's really left out are all the associated costs of driving a motorcar that's breaking the budget of the poor. I suspect all the costs of motoring exceeds 20% of all income

...............................Salary.............Cost of driving......% spent on driving
Misti Davison, 28 $11,136.00.....$4,000.00 est........35%

Esther Guzman 38 $16,896.00.....$4,000.00 est.......23%

You can see using my conservative estimate, the actual cost of driving and not the increase in gas alone is what's bankrupting both individuals. The article makes it look as though the price of fuel that's breaking the budget of the poor but the real culprit is the motorcar lifestyle.

No where in the article did you find any solution to this problem because that would require a reduction in gas prices or a government handout. It would never occur to these individuals (or the author) that a much better alternative would be to sell the car, move to a community that supported affordable housing, public transportation, schools and shopping.

Fortunately, most of us found out the hard way the answer does not require a fuel efficent car, higher paying job or lower gas prices. The real solution requires breaking away from the motorcar lifestyle once and for all.


https://www.usatoday.com/money/econom...ome-usat_N.htm

scottyk

I wonder when they do articles like that if they find the person with the worst grasp of finances. They quote 3 or 4 people in different parts of the country. One guy was living in a FEMA trailer and on disability. He was getting $2400 a month (more than I make at my job) and he was complaining about gas prices.

kc9eog

Look at a map of Alabama, why would anyone need to live 66 miles from work? I almost buy the excuse of the people who live in connecticut and travel to NYC, but northern Alabama? Instead of looking for another job why not move closer to work? We should have cheap gas prices so more people can do stupid things like get jobs 66 miles from work? It is like the truck excuse. "I need a truck so I can haul stuff, a man needs a truck". They make the arguement that all the trucks on the road are being used to haul stuff, total crap! Everyone should have a truck so they can go to lowe's twice a year and bring home a door or lawn mower. We should have really cheap gas so people don't have to suffer or spend too much when they do something like live 66 miles from work. My roundtrip commute for a week is less than 50 miles; many of my coworkers will drive that far just coming in, then complain about cartels and big oil screwing everyone.

maddyfish

I think you're allowing your anti-suburb predjudice to color your feeling on this article.
Surely Misti Davidson can find a job for $7.25 an hour a whole lot less than 66 miles from her house.
Ester Guzman is only about 7-10 miles from downtown Trenton N.J. Surley there is a job there for $11/hour. These people are stupid for having a job paying so little, so far from home.

Believe it or not the answer to everyone's problems is not to move into a big city. I'm sure Ester Guzman could move to Camden, N.J. to be bike/walk close to a job, but like many big cities, she would likely get *****/robbed/murdered before realizing the benefits.

maddyfish

Thre article should have been titled, "STUPIDITY BUSTS BUDGET FOR POOR"

acroy

+1

doing dumb stuff and getting it in the paper? have a little self-respect!

Platy

Bright, energetic, charming, able people can usually find a way to prosper. They are, however, a minority. What we want is an economy that allows average people to prosper as well.

Bikepacker67

Plus we need to redefine what 'prosper' means.

Platy

Look out yer window, it's happening right now!

TimJ

The idea that anyone with budget problems or car problems can just get a job closer to home or move closer to a job is asinine and insulting and I suspect a lot of people here buy into it because it makes them feel superior. This is the same, tired argument you hear from professional dumbasses like libertarians at Reason magazine or the conservatives at National Review. People are chess pieces and it's as simple as moving them to one spot on the board or the other. The only motivation given to everyone but the person doing the criticising is basic survival. There is a job somewhere closer to home, the argument goes, so therefore there is no excuse for working far away from home. Or, there is a job somewhere that pays more money, or there is a home somewhere that costs less, or there is a home somewhere where there's publi transportation nearby, so therefore there is no excuse to not live near work, or make more money, or live near effective mass transit, or pay less for rent, etc., etc.

