Get E-Mail Updates

God's Politics Blog

One Nation, Underprivileged: Analyzing the Game Instead of the Players

by Neeraj Mehta 09-14-2009 | 5:30pm
Print
24 Comments | Login or Register to post comments

If life were a game, it could be said that we like to analyze the players (the winners and the losers) of the game, rather than the game itself. In my mind, we would do well to dedicate equal attention and resources to both sides of this problem.

Related Reading

Take Action on This Issue

Tell the Senate: Don't Cut International Aid

Please join us in telling the Senate: Protect foreign aid programs that help the poor and the needy. 

Mark Robert Rank utilizes a great metaphor while painting a picture of poverty in America in his book, One Nation, Underprivileged: Why American Poverty Affects Us All.

Rank sets the table for discussion with this image:

"Imagine three people beginning a game of Monopoly. Normally, each player is given $1500 at the start of the game. The playing field is in effect level, with each of the players' outcomes determined by the roll of the dice and by their own skills and judgments.

Now let us imagine a modified game of Monopoly, in which players start out with quite different advantages and disadvantages, much as they would in life. Player 1 begins with $5000 and several Monopoly properties on which houses have already been built. Player 2 starts out with the standard $1500 and no properties. Finally, player 3 begins the game with only $250.

Who will be the winners and losers in this modified game of Monopoly?

In this new game, luck and skill are still involved, but are de-emphasized because of the varied set of resources and assets that each player begins the game with. Of course, Player 1 could still lose and Player 3 could still win, but it would be much more difficult. Played out over hundreds of games, Player 1 would come out on top many more times than Player 3. More importantly, though, might be the way that these new rules impact how each player is forced to play the game. In this modified game, Player 1 can take more risks, while one wrong move could end the game for Player 3. And lastly, Player 1 can build more easily upon his or her assets, leading to a greater possibility of future income.

What's true about both this modified game of Monopoly and America is that we're not all beginning our lives at the same starting point. Your starting point has a powerful impact throughout your life. And where you start out in life has a lot to do with where your parents started out.

In 1994 the median white family held assets worth more than seven times those of the median nonwhite family. In order to understand a family's well being and the life chances of its children, we must also take into account that family's accumulated wealth (Conley 1999). If you are non-white, your parents were held back from accumulating the same levels of wealth that white families have been able to in the last 100 years in America.

And much of these disparities are due to the effects of unjust and unfair systems. From racist federal housing policies in the 1930s, to the planned destruction of the Federal Highway System in the 1950s and 1960s, to unequal educational systems and unfair banking practices, all have in some way contributed to the hindering of asset-building and wealth-creation for non-white families in this country.

So as we continue to address the issues of our current times -- looking at how systems failed us and plunged many more Americans into poverty -- I hope that we might also look at how the systems of our past failed millions of Americans by placing them in poverty and keeping them there.

portrait-neeraj-mehtaNeeraj Mehta has been working with others to uncover beauty and strength in North Minneapolis for the past 10 years. Previously he worked for Project for Pride in Living and most recently as program and strategic development director for the Sanctuary Community Development Corporation. Currently, he is working with the community-building intermediary Nexus Community Partners, partnering with others to create more engaged and powerful communities in the Twin Cities.

24 Comments | Login or Register to post comments
Sojourners relies on the support of readers like you to sustain our message and ministry.

Related Stories

Resources

Like what you're reading? Get Sojourners E-Mail updates!

by: MarKatJac

09-15-2009 @ 11:22pm

The article skims the surface of the reality of life in the US. My father was one of 9, my grandparents were tenant farmers, and my father was in a different school each year. In addition, they also worked for the railroad and textile mill. His oldest sister dropped out of school to raise the little ones, his oldest brother dropped out to run the farm. By bagging groceries, my father put himself through college, I was 7 when he got his PhD. I am 12th generation European-American so we have been poor and white for a long time. No accumulated wealth to speak of. My brother worked in Appalachia for years, with people who have been pulling water down the mountain from mine run-off, and live in coal camp houses. Again, these people are white.

I don't point this out for folks to feel sorry for white people, or deny that minorities have been dealt a horrible blow, but I think that the conversation is more complicated than the article states.

In fact, the research I have seen is that poor people of all colors have more in common with each other, than people within a cultural group. So, poor latinos, whites, blacks and asian have more in common than poor, middle class and rich white people have with each other. It is a bigger prediction of how well you will do in school, what kind of job you will have, or whether you will spend time in jail.

I also have been teaching urban minority children since 1994, and I see what really matters. Attitude. Desire. Determination. Lack of Self-hatred. Avoidance of blame. Refusal to make excuses and take the easy way out. Looking forward, never back. None of these qualities are race-specific.

I work at a public school that spends $14K per child. The same amount as an elite private school not more than 2 miles away. Each of my students can choose to come to school, choose to determine that their character is as important or more important than what they wear, or what they listen to, or what amount of melanin God gave them.
I watch as students make choices. To have unprotected premarital sex, and have babies in highschool, and handicap themselves. To chose drugs and the lure of fast money, instead of the promise of a solid occupation.

Or, to welcome and treasure the blessing of a free and high quality public education, get full scholarships upon graduation, or walk into ready made occupations as auto mechanics or welders.

What is missing in this discussion is the role of education. Despite the monopoly analogy, each child does get not $1500 at the beginning of the game but $7K to $18K per year. The worst American school is far superior than many schools on this planet. Even at the worst American school, there is opportunity available for that child who wants it.
I know many children who come from 'broken' homes, who's parents are addicted, who even abuse them to a certain degree. Some of these students still have the internal compass that tells them this isn't for me. Some of these students understand this public education is their refuge.
I know students from some of the worst home situations who despite this nonsense, graduate valedictorian and get full scholarships (I know one who is now at Yale).

Somehow children of all colors, of all backgrounds who have the compass of hope can see their way clear to walk past all the inequalities their histories have dealt them and persevere despite the odds. Like my father, like my husband (who would be classified minority). I can't say the students who rise above their circumstances have even one single family member who gave them any guidance. Their families have been a bigger distraction than anything. I can say that it is quite possible for people to get beyond this historical baggage.

(Here's my two-cents...telling students to stay in school, study, and make something of themselves is indeed subversive, and perhaps 'socialist' ...if so I will wear that label with pride...)

by: MarKatJac

09-15-2009 @ 11:22pm

The article skims the surface of the reality of life in the US. My father was one of 9, my grandparents were tenant farmers, and my father was in a different school each year. In addition, they also worked for the railroad and textile mill. His oldest sister dropped out of school to raise the little ones, his oldest brother dropped out to run the farm. By bagging groceries, my father put himself through college, I was 7 when he got his PhD. I am 12th generation European-American so we have been poor and white for a long time. No accumulated wealth to speak of. My brother worked in Appalachia for years, with people who have been pulling water down the mountain from mine run-off, and live in coal camp houses. Again, these people are white.

