The shocking state of America's poor teens

The headline news today was that poverty was down and median wages were finally rising last year.
However, the Urban Institute released a much less reported study today that paints a different picture.

Teenagers in America are resorting to sex work because they cannot afford food, according to a study that suggests widespread hunger in the world’s wealthiest country.

Focus groups in all 10 communities analysed by the Urban Institute, a Washington-based thinktank, described girls “selling their body” or “sex for money” as a strategy to make ends meet. Boys desperate for food were said to go to extremes such as shoplifting and selling drugs.

The findings raise questions over the legacy of Bill Clinton’s landmark welfare-reform legislation 20 years ago as well as the spending priorities of Congress and the impact of slow wage growth. Evidence of teenage girls turning to “transactional dating” with older men is likely to cause particular alarm.

“I’ve been doing research in low-income communities for a long time, and I’ve written extensively about the experiences of women in high poverty communities and the risk of sexual exploitation, but this was new,” said Susan Popkin, a senior fellow at the Urban Institute and lead author of the report, Impossible Choices.

“Even for me, who has been paying attention to this and has heard women tell their stories for a long time, the extent to which we were hearing about food being related to this vulnerability was new and shocking to me, and the level of desperation that it implies was really shocking to me. It’s a situation I think is just getting worse over time.”

Popkin said: “We heard the same story everywhere, a really disturbing picture about hunger and food insecurity affecting the wellbeing of some of the most vulnerable young people. The fact that we heard it everywhere from kids in the same way tells us there’s a problem out there that we should be paying attention to.”
The consistency of the findings across gender, race and geography was a surprise.
“I wasn’t sure we would see it,” Popkin said. “Kids knew about all these strategies: hanging around your friend’s house and see if they’ll feed you, going hungry so that their younger brothers and sisters could eat, saving their school lunch so they could eat it at night so they could sleep at night.
“Everybody knew where you get the cheapest food and how you keep some emergency stuff in your house. It was just very matter-of-fact and very common, in the richest country in the world.”
In every community, and in 13 of the 20 focus groups, there were accounts of sexual exploitation, often related with distaste. A girl in Portland, Oregon told researchers: “It’s really like selling yourself. Like you’ll do whatever you need to do to get money or eat.”

This sure doesn't sound like a 1st world nation to me.

Just last week the government reported that the level of food insecurity was going down, but still affected 15.8 million households.
Simply, we are abandoning the very poor children in this country.

According to the Department of Housing and Urban Development, more than a half-million people are homeless in America right now, but that figure is increasing by the day. And it isn't just adults we are talking about. It has been reported that that the number of homeless children in this country has risen by 60 percent since the last recession, and Poverty USA says that a total of 1.6 million children slept either in a homeless shelter or in some other form of emergency housing at some point last year.
Share
up
0 users have voted.

Comments

Raggedy Ann's picture

My grandkids are 20 and 18 and live on their own. Let me rephrase. They are trying desperately to live on their own. I'm concerned for their future - for everyone's future. We are being squeezed in cruel ways. There is little investment in our young. I'm very concerned about where this is going.

up
0 users have voted.

"The “jumpers” reminded us that one day we will all face only one choice and that is how we will die, not how we will live." Chris Hedges on 9/11

When I first got out on my own, things didn't go well.
I wound up in a flop-house with a bunch of runaways.
Me and my girlfriend at the time ended up shoplifting food so we could eat. So I know this article is true.

up
0 users have voted.
Hawkfish's picture

Teens fear stigma around hunger and actively hide it. Consequently, many teens refuse to accept food or assistance in public settings or from people outside a trusted circle of friends and family.

In other words, contributing to your local food bank won't help. Nor will just giving them food. How fucked up is that?

up
0 users have voted.

We can’t save the world by playing by the rules, because the rules have to be changed.
- Greta Thunberg

Life is returning to the Dickensian dystopia of those days, more with every turn of the economic cycle. Any country that permits this to happen has sold its soul for 30 pieces of silver. The difference between our robber barons and the old ones is that these will happily drive the human race to extinction, as long as their compensation packages keep growing every year.

Maybe a human race that lets this happen doesn't deserve to survive. Pity we will take so many innocent bystanders with us.

up
0 users have voted.