Give me a break, this is so infantile. First of all, how about allowing people come motivation beyond simple food and shelter? Maybe the schools are better in one part of town but there's no jobs available there? Maybe the dream job that fullfills you right down to the toes is in an area with no affordable housing, or maybe it pays crap but you don't care because you love it? My god, the list could go on for miles- this is called life. That's how things sort out. Public schools are funded primarily through property taxes so the best schools are usually in the most expensive neighborhoods. Vast areas of cities are often nearly purely residential, offering little employment nearby. Business parks get zoned out on the edge of town away from everything so it is simply impossible to live closer than 10 miles from work.

But I guess you guys would say "well then don't work at the business park, work somewhere else". So who works at the business park? If we're going to reorder everyone so no one really has to drive, we're going to run out of jobs and housing pretty damn quickly and it'll become apparent that in fact it is impossible for everyone to live close to their work, close to a place that they could work, etc.

That is just asinine. Those places are just out there for the taking, right? Anyone can pack up and move to a city with affordable housing, adequate mass transit, and all that other great stuff, right? It's so damn easy, everyone who now lives in a city that doesn't provide these things could move to a community just like that, right? Or no, not everyone, just the poor people, is that right? There's a whole bunch of these communities out there and it would be so freaking simple for some poor shmuck to move to one, get an affordable home and get a decent job, right?

Is there a list somewhere? I'd be curious because I wonder why all the mexican families I was living around in Wilshire Center didn't move there instead of living 6 to a two bedroom apartment? Strange. I wonder why when people get laid off 1,000 at a time, they all just don't make a trek to one of these places?

Weird. I mean, has it never occured to someone who just got fired and then rehired with no benefits and lower wages that there's a city, right around the corner, where jobs are available, housing is affordable, they can get around without a car, and their kids get a quality education? Or why hasn't it occured to them that there is a job available to them close to where they are now and all they have to do is find it? Good lord. My wife is a graphic designer and her company just moved twenty miles away so she has to commute now. My God! She can just get a job closer to home! Forget your career, honey, they're hiring at the new Starbucks!

You guys have convinced me. People are freaking stupid.

Platy

TimJ, I think you've outlined the problem rather well. You're saying that our way of life depends totally on cars, right?

I can't agree that it's the fault of people who are trying to figure out how to live carfree, though. The problem is infrastructure, not bad attitudes on our part.

scottyk

I think that the reasoning is more along these lines:
1). If you cant afford to drive as much, then you can look for a job closer to home. This doesnt mean you drop everything right now and quit your current job, it means you prepare for the oppurtunity of getting a different job if it comes along. Be ready to take advantage when the situation presents itself. Who wouldnt like to work under 5 miles from home and spend less time commuting? Maybe the new job pays less, but you have to factor in less gas, less wear and tear on your car, less time spent in the car.

2)If you can afford all the gas you want, then you probably arent worried about where you job is. If you can afford gas, but still want to work closer to home, see #1.

acroy

whew!
take a deep breath or 3, and put down the coffee, you sound kinda jittery....

I can speak from my own experiences, and those of people I know, that if you want to live close to where you work, you can. Everything is a compromise. The job may pay less. That might be OK, cause you won't have to drive 100+ miles round trip!

Your wife works 20 miles away
- there's folks on this formum bike commuting farther than that
- the job must be worth it to her
- she has the freedom to choose to commute or find a new job

You're right, it's called Life, and much of Life is spent trying to improve the quality of Life, it's always a compromise.... I've decided to enjoy it and let no one rain on my day (other than the weather man)

Cheers

maddyfish

TimJ- Your wife as a graphic designer may not be able to find a job in her field closer to home, for the same money. Hopefully as a graphic designer she makes enough money to make it worth it. But these ladies are basically unskilled labor working for very little money. Jobs for very little money are fairly easy to find. Would I drive 35 miles for a $125,000/year job? Sure. Would I drive 35 miles for a $35,000/year job? No.
Every person should make a cost analysis about their own job, either it is worth it or not. From my point of view, these two ladies with low paying, easily replaced jobs, are nuts for driving that far.

TimJ

What I'm ticked about is the idea- that is so prevelent everywhere in US social/politcal rhetoric- that whatever problems the powerless face, it's mainly their own damn fault. That's what this boils down to and it's, to me, a sick, undemocratic way of looking at the world.