I don't point this out for folks to feel sorry for white people, or deny that minorities have been dealt a horrible blow, but I think that the conversation is more complicated than the article states.

In fact, the research I have seen is that poor people of all colors have more in common with each other, than people within a cultural group. So, poor latinos, whites, blacks and asian have more in common than poor, middle class and rich white people have with each other. It is a bigger prediction of how well you will do in school, what kind of job you will have, or whether you will spend time in jail.

I also have been teaching urban minority children since 1994, and I see what really matters. Attitude. Desire. Determination. Lack of Self-hatred. Avoidance of blame. Refusal to make excuses and take the easy way out. Looking forward, never back. None of these qualities are race-specific.

I work at a public school that spends $14K per child. The same amount as an elite private school not more than 2 miles away. Each of my students can choose to come to school, choose to determine that their character is as important or more important than what they wear, or what they listen to, or what amount of melanin God gave them.
I watch as students make choices. To have unprotected premarital sex, and have babies in highschool, and handicap themselves. To chose drugs and the lure of fast money, instead of the promise of a solid occupation.

Or, to welcome and treasure the blessing of a free and high quality public education, get full scholarships upon graduation, or walk into ready made occupations as auto mechanics or welders.

What is missing in this discussion is the role of education. Despite the monopoly analogy, each child does get not $1500 at the beginning of the game but $7K to $18K per year. The worst American school is far superior than many schools on this planet. Even at the worst American school, there is opportunity available for that child who wants it.
I know many children who come from 'broken' homes, who's parents are addicted, who even abuse them to a certain degree. Some of these students still have the internal compass that tells them this isn't for me. Some of these students understand this public education is their refuge.
I know students from some of the worst home situations who despite this nonsense, graduate valedictorian and get full scholarships (I know one who is now at Yale).

Somehow children of all colors, of all backgrounds who have the compass of hope can see their way clear to walk past all the inequalities their histories have dealt them and persevere despite the odds. Like my father, like my husband (who would be classified minority). I can't say the students who rise above their circumstances have even one single family member who gave them any guidance. Their families have been a bigger distraction than anything. I can say that it is quite possible for people to get beyond this historical baggage.

(Here's my two-cents...telling students to stay in school, study, and make something of themselves is indeed subversive, and perhaps 'socialist' ...if so I will wear that label with pride...)

by: MarKatJac

09-16-2009 @ 1:22am

The article skims the surface of the reality of life in the US. My father was one of 9, my grandparents were tenant farmers, and my father was in a different school each year. In addition, they also worked for the railroad and textile mill. His oldest sister dropped out of school to raise the little ones, his oldest brother dropped out to run the farm. By bagging groceries, my father put himself through college, I was 7 when he got his PhD. I am 12th generation European-American so we have been poor and white for a long time. No accumulated wealth to speak of. My brother worked in Appalachia for years, with people who have been pulling water down the mountain from mine run-off, and live in coal camp houses. Again, these people are white.

I don't point this out for folks to feel sorry for white people, or deny that minorities have been dealt a horrible blow, but I think that the conversation is more complicated than the article states.

In fact, the research I have seen is that poor people of all colors have more in common with each other, than people within a cultural group. So, poor latinos, whites, blacks and asian have more in common than poor, middle class and rich white people have with each other. It is a bigger prediction of how well you will do in school, what kind of job you will have, or whether you will spend time in jail.

I also have been teaching urban minority children since 1994, and I see what really matters. Attitude. Desire. Determination. Lack of Self-hatred. Avoidance of blame. Refusal to make excuses and take the easy way out. Looking forward, never back. None of these qualities are race-specific.

I work at a public school that spends $14K per child. The same amount as an elite private school not more than 2 miles away. Each of my students can choose to come to school, choose to determine that their character is as important or more important than what they wear, or what they listen to, or what amount of melanin God gave them.
I watch as students make choices. To have unprotected premarital sex, and have babies in highschool, and handicap themselves. To chose drugs and the lure of fast money, instead of the promise of a solid occupation.

Or, to welcome and treasure the blessing of a free and high quality public education, get full scholarships upon graduation, or walk into ready made occupations as auto mechanics or welders.

What is missing in this discussion is the role of education. Despite the monopoly analogy, each child does get not $1500 at the beginning of the game but $7K to $18K per year. The worst American school is far superior than many schools on this planet. Even at the worst American school, there is opportunity available for that child who wants it.
I know many children who come from 'broken' homes, who's parents are addicted, who even abuse them to a certain degree. Some of these students still have the internal compass that tells them this isn't for me. Some of these students understand this public education is their refuge.
I know students from some of the worst home situations who despite this nonsense, graduate valedictorian and get full scholarships (I know one who is now at Yale).

Somehow children of all colors, of all backgrounds who have the compass of hope can see their way clear to walk past all the inequalities their histories have dealt them and persevere despite the odds. Like my father, like my husband (who would be classified minority). I can't say the students who rise above their circumstances have even one single family member who gave them any guidance. Their families have been a bigger distraction than anything. I can say that it is quite possible for people to get beyond this historical baggage.

(Here's my two-cents...telling students to stay in school, study, and make something of themselves is indeed subversive, and perhaps 'socialist' ...if so I will wear that label with pride...)

by: letjusticerolldown

09-14-2009 @ 5:13pm

The analogy works at highlighting disparities. Although, some parties might not act as if they have a great deal of sympathy for the harsh realities around the disparate situations; I don't know if many would really disagree.

But they tend to make several points.

First--Acknowledging the fact that persons start with different assets--does that dictate we ought define the end point of the game. Who decides? Is the game itself even just? If the game itself is just and the only problem is the starting point--then we just reshuffle the piles of money, properties, assets, etc. Is the game perfect when everyone proceeds through the game from start, to a never-ending conclusion, with no disparities.

Everytime you introduce a new rule to the game that restricts how the game works, it becomes more and more a game of chance/luck versus one of skill. When it is wide open, persons can become quite inventive in overcoming their initial meager assets. On the other hand--a wide open game makes exploitation more possible.

Does a game that produces disparities (one person win all the assets) due to luck deliver any greater justice than one that produces a winner with all the assets due to skill?

Or what do you think of Monopoly rules when the bank ends up with all the money and all the players are broke?

What about a game where we all put our pieces on "Go" and do a forced redistrution of all assets so we have equality--and then just sit together on "Go." Equal--and, well, acting dead.

I think the Monopoly analogy might acutally work pretty well--in pointing out there might not be any perfect answer.