Please help support caucus99percent!

polkageist's picture

This is exactly what we are beginning. For a look at the past foretelling our probable future if we can't turn the oligarchy out read London Labour and the London Poor by Henry Mayhew. It's a chronicle of social conditions in London circa 1861-2.

up
0 users have voted.

-Greed is not a virtue.
-Socialism: the radical idea of sharing.
-Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.
John F. Kennedy, In a speech at the White House, 1962

PriceRip's picture

          The other day she pointed out that there was nothing significant about the fact that I had started my career (in 1979) with near zero debt. I often point out that I went all the way through a PhD and had a debt load of less than $1000. She was expressing frustration with those "of my generation" that claimed that if people of her generation "did it right" they too could have started a career nearly debt free. She is not real sympathetic to those who are into "blaming the victim". So, essentially, she was attacking me for what others of my generation say, sigh.

          It took a bit of talking to calm her down as I explained that I knew full well why there is such a disparity between our two situations. In fact I have been using my experience for some time (most recently as part of a "Last Lecture" presentation) to highlight the problem and how to fix it.

          The problems are obvious. The solution is trivial to implement, and effective. But those that know how to fix the situation are marginalized and vilified.

up
0 users have voted.

debt load for a college graduate is over $30k. Think about that. It takes years at an entry level job to pay that off.

up
0 users have voted.

Democrats, we tried to warn you. How is that guilt and shame working out?

existence, ie, increased government deficits, as we use government created dollars to pay off our private bank debts.

Which is why banks are so against government funded public goods.

The public gets private bank debt.

The banks get government created dollars, which are the private sectors' net financial assets.

Then the banks use our government created national currency to bribe our politicians to not fund public goods.

It's a perfect circle.

up
0 users have voted.
PriceRip's picture

should (and could) be much less than $30k. Think about that. Why don't we do now, what has been done in the past? Why don't we make College and Tech School free or very inexpensive? Why don't we have Public Works Projects to put people to work rebuilding our infrastructure?
          If Doctors leave Med School debt free they would not demand exorbitant salaries in their specialties. I left Grad School debt free and took a teaching job for less than $20,000/year . . . I could have worked a really sweet industrial job for more that $100,000/year doing research nuclear physics. Why are we not in the mode of providing opportunities for the next generation?
          There is nothing stopping us from doing the right thing, so why aren't we doing the right thing????

up
0 users have voted.

People do not want to pay taxes (state taxes have been reduced and college tuition has been on the chopping block) and there is profit to be made on forcing people to barrow for college. Slavery and indentured servitude were the norm until fairly recently in human history. This is an effort to re-institute those things.

up
0 users have voted.

Democrats, we tried to warn you. How is that guilt and shame working out?

PriceRip's picture

          It is easier to buy into the lie than it is to actually think the process through to its logical conclusion(s). Jesus Christ (and BTW I am an atheist) would be so sad. Even when slavery and indentured servitude were the norm the monetary system(s) function to the rules of reality. We actually have the ability to work for the revolution we want. But as long as we are not organized or as long as we complaisantly walk the killing chute route nothing will change.

up
0 users have voted.

enough folks really know what they already know: America, unlike Greece, merely creates its' own currency, thus can always afford anything for sale in its' own currency.

When the government buys stuff from the private sector - including teacher labor, pencils, pens, paper, etc - dollars move from the government sector into the private sector, where we use those dollars to pay our taxes, pay off our private bank debt, buy stuff from stores, and record a net income (or not).

As long as people think that our government is reliant upon tax revenue to fund itself, rather than being self funding due to the fact that it itself creates dollars out of thin air, then we will never be able to think our way out of our mess.

Folks need to easily hold unto the knowledge that what government doesn't fund, the private sector must fund by going to a private bank and taking on private debt.

Then the private sector must earn government created dollars to pay off that private bank debt if they hope to have a NET income.

Only government spending can fund our NET incomes.

If we want the private sector to have a net income (net savings) of $1, then the governments' deficit must be exactly $1, as:

Public Sector -1 = Private Sector +1 (minus foreign trade)

And:

Government Spending = National Net Income - Taxes - Private Bank Debt - Foreign Trade

Since we run large trade deficits, a Public Sector Surplus looks like this:

Public Sector +1 - (Domestic Private Sector -2) - (Foreign Trade +1)

Where the domestic private sector must go into private bank debt to fund both the public sector surplus and the foreign trade deficit.