Even the seemingly reasonable idea that unskilled laborers, by being unskilled, can easily or simply find a different job- because it doesn't matter what they do- is just horribly insulting. It strips a whole class of people of their humanity. Ambition is for people who can afford it. Goals are something the priviledged attain. Fullfillment isn't something the poor need to concern themselves with.

This attitude, this idea that an epsilon is a epsilon because they're an epsilon is what keeps our country arranged the way it is. Why isn't there better mass transit? Why are public schools failing? Why are corporations allowed to pollute everyone's air and water? Why isn't there much clean and affordable housing in mixed use neighborhoods? Because the initiative to do anything about any of those situations doesn't exist because the benefits are always for some perceived, unworthy "other". Why help out a failing school if you're well off enough to not live in that district? Why improve the bus system is you can afford to drive everywhere and busses just get in your way? Why clean up water? You don't drink out of the tap. And who wants to pay for a building so people- who are too dumb to make enough money to get their own apartment- have a place to live among those of use who do?

But, there are no problems in this country, right? There is no need for collective effort (government), because only the poor are really subject to the problems- even the middle class can buy themselves out of a failing sewer system, for instance- plus the poor can always move and they can always find a different job. If they don't, it's their own fault for being so stupid. They're unskilled, they can go anywhere.

Good for you. Don't care.

kc9eog

To TimJ

The heart of the matter is this: people have the option of living far away from work and it is perfectly acceptable to gripe about the cost to then get to work, but it is like moving to Miami and then complaining about the heat in the summer. Whatever is keeping them far from work must be worth the cost or they wouldn't do it. Maybe they have elderly parents, or a great school for the kids, or whatever.
People are very upset about the cost of gasoline but it must still cost less than the alternatives to them, because they continue to increase demand. No, car free living wouldn't work in America for the vast, vast majority today for a multitude of reasons. But if people have the right to complain about the cost of getting around in a car then I have the right to say I don't feel sorry for them.

TimJ

What you're really putting forth is the idea that people could (easily) avoid having to drive far for work. They have the "option" of living far away from work? That doesn't even make sense unless of course you're saying they have the option of living close to work or living far away from work.

Sez who? You're sure people could live closer to their work if.... what? If they made different choices? Well gee, that's a reasonable argument. I don't like how people complain about our fearless leader George Bush. They could move to Canada or Mexico so, obviously, they should shut up and stop complaining. I don't like how people compain about the traffic here in LA. They could move to somewhere that doesn't have traffic or they could live and work and play in a small enough area as to not have to deal with traffic.

They have the option if they would just make different choices. It is by their own hand and their own fault that they are subject to whatever it is they're complaining about, so therefore they should shut up and stop whining, cuz I don't like to listen to *****ing.

scottyk

But it is up to each one of us how we live. We all make choices every day on what we buy, where we work, and how we live. If you choose to live far away from work, spend all your money on cable bill, internet bill, movies, beer, food, cars, vacations, whatever it is, then you have to live with those choices.

TimJ

Yep. And any complaint anyone has about anything in their life comes down to the choices they've made, right? So whining about the price of gas pinching you because you have to drive to work is equivalent whining about the color you decided to paint your livingroom.

Every problem in the world comes down to someone else's bitc*ing, this is what I'm getting at. And that's infantile and pathetic. That's how I used to think out on the schoolyard. "Quit your whining" should be our national motto. The price of gas, having to drive, these are not cut-and-dry choices we simply make the same as we do what brand of tp to buy. The infrastructure and planning of our entire freaking nation is petroleum based, and people are trying to tell me the price of gas being a problem comes down to nothing else but personal choice? Right.

And that's what you're saying, but you're throwing in the next tired argument against the powerless: they're poor because they make stupid choices. Our lives are a sum of our economic decisions? People who, say, live near a chemical plant and complain about getting cancer from breathing the air, they live there because they made choices in their life that put them there, so it's their own fault, so they should shut up? No bike lanes in your city? You made the economic choices that put you in that city, if you don't like it, shut up and make the choices that allow you to move to a city with bike lanes.