But there can be benefit in increasing our insight; in playing the game with a heart for justice, honest work, care for others, systems which uphold the dignity of others, etc. so as to develop wisdom; and together attempting to steward this place of life to reflect God's glory.

by: Ashleigh101

09-14-2009 @ 6:41pm

The thing is... life is not a game. This whole game/players/winners/losers analogy is from a completely humanistic/secular viewpoint, not a Biblical one. As Christians, we are called to view things from the "mind of Christ," and not from the worldly, Godless perspective that we might've once had before knowing Christ.

by: ando

09-14-2009 @ 6:47pm

Ashleigh101,
I completely agree with you. I'd add that every year hundreds of thousands, if not millions , of potential immigrants try to come to the United States. Why do they come here? Do they think they'll be persecuted, or do they think that perhaps this is still the land of opportunity? Why are there more Ethiopian doctors in the DC-area than in all of Ethiopia? My room at school is full of immigrant children. Their parents work several jobs, just as immigrant parents did throughout history, to make it possible for their children to succeed. And many do, through hard work and strong support at home. But that doesn't fit in with the victimization paradigm.

by: Ashleigh101

09-14-2009 @ 7:04pm

Very true... about the immigrants who come here seeking freedom and opportunity.

I've been to Mexico and known many Mexicans who have come here (I live in CA), and that is a place where families are truly born into poverty and it's almost impossible to not just have wealth, but to have decent jobs and be able to make a decent living, because the govt. (the police officers, etc) there is very, very corrupt, and in Mexico, you are either born with money or not... and you really do stay that way, and the majority of people there are very, VERY poor.

But in America, even though there are oppressive systems, there are also many, many opportunities to be able to rise above them. There are grants, scholarships, and loans for education... and most of those strongly favor minorities and the poor. There are churches, charities, and many organizations that can help people.

And the govt. does have some good things as well (including the grants and loans). Like there are Employment Development Deparment places in towns throughout the U.S. where anyone can go and use computers, printers, and fax machines for free (if its job-related) and get job assistance, advice, etc.

And there are other programs, etc. but while I agree that systems can fail people, I also believe that in America, everyone has many opportunities to get out of those systems and to rise above them, and there are MANY people in this nation who rose above their family origin and the poverty they were raised in.

But in other nations and countries, this isn't the case. In many other nations and countries... in places like Mexico, Iraq, Ethiopia, people do not have the opportunities and help like they do here.

by: Ashleigh101

09-14-2009 @ 7:09pm

But again, this is still looking at things with a pretty humanistic, worldly perspective. Health, wealth, and prosperity isn't what Christ taught us to seek or set our minds on. Jesus himself was not a wealthy man. It didn't matter, other than that it teaches us that wordly riches and wealth do not matter as far as our joy, salvation, and worth are concerned. The only way they matter is what we do with them and how we view them.

by: ando

09-14-2009 @ 8:32pm

You're right. I would add that the Bible does admonish us to serve the poor of the world. I don't think we can turn a blind eye to the truly needy. But it should be done with agape love, as the Apostle Paul noted.

by: letjusticerolldown

09-14-2009 @ 10:01pm

I think our lives are quite full (OK, I'll speak for myself))--My life is quite full with making meals, raising children, mowing the lawn, talking on the phone, buying groceries at Walmart, paying bills, etc. etc. Our lives are created by God. The world was created by God and belongs to God.

Scripture does make clear there is a worldly system; a system aligned against God. There are also things that are temportal, which are not inherently evil--but are limited in how good they are. Even family are not to be placed over our allegiance to God.

I don't think we end up being very faithful stewards of our lives if we conceive of the mundane affairs of life as having no value. I am not saying you are stating that--but your language makes some implications in that direction--and I understand because we often have that language in the church.

I am not of this world--just passin' through.

What ends up happening is we say stuff here has no value--but then most of the moments of our lives are involved with handling the stuff of here and now. And at the end of the day--we don't see a real connection between our mundane moments and the purposes of God.

I think of it like this. The most significant matters of life (such as marriage or healing in Jesus name) are completely devoid of value if not in submission to God. And the most mundane matters, such as a glancing smile given to the person crossing the street, can be a blessed, God-filled, eternal moment--if it is within God's desire.

So don't hesitate writing about the things you wrote about. I believe the scriptural perspective is that faith divorced from the concrete love of our neighbor is a meaningless faith; and the complete occupation of our lives with our neighbors apart from submission to God is equally meaningless. The two things really have to be walked out together--otherwise both are futile.

Your instinct to be concerned with both are correct. Don't hesitate writing about both in the same breath. You will find new life and understanding being born in you reflections. That is my experience, anyway. Blessings on the journey.

by: letjusticerolldown

09-14-2009 @ 5:13pm

The analogy works at highlighting disparities. Although, some parties might not act as if they have a great deal of sympathy for the harsh realities around the disparate situations; I don't know if many would really disagree.

But they tend to make several points.

First--Acknowledging the fact that persons start with different assets--does that dictate we ought define the end point of the game. Who decides? Is the game itself even just? If the game itself is just and the only problem is the starting point--then we just reshuffle the piles of money, properties, assets, etc. Is the game perfect when everyone proceeds through the game from start, to a never-ending conclusion, with no disparities.

Everytime you introduce a new rule to the game that restricts how the game works, it becomes more and more a game of chance/luck versus one of skill. When it is wide open, persons can become quite inventive in overcoming their initial meager assets. On the other hand--a wide open game makes exploitation more possible.

Does a game that produces disparities (one person win all the assets) due to luck deliver any greater justice than one that produces a winner with all the assets due to skill?

Or what do you think of Monopoly rules when the bank ends up with all the money and all the players are broke?

What about a game where we all put our pieces on "Go" and do a forced redistrution of all assets so we have equality--and then just sit together on "Go." Equal--and, well, acting dead.

I think the Monopoly analogy might acutally work pretty well--in pointing out there might not be any perfect answer.

But there can be benefit in increasing our insight; in playing the game with a heart for justice, honest work, care for others, systems which uphold the dignity of others, etc. so as to develop wisdom; and together attempting to steward this place of life to reflect God's glory.

by: Ashleigh101

09-14-2009 @ 6:41pm

The thing is... life is not a game. This whole game/players/winners/losers analogy is from a completely humanistic/secular viewpoint, not a Biblical one. As Christians, we are called to view things from the "mind of Christ," and not from the worldly, Godless perspective that we might've once had before knowing Christ.

by: ando

09-14-2009 @ 6:47pm

Ashleigh101,
I completely agree with you. I'd add that every year hundreds of thousands, if not millions , of potential immigrants try to come to the United States. Why do they come here? Do they think they'll be persecuted, or do they think that perhaps this is still the land of opportunity? Why are there more Ethiopian doctors in the DC-area than in all of Ethiopia? My room at school is full of immigrant children. Their parents work several jobs, just as immigrant parents did throughout history, to make it possible for their children to succeed. And many do, through hard work and strong support at home. But that doesn't fit in with the victimization paradigm.

by: Ashleigh101

09-14-2009 @ 7:04pm

Very true... about the immigrants who come here seeking freedom and opportunity.