This is what happened under Bill Clintons' public sector surplus, funded by the rapid increase in household debt which funded both the dot com bubble and the beginning of the housing bubble.

More on Clintons' Surplus by James Galbraith:

https://www.thenation.com/article/defense-deficits/

up
0 users have voted.
PriceRip's picture

          As long as people think that our government is reliant upon tax revenue to fund itself, rather than being self funding due to the fact that it itself creates dollars out of thin air, then we will never be able to think our way out of our mess.

          Why do people think our government relies upon tax revenue to fund itself given that I knew better by the time I was in High School in the mid-1960s? I admit to being an intelligent individual but it is obscene that as a teenager in the 1960s I knew a central tenet of Modern Monetary Theory long before MMT was invented, while the rest of the population is unaware of this most basic element of economics. What the fuck is wrong with this picture?

up
0 users have voted.

how our monetary system should work, the result was FDR taking us off the gold standard for domestic settlement.

Folks back then understand what this meant, as it was a hotly debated, and reported upon, subject.

The text books reflected this knowledge.

Then there was a slow turning away from the more correct explanations in those text books ..... many of which were still accurate in the 60s, which is one reason there was a lot of public support for Nixons' idea of a basic income, which Milton Friedman wrote about.....

Then text books went insane with propaganda as the neoliberal forces became more powerful and killed off Keynesianism and any correct description of how our monetary system works.

Etc....

up
0 users have voted.
PriceRip's picture

          Let me be clear: They were debating what the rules should be not what reality dictates. The truth is that MMT describes how sovereign money actually works. If you decide upon rules that try to defy the fundamental underpinnings of the system you are trying to operate reality gets in your way. When you "go with the flow" the system runs smoothly.
          So yes there were debates, but as usual the lack of understanding on the part of the players distracted from the real task, but we got lucky at times.
          "Classical" economists as a useless as "classical" philosophers.

up
0 users have voted.

a gold standard, a bimetal standard, a fiat system, and what the relationship between the treasury and the federal reserve should be - should the treasury be able to have an overdraft at the fed or not, should the fed be dissolved, etc....

They were debating how the reality of the monetary system should work in pretty much all its' aspects.

We got a fiat currency with the rule that for every dollar created, an equal amount of bonds needed to be issued.

The law surrounding whether, and under what circumstances, the treasury can run an overdraft at the fed has gone back and forth, and has been changed over time.

Right now, the treasury can not run an overdraft.

We simply don't talk about this stuff anymore, and most text books aren't too clear about the subject

up
0 users have voted.
PriceRip's picture

up
0 users have voted.

and I was older when I went to college, also had the GI Bill from the Army. That said, I was able to put my tuition on credit cards, and while I did have to carry it for a while and pay some interest, it is NOTHING compared to what kids go through now.

You're so right - the problems are obvious, the solutions are not rocket science, but the profit motive reigns supreme now above all else in a dumbed down TV addled society. We are eating our seed corn and not giving one shit in hell about doing it either.

up
0 users have voted.

Only a fool lets someone else tell him who his enemy is. Assata Shakur

PriceRip's picture

          Even with avarice in full bloom we were able to have the WPA provide jobs for us to create infrastructure. Even with the robber barons creating the foundations for the 0.01% we built the West (at the expense of some of my friends) and created some of the most impressive projects in the world.

          There is nothing real stopping us from taking the initiative and making the same decisions again. Why is it so very heard to get with the program and get the job done?

up
0 users have voted.

Too too close to home. I just keep thinking about several years ago that we got with a Dem controlled Senate, a Dem controlled White House about $8 billion in cuts to food stamps. I believe that is about the amount in defense increases going to defend against the Russian threat to amber gathering in Lithuania.

up
0 users have voted.

have spent on the wars since 9/11....One Million Iraqi dead....millions displaced

$5 Trillion legacy

up
0 users have voted.

"The justness of individual land right is not justifiable to those to whom the land by right of first claim collectively belonged"

That's how much of our national currency was created to pay for war rather than public goods.

The government is not reliant upon collecting taxes in order to spend.