If only everyone would just have the willpower to make the choices they need to make to be where they want to be, there wouldn't be any problems. Poverty and powerlessness are a choice.

Yeah? I know it follows logically, that's the rhetorical end-point, is that what you guys believe? I mean, that's pretty much how the nation works politically, I would expect a lot of people to think that way. Especially folks who think a nation built from the ground up to move by car offers endless car-lite or car-free options to anyone or everyone.

squegeeboo

Well are they whining because the paint is to expensive to redo it?

Edit: I find it interesting that a person who has this in their profile:
The incompetent are too incompetent to recognize their own incompetence.
Is busy trying to defend people who are to incompetent to find a way to deal with their money issues other than to whine about it.

turtle77

It's not like it's sudden, groundbreaking news that the price of gas has been and will probably continue to go up. Burying one's head in the sand and hoping that things will get better and then whining about it when the situation doesn't magically improve is simply being irresponsible, not newsworthy. It's a very definite possibility that we're on the threshold of a completely life-altering condition (if everything we've heard about peak oil is true) that has the potential of causing a lot more than just the "mild inconvenience" of having to move a little closer to work.

I'm sorry sweetheart, that you're not rich. Boo-hoo, I'm poor too. In fact, I'll bet you make a lot more than me... so what? Do I have to make compromises because I don't make a lot? Of course! But often the compromises take me down paths that I might not have necessarily chosen, and made my life more interesting or better.

TimJ

\

You are a scholar and a saint.

I'm not defending anyone. I don't know anything about those people and neither do you, and yet there's a knee-jerk reaction in this country to attack, fast and hard, anyone who complains about their situation on the grounds that "it's their own fault so they need to shut up". Whatever it is, whether it's someone complaing about the price of the paint they used to redo their McMansion or how the price of gas is seriously strangling them financially, it all gets lumped as "whining". As you've illustrated. As turtle77 has illustrated. As just about everyone illustrates.

There's a qualitative difference between a person living paycheck to paycheck complaining about the price of gas and someone, regardless of income, complaining about the price of flat-screen TVs. But, because it makes you and some of the other dudes here feel good, you make no distinction. Anything bitc*ed about that you personally don't have to deal with is just plain ol' whining from some loser who's too stupid to to do the ever-so-simple things it takes to change their situation.

Bull S**t. I don't know if the people in the article are stupid or smart or thrifty or what, I don't know if they could get a new job, could move, could change their situation or what, but what I do know is the price of gas and the effect is has on the poor and powerless is often not a condition of choice, it's largely a condition of design and of circumstance and it is foul and pathetic to write these people off as whiners. They didn't ask the nation to be built on the back of cheap, free-flowing oil and they didn't ask the economy to be built around free-flowing international capital. But surely, let's just file them under "whiners" and not consider it any further, eh?

acroy

Obviously you do, enough to quote it.
Thanks

acroy

Well my friend, thus far you have called fellow forum members & their opinions asinine, weird, stupid, unreasonable, accused them of using rhetorical arguments, and being full of Bull S**t.

I would suggest toning down a notch. I am assuming that you are here, and posting, because you care. The rest of us are here, and posting, bacause we care. So that's out of the way: we all care. Our opinions and ideas on the issues at hand are different - that's what makes a forum fun and educational. Please treat us with some respect and etiquette. Thanks.

What are your ideas? You did mention "collective effort (government)".
Is government your answer?
Because, as a conservative Liberatarian, I would suggest that to err is human: to really scr*w things up requires a Government
I look forward to your reply.
Cheers

vulpes

I think you're spot on about that. Another good example the same is the distribution of the mortality and displacement wrought by hurricane Katrina along economic and racial lines due to the marginalization, disenfranchisement and racial exclusion of America’s poor. Those holding the high ground – predominantly white and middle/upper class – could choose to go or stay. Those living in the lower areas were flooded out or drowned. Evacuation plans counted on being able to drive away from danger; but what percentage of New Orleans’ predominantly African-American underclass owned cars?