I've been to Mexico and known many Mexicans who have come here (I live in CA), and that is a place where families are truly born into poverty and it's almost impossible to not just have wealth, but to have decent jobs and be able to make a decent living, because the govt. (the police officers, etc) there is very, very corrupt, and in Mexico, you are either born with money or not... and you really do stay that way, and the majority of people there are very, VERY poor.

But in America, even though there are oppressive systems, there are also many, many opportunities to be able to rise above them. There are grants, scholarships, and loans for education... and most of those strongly favor minorities and the poor. There are churches, charities, and many organizations that can help people.

And the govt. does have some good things as well (including the grants and loans). Like there are Employment Development Deparment places in towns throughout the U.S. where anyone can go and use computers, printers, and fax machines for free (if its job-related) and get job assistance, advice, etc.

And there are other programs, etc. but while I agree that systems can fail people, I also believe that in America, everyone has many opportunities to get out of those systems and to rise above them, and there are MANY people in this nation who rose above their family origin and the poverty they were raised in.

But in other nations and countries, this isn't the case. In many other nations and countries... in places like Mexico, Iraq, Ethiopia, people do not have the opportunities and help like they do here.

by: Ashleigh101

09-14-2009 @ 7:09pm

But again, this is still looking at things with a pretty humanistic, worldly perspective. Health, wealth, and prosperity isn't what Christ taught us to seek or set our minds on. Jesus himself was not a wealthy man. It didn't matter, other than that it teaches us that wordly riches and wealth do not matter as far as our joy, salvation, and worth are concerned. The only way they matter is what we do with them and how we view them.

by: lumens

09-15-2009 @ 11:59am

In this analogy, however, the left wants to subsidize the purchase of Baltic Avenue, raise the income and luxury tax to pay for it, require everyone to purchase a utility, and refuse to send anyone to jail no matter how frequently they roll doubles.

by: csack

09-15-2009 @ 2:53pm

i suggest the author go read Scratch Beginnings as an antidote to Nickel and Dimed and this victim mentality.

by: ando

09-14-2009 @ 8:32pm

You're right. I would add that the Bible does admonish us to serve the poor of the world. I don't think we can turn a blind eye to the truly needy. But it should be done with agape love, as the Apostle Paul noted.

by: jazzact13

09-15-2009 @ 4:30pm

Funny. I once played a game of Monopoly, with about 5 other people, and in the game one person boughy only one property--Boardwalk. The rest of us bought the others. One would think that the person buying only one property would have lost. But he didn't, he won (and, sadly, the person wasn't me).

But Monopoly, for all its virtues, is merely a game. Life is much different. Far too many people hae started with little or nothing, and "made it" to make the analogy quite a good one.

by: letjusticerolldown

09-14-2009 @ 10:01pm

I think our lives are quite full (OK, I'll speak for myself))--My life is quite full with making meals, raising children, mowing the lawn, talking on the phone, buying groceries at Walmart, paying bills, etc. etc. Our lives are created by God. The world was created by God and belongs to God.

Scripture does make clear there is a worldly system; a system aligned against God. There are also things that are temportal, which are not inherently evil--but are limited in how good they are. Even family are not to be placed over our allegiance to God.

I don't think we end up being very faithful stewards of our lives if we conceive of the mundane affairs of life as having no value. I am not saying you are stating that--but your language makes some implications in that direction--and I understand because we often have that language in the church.

I am not of this world--just passin' through.

What ends up happening is we say stuff here has no value--but then most of the moments of our lives are involved with handling the stuff of here and now. And at the end of the day--we don't see a real connection between our mundane moments and the purposes of God.

I think of it like this. The most significant matters of life (such as marriage or healing in Jesus name) are completely devoid of value if not in submission to God. And the most mundane matters, such as a glancing smile given to the person crossing the street, can be a blessed, God-filled, eternal moment--if it is within God's desire.

So don't hesitate writing about the things you wrote about. I believe the scriptural perspective is that faith divorced from the concrete love of our neighbor is a meaningless faith; and the complete occupation of our lives with our neighbors apart from submission to God is equally meaningless. The two things really have to be walked out together--otherwise both are futile.

Your instinct to be concerned with both are correct. Don't hesitate writing about both in the same breath. You will find new life and understanding being born in you reflections. That is my experience, anyway. Blessings on the journey.

by: MarKatJac

09-16-2009 @ 1:22am

The article skims the surface of the reality of life in the US. My father was one of 9, my grandparents were tenant farmers, and my father was in a different school each year. In addition, they also worked for the railroad and textile mill. His oldest sister dropped out of school to raise the little ones, his oldest brother dropped out to run the farm. By bagging groceries, my father put himself through college, I was 7 when he got his PhD. I am 12th generation European-American so we have been poor and white for a long time. No accumulated wealth to speak of. My brother worked in Appalachia for years, with people who have been pulling water down the mountain from mine run-off, and live in coal camp houses. Again, these people are white.

I don't point this out for folks to feel sorry for white people, or deny that minorities have been dealt a horrible blow, but I think that the conversation is more complicated than the article states.

In fact, the research I have seen is that poor people of all colors have more in common with each other, than people within a cultural group. So, poor latinos, whites, blacks and asian have more in common than poor, middle class and rich white people have with each other. It is a bigger prediction of how well you will do in school, what kind of job you will have, or whether you will spend time in jail.

I also have been teaching urban minority children since 1994, and I see what really matters. Attitude. Desire. Determination. Lack of Self-hatred. Avoidance of blame. Refusal to make excuses and take the easy way out. Looking forward, never back. None of these qualities are race-specific.

I work at a public school that spends $14K per child. The same amount as an elite private school not more than 2 miles away. Each of my students can choose to come to school, choose to determine that their character is as important or more important than what they wear, or what they listen to, or what amount of melanin God gave them.
I watch as students make choices. To have unprotected premarital sex, and have babies in highschool, and handicap themselves. To chose drugs and the lure of fast money, instead of the promise of a solid occupation.

Or, to welcome and treasure the blessing of a free and high quality public education, get full scholarships upon graduation, or walk into ready made occupations as auto mechanics or welders.

What is missing in this discussion is the role of education. Despite the monopoly analogy, each child does get not $1500 at the beginning of the game but $7K to $18K per year. The worst American school is far superior than many schools on this planet. Even at the worst American school, there is opportunity available for that child who wants it.
I know many children who come from 'broken' homes, who's parents are addicted, who even abuse them to a certain degree. Some of these students still have the internal compass that tells them this isn't for me. Some of these students understand this public education is their refuge.
I know students from some of the worst home situations who despite this nonsense, graduate valedictorian and get full scholarships (I know one who is now at Yale).