Government spending funds our ability to pay taxes.

Dollars are an IOU from government to you. What does the government owe you?

Tax relief.

Dollars are tax credits. Those credits must first be moved from the government sector (which creates them out of thin air, and can create an infinite number of dollars, so has no need to collect your dollars -- can't add #s to infinity) into the private sector before the private sector has dollars with which it can pay taxes.

As head of the fed back in the 40s, Ruml, wrote:

In a country that is not on the gold standard, ie, where the currency is not convertible into anything other than itself,

“... a sovereign national government is finally free of money worries and need no longer levy taxes for the purpose of providing itself with revenue... It follows that our Federal Government has final freedom from the money market in meeting its financial requirements... All federal taxes must meet the test of public policy and practical effect. The public purpose which is served should never be obscured in a tax program under the mask of raising revenue.”

He goes on to explain how, with Federal spending not revenue constrained, the first function of taxation is to regulate the value of the dollar, which we know as regulating inflation.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/warren-mosler/taxes-for-revenue-are-obs_b_...

up
0 users have voted.
PriceRip's picture

          Even before we went off the "Gold Standard" Federal Spending was only constrained "in theory". In truth "creative bookkeeping" was used when necessary to "make it work". Going off the "Gold Standard" just provided certain people the "Tax and Spend" demonization mantra to scare the great unwashed into stampeding toward the killing chute.

up
0 users have voted.

bookkeeping, but you could only be as creative as other circumstances allowed. There WAS a revenue constraint on the government under the various gold standards (the creative book keeping usually meant changes in law domestically (money is always just a system of law) and rules of international trade.

But there's no doubt that going off the gold standard opened up much more policy space, and that policy space was used to fund The New Deal.

For one, the treasury was able to run an over draft at the fed at times under FDR - creating even more policy space.

At any rate, whenever credit is convertible into whatever commodity, you need X amount of commodity at all times.

This is a constraint, even if you change some of the rules surrounding how the conversion is to be calculated.

up
0 users have voted.
PriceRip's picture

          Confidence artists create money all the time. It is an easy process requiring the con artist to exploit the confidence created in the Mark. The "gold standard" never functioned as intended.

          The gold standard "effectively" disappeared in 1971. Prior to 1971 all real monetary policy with respect to "the gold standard" was tweaked as needed to keep the economy running in spite of the "gold standard". If we were to reinstitute the "gold standard" the same sorts of creative bookkeeping would have to be implemented to keep the economy running. The reality is: A sovereign nation without a sovereign (create money by fiat) currency is not, virtually by definition, sovereign.

          Commodity based monetary systems have always been a sham, not even rising to the level of a beginner's first con. As I stated elsewhere I knew how to create money from a very young age. I simply chose not to get insinuated into the life.

up
0 users have voted.

and fixed exchange rates.

See the problems with Europe and the euro.

Anyway, seems to me that a gold standard and fixed exchange rates vs a non-convertible currency and floating exchange rates matter a great deal.

You really can run out of gold, you really are dependent upon others who own the gold in the ground, etc....

Accounting marks that you yourself create and over which you and you alone have control over? Much better.

up
0 users have voted.

off the gold standard created the tax and spend mantra?

Think it was more a matter of forces that prefer a "gold standard" - as long as they control the gold mines, etc... - making concerted efforts to obscure the significance of what going off the gold standard meant.

So, FDR is never remembered as the guy who made America sovereign in its' own currency for domestic purposes. Its' never listed as one of his achievements.

I think it should and needs to be.

But if being on a convertible currency is exactly the same as not being on one, then - sure, it doesn't matter - so no reason to remind people.

I think that's a mistake.

up
0 users have voted.
PriceRip's picture

can only be uttered if you buy into the fraud that a monetary system is based upon a commodity.

up
0 users have voted.
PriceRip's picture

when we tried to build the Superconductor Super Collider (for a few Billion dollars) in Texas. A much more powerful machine than was built at CERN that would have kept us in the forefront of particle physics. Making the USofA great, yea you betcha.

up
0 users have voted.

up
0 users have voted.

"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon

Thaumlord-Exelbirth's picture

Crime grows well. Where an abundance of wealth is, a different kind of crime too grows well.

up
0 users have voted.