<p>I don’t know if they’re citizens or not, but being on public assistance for 18 years is too long. Again, my opinion.</p>
<p>The cost of public assistance to taxpayers pales in comparison to that of supporting the military-industrial complex or corporate welfare. If this family’s situation bothers you so much, do what you can to support adequate mental health services for everyone and a higher minimum wage so we don’t have working poor collecting assistance even with a full-time McJob.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>I have no idea for how many years Lloyd received public assistance. I am curious, however, as to the age at which you would pronounce a child ineligible for public support. Even granting the desirability of limits to the length of time an individual can receive aid, I think it would be bizarre for those limits to kick in before the age of majority. By your logic, children should be booted from the foster care system before the age of majority as well. And I am still curious as to whether you would have foster children reimburse the state for their care.</p>
<p>This guy is really inspirational to me. I think he should have considered Questbridge though.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Given the hostility toward need-based financial aid that shows up periodically in other threads, it is not surprising that resentment of the poor, even extending to the kids who were born into that situation when they somehow find a stepping stone out of the cycle of poverty (which they will pay forward by being more economically productive and paying more taxes in the future, instead of contributing little in taxes and needing more government services in the case where the stepping stones out of poverty are not available), shows up here.</p>
<p>The demographics here seem to be heavily skewed toward the “middle class who won’t get financial aid” (i.e. top 3% income households, but not the super-wealthy). Presumably, this means that the main contact with government is in paying (a lot of) taxes, but (unlike the super-wealthy) they are not realistically able to gain significantly greater government services than other above-median household income households by purchasing politicians like the super-wealthy can. I.e. they may feel that they are paying a lot for government, but not getting as much for their money as the poor and the super-wealthy get. Some such people evidently resent their situation in relation to the poor and the super-wealthy, even though it is not a bad place to be in an absolute sense (would you rather be poor, or “middle class who won’t get financial aid”?).</p>
<p>Or perhaps it is just that they don’t want their kids to have to compete with top students from poor families in gaining admission to super-selective colleges.</p>
<p>I’m not into changing anyone’s mind, I’m simply sharing my opinion. My opinion is that there are plenty of hardworking kids and parents who come from poverty and never take public assistance. Many of these families are veterans. From the article, the family in question have been on assistance since they arrived in the US, or very shortly thereafter. I disagree with this. I also wonder where the dad went, and why he wasn’t paying child support.</p>
<p>As for foster children, in my opinion, if they’re American citizens, they’re eligible for whatever services are available. If they’re not American citizens, and are here illegally, they shouldn’t receive benefits.</p>
<p>“I.e. they may feel that they are paying a lot for government, but not getting as much for their money as the poor and the super-wealthy get. Some such people evidently resent their situation in relation to the poor and the super-wealthy, even though it is not a bad place to be in an absolute sense (would you rather be poor, or “middle class who won’t get financial aid”?).”</p>
<p>To a certain extent, I agree. What’s happening now is massive amounts of income redistribution at gunpoint (try not paying taxes and see what happens!), both for assistance to individuals and for corporate welfare. I’m against both.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>So in your ideal world, Lloyd’s mother would have lost all state support while he was still quite young, and he would have become a ward of the state because she could not afford to care for him?</p>
<p>Also, I’m still waiting for an answer on whether foster children need to reimburse the state for their care. If not, why are you willing to pay to support indigent children in the state system, but not with their families? Do you think that it is good social policy to encourage poor families to relinquish their children to the care of the state? The data on these children (wards of the state) are not encouraging.</p>
<p>In terms of income redistribution, the biggest recipients are the senior citizens, not the poor (senior citizens are not necessarily poor).</p>
<p>In addition, some may be unsympathetic to adults who use welfare services for long periods of time, but do not want to penalize the next generation for merely having been born into poverty. Indeed, it would be a waste (both economically and non-economically) of talent if being born into poverty automatically closed the door to future opportunities – and such waste of talent would have negative external effects, including to government finances. As it is now, economic mobility in the US is fairly low, so it is likely that there is significant waste of talent going on here.</p>
<p>“So in your ideal world, Lloyd’s mother would have lost all state support while he was still quite young, and he would have become a ward of the state because she could not afford to care for him?”</p>