Somehow children of all colors, of all backgrounds who have the compass of hope can see their way clear to walk past all the inequalities their histories have dealt them and persevere despite the odds. Like my father, like my husband (who would be classified minority). I can't say the students who rise above their circumstances have even one single family member who gave them any guidance. Their families have been a bigger distraction than anything. I can say that it is quite possible for people to get beyond this historical baggage.

(Here's my two-cents...telling students to stay in school, study, and make something of themselves is indeed subversive, and perhaps 'socialist' ...if so I will wear that label with pride...)

by: lumens

09-15-2009 @ 11:59am

In this analogy, however, the left wants to subsidize the purchase of Baltic Avenue, raise the income and luxury tax to pay for it, require everyone to purchase a utility, and refuse to send anyone to jail no matter how frequently they roll doubles.

by: csack

09-15-2009 @ 2:53pm

i suggest the author go read Scratch Beginnings as an antidote to Nickel and Dimed and this victim mentality.

by: jazzact13

09-15-2009 @ 4:30pm

Funny. I once played a game of Monopoly, with about 5 other people, and in the game one person boughy only one property--Boardwalk. The rest of us bought the others. One would think that the person buying only one property would have lost. But he didn't, he won (and, sadly, the person wasn't me).

But Monopoly, for all its virtues, is merely a game. Life is much different. Far too many people hae started with little or nothing, and "made it" to make the analogy quite a good one.

Comments sorted by highest rated. After voting you must refresh your page to see the sort order change.

by: letjusticerolldown

09-14-2009 @ 5:13pm

The analogy works at highlighting disparities. Although, some parties might not act as if they have a great deal of sympathy for the harsh realities around the disparate situations; I don't know if many would really disagree.

But they tend to make several points.

First--Acknowledging the fact that persons start with different assets--does that dictate we ought define the end point of the game. Who decides? Is the game itself even just? If the game itself is just and the only problem is the starting point--then we just reshuffle the piles of money, properties, assets, etc. Is the game perfect when everyone proceeds through the game from start, to a never-ending conclusion, with no disparities.

Everytime you introduce a new rule to the game that restricts how the game works, it becomes more and more a game of chance/luck versus one of skill. When it is wide open, persons can become quite inventive in overcoming their initial meager assets. On the other hand--a wide open game makes exploitation more possible.

Does a game that produces disparities (one person win all the assets) due to luck deliver any greater justice than one that produces a winner with all the assets due to skill?

Or what do you think of Monopoly rules when the bank ends up with all the money and all the players are broke?

What about a game where we all put our pieces on "Go" and do a forced redistrution of all assets so we have equality--and then just sit together on "Go." Equal--and, well, acting dead.

I think the Monopoly analogy might acutally work pretty well--in pointing out there might not be any perfect answer.

But there can be benefit in increasing our insight; in playing the game with a heart for justice, honest work, care for others, systems which uphold the dignity of others, etc. so as to develop wisdom; and together attempting to steward this place of life to reflect God's glory.

by: letjusticerolldown

09-14-2009 @ 5:13pm

The analogy works at highlighting disparities. Although, some parties might not act as if they have a great deal of sympathy for the harsh realities around the disparate situations; I don't know if many would really disagree.

But they tend to make several points.

First--Acknowledging the fact that persons start with different assets--does that dictate we ought define the end point of the game. Who decides? Is the game itself even just? If the game itself is just and the only problem is the starting point--then we just reshuffle the piles of money, properties, assets, etc. Is the game perfect when everyone proceeds through the game from start, to a never-ending conclusion, with no disparities.

Everytime you introduce a new rule to the game that restricts how the game works, it becomes more and more a game of chance/luck versus one of skill. When it is wide open, persons can become quite inventive in overcoming their initial meager assets. On the other hand--a wide open game makes exploitation more possible.

Does a game that produces disparities (one person win all the assets) due to luck deliver any greater justice than one that produces a winner with all the assets due to skill?

Or what do you think of Monopoly rules when the bank ends up with all the money and all the players are broke?

What about a game where we all put our pieces on "Go" and do a forced redistrution of all assets so we have equality--and then just sit together on "Go." Equal--and, well, acting dead.

I think the Monopoly analogy might acutally work pretty well--in pointing out there might not be any perfect answer.

But there can be benefit in increasing our insight; in playing the game with a heart for justice, honest work, care for others, systems which uphold the dignity of others, etc. so as to develop wisdom; and together attempting to steward this place of life to reflect God's glory.

by: Ashleigh101

09-14-2009 @ 6:41pm

The thing is... life is not a game. This whole game/players/winners/losers analogy is from a completely humanistic/secular viewpoint, not a Biblical one. As Christians, we are called to view things from the "mind of Christ," and not from the worldly, Godless perspective that we might've once had before knowing Christ.

by: Ashleigh101

09-14-2009 @ 6:41pm

The thing is... life is not a game. This whole game/players/winners/losers analogy is from a completely humanistic/secular viewpoint, not a Biblical one. As Christians, we are called to view things from the "mind of Christ," and not from the worldly, Godless perspective that we might've once had before knowing Christ.

by: ando

09-14-2009 @ 6:47pm

Ashleigh101,
I completely agree with you. I'd add that every year hundreds of thousands, if not millions , of potential immigrants try to come to the United States. Why do they come here? Do they think they'll be persecuted, or do they think that perhaps this is still the land of opportunity? Why are there more Ethiopian doctors in the DC-area than in all of Ethiopia? My room at school is full of immigrant children. Their parents work several jobs, just as immigrant parents did throughout history, to make it possible for their children to succeed. And many do, through hard work and strong support at home. But that doesn't fit in with the victimization paradigm.

by: ando

09-14-2009 @ 6:47pm

Ashleigh101,
I completely agree with you. I'd add that every year hundreds of thousands, if not millions , of potential immigrants try to come to the United States. Why do they come here? Do they think they'll be persecuted, or do they think that perhaps this is still the land of opportunity? Why are there more Ethiopian doctors in the DC-area than in all of Ethiopia? My room at school is full of immigrant children. Their parents work several jobs, just as immigrant parents did throughout history, to make it possible for their children to succeed. And many do, through hard work and strong support at home. But that doesn't fit in with the victimization paradigm.

by: Ashleigh101

09-14-2009 @ 7:04pm

Very true... about the immigrants who come here seeking freedom and opportunity.

