Moving for Opportunity

Wednesday, May 26, 2010

We're looking at new research into what happens when people move from impoverished areas for better opportunities. And we want to know from you: When have you moved for the sake of opportunity? How did it affect your life?

Sue Popkin wrote the new book, "Moving to Opportnity: The Story of an American Expeiment to Fight Ghetto Poverty." She joins us along with Lydia Grayson, who took advantage of the "Moving to Opportunity" program to get out of New York City in an effort to find a safer environment for her children.

Cynda on Facebook writes:

"In the middle of it right now, for the 2nd time in our lives. First time it worked out very well. My thought: never wait till you're out of options to choose this option. Best to take the risk, when you've still got a bit of a safety net."

Guests:

Lydia Grayson

Produced by:

Samantha Fields

Comments [3]

paul dare from westland, mi

I found myself thinking the exact same thoughts as "robert from Detroit" as I listened to this story this morning. The one missing element in the entire story: Dads

It doesn't matter where you grow up, what your economic situation is. If you grow up without a Dad who is doing his duty to love, teach, train, model, discipline and correct you, you can hope from Harlem to Beverly Hills and get into trouble no matter where you lay your head.

I was also struck with the apparent complete misunderstanding of the role of government by the guest on this segment who had actually bean a recipient of this relocation program. Her first words were "I didn't like the new place!" Then she ended with the statement, "The government should provide more programs to help you relocate and adjust" [!]

It's not the government's job at all, ever to relocate people in hopes bettering their situation. So-when they do it-as an experiment mind you - the first words out of your mouth when you are being interviewed about it should be something to the effect of "THANK YOU!"

"The problem with government is our understanding of the function of government. As long as the government is seen as the solution to all of our problems, the government will continue to be the source of many of our problems." - RC Sproul Jr.

Dads-stay home, don't create single Mom, daughters longing for love and becoming teen-pregnant, and sons who go to gangs to be accepted.
Moms - if you're single, get involved with other families, the church, somewhere you can at the very least expose your children to godly men and hopefully find a spouse and new father for your children.
Churches - help the widow, single mom, single Dad, orphans. do your duty, laid out in the scripture.
government-please just keep the peace and stay small. quit printing money, causing inflation, taxing us to death and taking on every program under the son, especially the ones families and churches are responsible for.

May. 26 2010 12:28 PM
robert from Detroit

Your guests are clueless. Why would you ask a woman who failed with her boys what her boys needed? If she knew, they wouldn't be failures! The issue is not where you raise kids, it's HOW you raise kids. Typically, single mothers have problems with boys regardless of demographics. Boys need a level of descipline, proper activities, coaching, etc., that women often don't bring. If single mothers do not understand their boys need strong, positive male influences to pattern their behavior after, the boys from these situations will typically find what they're looking for in anti-social groups of boys that the greater population labels "gangs". They take their cues on masculinity in the only place they find it, on TV, movies, rap videos, etc. and you should be able to figure out the rest...

May. 26 2010 08:49 AM
Rick Evans from Taxachusetts

The most important "takeaway" from this experiment is that both male and female children need discipline. This part is clearly not a poverty issue. Across cultures and economic levels girls tend to have a shorter leash than boys with pregnancy being the elephant filling the room and which helps explain why American girls are attending college at 60:40 rate compared to boys and at a more disproportionate ratio among 'disadvantaged minorities'.

May. 26 2010 08:25 AM

Leave a Comment

Register for your own account so you can vote on comments, save your favorites, and more. Learn more.
Please stay on topic, be civil, and be brief.
Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments. Names are displayed with all comments. We reserve the right to edit any comments posted on this site. Please read the Comment Guidelines before posting. By leaving a comment, you agree to New York Public Radio's Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use.