<p>If they were here legally, then whatever aid to which they were legally entitled should have been given to them. If not, in my opinion, they should have been deported. For many years, being allowed residence in the US was contingent on being financially independent.</p>
<p>“Also, I’m still waiting for an answer on whether foster children need to reimburse the state for their care. If not, why are you willing to pay to support indigent children in the state system, but not with their families? Do you think that it is good social policy to encourage poor families to relinquish their children to the care of the state? The data on these children are not encouraging.”</p>
<p>Children in foster care have often been relinquished by their parents (or should have been) and as such, are wards of the state. No, those children should not reimburse the state. Actually, I never said that Lloyd HAD to reimburse the state for everything he and his family have received- I said they SHOULD, as a matter of honor.</p>
<p>“t would be a waste (both economically and non-economically) of talent if being born into poverty automatically closed the door to future opportunities -”</p>
<p>How did so many generations of immigrants, born into poverty, terrible poverty, not 2013 poverty, create opportunity for themselves? Government is not necessary for people to create opportunities for themselves.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>He will, by becoming an economically and otherwise productive taxpaying citizen with little need for government assistance (other than public good type of government services like military defense and rule of law that everyone gets), rather than continuing the cycle of poverty with little economic and taxpaying contribution but high government assistance.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Immigration has a selection effect on the immigrants.</p>
<p>Those who move to a completely new country are often much more motivated than the average person in their country of origin, since moving to a new country is a pretty big step to take.</p>
<p>In addition, immigration restrictions do include preference for skilled workers, graduate students, etc. over typical people from wherever.</p>
<p>Plus, if they were poor in a poor country, they probably have extremely frugal habits that serve them well even at poverty-level incomes in the US. (Meanwhile, the “middle class who won’t get financial aid” complains about making ends meet and affording college for their kids on a top 3% income.)</p>
<p>So the achievement of immigrants and perhaps their first generation descendants is not all that surprising. But after a few generations, the descendants tend to regress to typical American levels of achievement.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>While I would not use the word “honor” to describe my reasons, I do agree with you that all of us should make the effort to “give back” to our community what we have been so lucky to receive. I just don’t limit this obligation to immigrants. I don’t have any doubt that Lloyd Chen will go above and beyond in this respect. While he may not have taken a minimum wage job during high school, the article says, “As vice president of the Key Club, he spearheaded the school’s involvement in the 100 Friends Project, which raised money to build a library for poverty-stricken children in Thailand.” It goes on to point out that, “He can often be found tutoring whoever asks.” His counselor says that, “In over 20 years in education, I have met no student who is the match in dedication to his education and those around him.”</p>
<p>So I’d say that there’s no cause for resentment here. The state made a great investment in this kid, and it’s bound to pay off well for all of us.</p>
<p>“He will, by becoming an economically and otherwise productive taxpaying citizen with little need for government assistance (other than public good type of government services like military defense and rule of law that everyone gets), rather than continuing the cycle of poverty with little economic and taxpaying contribution but high government assistance.”</p>
<p>Isn’t this what is expected of everyone?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>He’s a US citizen. Are you contending that ALL US citizens who attend public schools ought to reimburse the state the cost of their education?</p>
<p>“Immigration has a selection effect on the immigrants.”</p>
<p>I agree with your points, but it’s interesting that immigrants of 100 years ago were successful without much government assistance- if any.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Realistically, a lot of kids in poor families find so many doors shut that they continue the cycle of poverty for another generation. Sure, the doors may not all be shut, but if it takes elite-level ability and motivation to find the open door out of poverty (while those of average- or below-average-level ability and motivation can succeed from a “middle class who won’t get financial aid” family), it is no surprise that being born into a poor family produces a high chance of being poor as an adult.</p>
<p>Do you consider that desirable?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So do a lot of immigrants today.</p>
<p>Do you really think that his mother chose to have a medical disability and chose to be poor?</p>
<p>“So I’d say that there’s no cause for resentment here. The state made a great investment in this kid, and it’s bound to pay off well for all of us.”</p>
<p>Resentment has nothing to do with my opinion. The “state” has made an investment in this young man- and I argue that it’s not the “state’s” (really, you should say taxpayer) place to invest in anyone. If there’s a private charity to help out indigent students, then I’m all for it.</p>