I've been to Mexico and known many Mexicans who have come here (I live in CA), and that is a place where families are truly born into poverty and it's almost impossible to not just have wealth, but to have decent jobs and be able to make a decent living, because the govt. (the police officers, etc) there is very, very corrupt, and in Mexico, you are either born with money or not... and you really do stay that way, and the majority of people there are very, VERY poor.

But in America, even though there are oppressive systems, there are also many, many opportunities to be able to rise above them. There are grants, scholarships, and loans for education... and most of those strongly favor minorities and the poor. There are churches, charities, and many organizations that can help people.

And the govt. does have some good things as well (including the grants and loans). Like there are Employment Development Deparment places in towns throughout the U.S. where anyone can go and use computers, printers, and fax machines for free (if its job-related) and get job assistance, advice, etc.

And there are other programs, etc. but while I agree that systems can fail people, I also believe that in America, everyone has many opportunities to get out of those systems and to rise above them, and there are MANY people in this nation who rose above their family origin and the poverty they were raised in.

But in other nations and countries, this isn't the case. In many other nations and countries... in places like Mexico, Iraq, Ethiopia, people do not have the opportunities and help like they do here.

by: Ashleigh101

09-14-2009 @ 7:04pm

Very true... about the immigrants who come here seeking freedom and opportunity.

I've been to Mexico and known many Mexicans who have come here (I live in CA), and that is a place where families are truly born into poverty and it's almost impossible to not just have wealth, but to have decent jobs and be able to make a decent living, because the govt. (the police officers, etc) there is very, very corrupt, and in Mexico, you are either born with money or not... and you really do stay that way, and the majority of people there are very, VERY poor.

But in America, even though there are oppressive systems, there are also many, many opportunities to be able to rise above them. There are grants, scholarships, and loans for education... and most of those strongly favor minorities and the poor. There are churches, charities, and many organizations that can help people.

And the govt. does have some good things as well (including the grants and loans). Like there are Employment Development Deparment places in towns throughout the U.S. where anyone can go and use computers, printers, and fax machines for free (if its job-related) and get job assistance, advice, etc.

And there are other programs, etc. but while I agree that systems can fail people, I also believe that in America, everyone has many opportunities to get out of those systems and to rise above them, and there are MANY people in this nation who rose above their family origin and the poverty they were raised in.

But in other nations and countries, this isn't the case. In many other nations and countries... in places like Mexico, Iraq, Ethiopia, people do not have the opportunities and help like they do here.

by: Ashleigh101

09-14-2009 @ 7:09pm

But again, this is still looking at things with a pretty humanistic, worldly perspective. Health, wealth, and prosperity isn't what Christ taught us to seek or set our minds on. Jesus himself was not a wealthy man. It didn't matter, other than that it teaches us that wordly riches and wealth do not matter as far as our joy, salvation, and worth are concerned. The only way they matter is what we do with them and how we view them.

by: Ashleigh101

09-14-2009 @ 7:09pm

But again, this is still looking at things with a pretty humanistic, worldly perspective. Health, wealth, and prosperity isn't what Christ taught us to seek or set our minds on. Jesus himself was not a wealthy man. It didn't matter, other than that it teaches us that wordly riches and wealth do not matter as far as our joy, salvation, and worth are concerned. The only way they matter is what we do with them and how we view them.

by: ando

09-14-2009 @ 8:32pm

You're right. I would add that the Bible does admonish us to serve the poor of the world. I don't think we can turn a blind eye to the truly needy. But it should be done with agape love, as the Apostle Paul noted.

by: ando

09-14-2009 @ 8:32pm

You're right. I would add that the Bible does admonish us to serve the poor of the world. I don't think we can turn a blind eye to the truly needy. But it should be done with agape love, as the Apostle Paul noted.

by: letjusticerolldown

09-14-2009 @ 10:01pm

I think our lives are quite full (OK, I'll speak for myself))--My life is quite full with making meals, raising children, mowing the lawn, talking on the phone, buying groceries at Walmart, paying bills, etc. etc. Our lives are created by God. The world was created by God and belongs to God.

Scripture does make clear there is a worldly system; a system aligned against God. There are also things that are temportal, which are not inherently evil--but are limited in how good they are. Even family are not to be placed over our allegiance to God.

I don't think we end up being very faithful stewards of our lives if we conceive of the mundane affairs of life as having no value. I am not saying you are stating that--but your language makes some implications in that direction--and I understand because we often have that language in the church.

I am not of this world--just passin' through.

What ends up happening is we say stuff here has no value--but then most of the moments of our lives are involved with handling the stuff of here and now. And at the end of the day--we don't see a real connection between our mundane moments and the purposes of God.

I think of it like this. The most significant matters of life (such as marriage or healing in Jesus name) are completely devoid of value if not in submission to God. And the most mundane matters, such as a glancing smile given to the person crossing the street, can be a blessed, God-filled, eternal moment--if it is within God's desire.

So don't hesitate writing about the things you wrote about. I believe the scriptural perspective is that faith divorced from the concrete love of our neighbor is a meaningless faith; and the complete occupation of our lives with our neighbors apart from submission to God is equally meaningless. The two things really have to be walked out together--otherwise both are futile.

Your instinct to be concerned with both are correct. Don't hesitate writing about both in the same breath. You will find new life and understanding being born in you reflections. That is my experience, anyway. Blessings on the journey.

by: letjusticerolldown

09-14-2009 @ 10:01pm

I think our lives are quite full (OK, I'll speak for myself))--My life is quite full with making meals, raising children, mowing the lawn, talking on the phone, buying groceries at Walmart, paying bills, etc. etc. Our lives are created by God. The world was created by God and belongs to God.

Scripture does make clear there is a worldly system; a system aligned against God. There are also things that are temportal, which are not inherently evil--but are limited in how good they are. Even family are not to be placed over our allegiance to God.

I don't think we end up being very faithful stewards of our lives if we conceive of the mundane affairs of life as having no value. I am not saying you are stating that--but your language makes some implications in that direction--and I understand because we often have that language in the church.

I am not of this world--just passin' through.

What ends up happening is we say stuff here has no value--but then most of the moments of our lives are involved with handling the stuff of here and now. And at the end of the day--we don't see a real connection between our mundane moments and the purposes of God.

I think of it like this. The most significant matters of life (such as marriage or healing in Jesus name) are completely devoid of value if not in submission to God. And the most mundane matters, such as a glancing smile given to the person crossing the street, can be a blessed, God-filled, eternal moment--if it is within God's desire.

So don't hesitate writing about the things you wrote about. I believe the scriptural perspective is that faith divorced from the concrete love of our neighbor is a meaningless faith; and the complete occupation of our lives with our neighbors apart from submission to God is equally meaningless. The two things really have to be walked out together--otherwise both are futile.

Your instinct to be concerned with both are correct. Don't hesitate writing about both in the same breath. You will find new life and understanding being born in you reflections. That is my experience, anyway. Blessings on the journey.

by: lumens

09-15-2009 @ 11:59am

In this analogy, however, the left wants to subsidize the purchase of Baltic Avenue, raise the income and luxury tax to pay for it, require everyone to purchase a utility, and refuse to send anyone to jail no matter how frequently they roll doubles.

by: lumens

09-15-2009 @ 11:59am

In this analogy, however, the left wants to subsidize the purchase of Baltic Avenue, raise the income and luxury tax to pay for it, require everyone to purchase a utility, and refuse to send anyone to jail no matter how frequently they roll doubles.

by: csack

09-15-2009 @ 2:53pm

i suggest the author go read Scratch Beginnings as an antidote to Nickel and Dimed and this victim mentality.

by: csack

09-15-2009 @ 2:53pm

i suggest the author go read Scratch Beginnings as an antidote to Nickel and Dimed and this victim mentality.

by: jazzact13

09-15-2009 @ 4:30pm

Funny. I once played a game of Monopoly, with about 5 other people, and in the game one person boughy only one property--Boardwalk. The rest of us bought the others. One would think that the person buying only one property would have lost. But he didn't, he won (and, sadly, the person wasn't me).

But Monopoly, for all its virtues, is merely a game. Life is much different. Far too many people hae started with little or nothing, and "made it" to make the analogy quite a good one.

by: jazzact13

09-15-2009 @ 4:30pm

Funny. I once played a game of Monopoly, with about 5 other people, and in the game one person boughy only one property--Boardwalk. The rest of us bought the others. One would think that the person buying only one property would have lost. But he didn't, he won (and, sadly, the person wasn't me).

But Monopoly, for all its virtues, is merely a game. Life is much different. Far too many people hae started with little or nothing, and "made it" to make the analogy quite a good one.

by: MarKatJac

09-15-2009 @ 11:22pm

The article skims the surface of the reality of life in the US. My father was one of 9, my grandparents were tenant farmers, and my father was in a different school each year. In addition, they also worked for the railroad and textile mill. His oldest sister dropped out of school to raise the little ones, his oldest brother dropped out to run the farm. By bagging groceries, my father put himself through college, I was 7 when he got his PhD. I am 12th generation European-American so we have been poor and white for a long time. No accumulated wealth to speak of. My brother worked in Appalachia for years, with people who have been pulling water down the mountain from mine run-off, and live in coal camp houses. Again, these people are white.

I don't point this out for folks to feel sorry for white people, or deny that minorities have been dealt a horrible blow, but I think that the conversation is more complicated than the article states.

In fact, the research I have seen is that poor people of all colors have more in common with each other, than people within a cultural group. So, poor latinos, whites, blacks and asian have more in common than poor, middle class and rich white people have with each other. It is a bigger prediction of how well you will do in school, what kind of job you will have, or whether you will spend time in jail.

I also have been teaching urban minority children since 1994, and I see what really matters. Attitude. Desire. Determination. Lack of Self-hatred. Avoidance of blame. Refusal to make excuses and take the easy way out. Looking forward, never back. None of these qualities are race-specific.

I work at a public school that spends $14K per child. The same amount as an elite private school not more than 2 miles away. Each of my students can choose to come to school, choose to determine that their character is as important or more important than what they wear, or what they listen to, or what amount of melanin God gave them.
I watch as students make choices. To have unprotected premarital sex, and have babies in highschool, and handicap themselves. To chose drugs and the lure of fast money, instead of the promise of a solid occupation.

Or, to welcome and treasure the blessing of a free and high quality public education, get full scholarships upon graduation, or walk into ready made occupations as auto mechanics or welders.

What is missing in this discussion is the role of education. Despite the monopoly analogy, each child does get not $1500 at the beginning of the game but $7K to $18K per year. The worst American school is far superior than many schools on this planet. Even at the worst American school, there is opportunity available for that child who wants it.
I know many children who come from 'broken' homes, who's parents are addicted, who even abuse them to a certain degree. Some of these students still have the internal compass that tells them this isn't for me. Some of these students understand this public education is their refuge.
I know students from some of the worst home situations who despite this nonsense, graduate valedictorian and get full scholarships (I know one who is now at Yale).

Somehow children of all colors, of all backgrounds who have the compass of hope can see their way clear to walk past all the inequalities their histories have dealt them and persevere despite the odds. Like my father, like my husband (who would be classified minority). I can't say the students who rise above their circumstances have even one single family member who gave them any guidance. Their families have been a bigger distraction than anything. I can say that it is quite possible for people to get beyond this historical baggage.

(Here's my two-cents...telling students to stay in school, study, and make something of themselves is indeed subversive, and perhaps 'socialist' ...if so I will wear that label with pride...)

by: MarKatJac

09-15-2009 @ 11:22pm

The article skims the surface of the reality of life in the US. My father was one of 9, my grandparents were tenant farmers, and my father was in a different school each year. In addition, they also worked for the railroad and textile mill. His oldest sister dropped out of school to raise the little ones, his oldest brother dropped out to run the farm. By bagging groceries, my father put himself through college, I was 7 when he got his PhD. I am 12th generation European-American so we have been poor and white for a long time. No accumulated wealth to speak of. My brother worked in Appalachia for years, with people who have been pulling water down the mountain from mine run-off, and live in coal camp houses. Again, these people are white.

I don't point this out for folks to feel sorry for white people, or deny that minorities have been dealt a horrible blow, but I think that the conversation is more complicated than the article states.

In fact, the research I have seen is that poor people of all colors have more in common with each other, than people within a cultural group. So, poor latinos, whites, blacks and asian have more in common than poor, middle class and rich white people have with each other. It is a bigger prediction of how well you will do in school, what kind of job you will have, or whether you will spend time in jail.

I also have been teaching urban minority children since 1994, and I see what really matters. Attitude. Desire. Determination. Lack of Self-hatred. Avoidance of blame. Refusal to make excuses and take the easy way out. Looking forward, never back. None of these qualities are race-specific.

I work at a public school that spends $14K per child. The same amount as an elite private school not more than 2 miles away. Each of my students can choose to come to school, choose to determine that their character is as important or more important than what they wear, or what they listen to, or what amount of melanin God gave them.
I watch as students make choices. To have unprotected premarital sex, and have babies in highschool, and handicap themselves. To chose drugs and the lure of fast money, instead of the promise of a solid occupation.

Or, to welcome and treasure the blessing of a free and high quality public education, get full scholarships upon graduation, or walk into ready made occupations as auto mechanics or welders.

What is missing in this discussion is the role of education. Despite the monopoly analogy, each child does get not $1500 at the beginning of the game but $7K to $18K per year. The worst American school is far superior than many schools on this planet. Even at the worst American school, there is opportunity available for that child who wants it.
I know many children who come from 'broken' homes, who's parents are addicted, who even abuse them to a certain degree. Some of these students still have the internal compass that tells them this isn't for me. Some of these students understand this public education is their refuge.
I know students from some of the worst home situations who despite this nonsense, graduate valedictorian and get full scholarships (I know one who is now at Yale).

Somehow children of all colors, of all backgrounds who have the compass of hope can see their way clear to walk past all the inequalities their histories have dealt them and persevere despite the odds. Like my father, like my husband (who would be classified minority). I can't say the students who rise above their circumstances have even one single family member who gave them any guidance. Their families have been a bigger distraction than anything. I can say that it is quite possible for people to get beyond this historical baggage.

(Here's my two-cents...telling students to stay in school, study, and make something of themselves is indeed subversive, and perhaps 'socialist' ...if so I will wear that label with pride...)

by: MarKatJac

09-16-2009 @ 1:22am

The article skims the surface of the reality of life in the US. My father was one of 9, my grandparents were tenant farmers, and my father was in a different school each year. In addition, they also worked for the railroad and textile mill. His oldest sister dropped out of school to raise the little ones, his oldest brother dropped out to run the farm. By bagging groceries, my father put himself through college, I was 7 when he got his PhD. I am 12th generation European-American so we have been poor and white for a long time. No accumulated wealth to speak of. My brother worked in Appalachia for years, with people who have been pulling water down the mountain from mine run-off, and live in coal camp houses. Again, these people are white.

I don't point this out for folks to feel sorry for white people, or deny that minorities have been dealt a horrible blow, but I think that the conversation is more complicated than the article states.

In fact, the research I have seen is that poor people of all colors have more in common with each other, than people within a cultural group. So, poor latinos, whites, blacks and asian have more in common than poor, middle class and rich white people have with each other. It is a bigger prediction of how well you will do in school, what kind of job you will have, or whether you will spend time in jail.

I also have been teaching urban minority children since 1994, and I see what really matters. Attitude. Desire. Determination. Lack of Self-hatred. Avoidance of blame. Refusal to make excuses and take the easy way out. Looking forward, never back. None of these qualities are race-specific.

I work at a public school that spends $14K per child. The same amount as an elite private school not more than 2 miles away. Each of my students can choose to come to school, choose to determine that their character is as important or more important than what they wear, or what they listen to, or what amount of melanin God gave them.
I watch as students make choices. To have unprotected premarital sex, and have babies in highschool, and handicap themselves. To chose drugs and the lure of fast money, instead of the promise of a solid occupation.

Or, to welcome and treasure the blessing of a free and high quality public education, get full scholarships upon graduation, or walk into ready made occupations as auto mechanics or welders.

What is missing in this discussion is the role of education. Despite the monopoly analogy, each child does get not $1500 at the beginning of the game but $7K to $18K per year. The worst American school is far superior than many schools on this planet. Even at the worst American school, there is opportunity available for that child who wants it.
I know many children who come from 'broken' homes, who's parents are addicted, who even abuse them to a certain degree. Some of these students still have the internal compass that tells them this isn't for me. Some of these students understand this public education is their refuge.
I know students from some of the worst home situations who despite this nonsense, graduate valedictorian and get full scholarships (I know one who is now at Yale).

Somehow children of all colors, of all backgrounds who have the compass of hope can see their way clear to walk past all the inequalities their histories have dealt them and persevere despite the odds. Like my father, like my husband (who would be classified minority). I can't say the students who rise above their circumstances have even one single family member who gave them any guidance. Their families have been a bigger distraction than anything. I can say that it is quite possible for people to get beyond this historical baggage.

(Here's my two-cents...telling students to stay in school, study, and make something of themselves is indeed subversive, and perhaps 'socialist' ...if so I will wear that label with pride...)

by: MarKatJac

09-16-2009 @ 1:22am

The article skims the surface of the reality of life in the US. My father was one of 9, my grandparents were tenant farmers, and my father was in a different school each year. In addition, they also worked for the railroad and textile mill. His oldest sister dropped out of school to raise the little ones, his oldest brother dropped out to run the farm. By bagging groceries, my father put himself through college, I was 7 when he got his PhD. I am 12th generation European-American so we have been poor and white for a long time. No accumulated wealth to speak of. My brother worked in Appalachia for years, with people who have been pulling water down the mountain from mine run-off, and live in coal camp houses. Again, these people are white.

I don't point this out for folks to feel sorry for white people, or deny that minorities have been dealt a horrible blow, but I think that the conversation is more complicated than the article states.

In fact, the research I have seen is that poor people of all colors have more in common with each other, than people within a cultural group. So, poor latinos, whites, blacks and asian have more in common than poor, middle class and rich white people have with each other. It is a bigger prediction of how well you will do in school, what kind of job you will have, or whether you will spend time in jail.

I also have been teaching urban minority children since 1994, and I see what really matters. Attitude. Desire. Determination. Lack of Self-hatred. Avoidance of blame. Refusal to make excuses and take the easy way out. Looking forward, never back. None of these qualities are race-specific.

I work at a public school that spends $14K per child. The same amount as an elite private school not more than 2 miles away. Each of my students can choose to come to school, choose to determine that their character is as important or more important than what they wear, or what they listen to, or what amount of melanin God gave them.
I watch as students make choices. To have unprotected premarital sex, and have babies in highschool, and handicap themselves. To chose drugs and the lure of fast money, instead of the promise of a solid occupation.

Or, to welcome and treasure the blessing of a free and high quality public education, get full scholarships upon graduation, or walk into ready made occupations as auto mechanics or welders.

What is missing in this discussion is the role of education. Despite the monopoly analogy, each child does get not $1500 at the beginning of the game but $7K to $18K per year. The worst American school is far superior than many schools on this planet. Even at the worst American school, there is opportunity available for that child who wants it.
I know many children who come from 'broken' homes, who's parents are addicted, who even abuse them to a certain degree. Some of these students still have the internal compass that tells them this isn't for me. Some of these students understand this public education is their refuge.
I know students from some of the worst home situations who despite this nonsense, graduate valedictorian and get full scholarships (I know one who is now at Yale).

Somehow children of all colors, of all backgrounds who have the compass of hope can see their way clear to walk past all the inequalities their histories have dealt them and persevere despite the odds. Like my father, like my husband (who would be classified minority). I can't say the students who rise above their circumstances have even one single family member who gave them any guidance. Their families have been a bigger distraction than anything. I can say that it is quite possible for people to get beyond this historical baggage.

(Here's my two-cents...telling students to stay in school, study, and make something of themselves is indeed subversive, and perhaps 'socialist' ...if so I will wear that label with pride...)