When considering a person’s future goals, it’s important to take their current and past living situations into account. In America, we’re told this narrative that anything is possible and we can be whoever we want to be, if we simply work hard enough towards those goals. Anyone living today who was not fortunate enough to be born into a family already equipped with the needed resources for basic human functions, can disagree and attest that hard work is in fact, not all you need to succeed today. With COVID wreaking havoc on every industry we have, there’s no telling when the job force will stabilize and this means even more families are forced to rely on public assistance programs to get by, through no fault of their own. No amount of planning ahead or hard work could have prepared anyone for the falling out we as a planet experienced in 2020. Knowing this, we have to start looking at what we can do, starting with public assistance programs. Poverty at its base level poorly affects the mental health of all people in the home because their basic human needs (such as housing, food and financial security) go unmet, and have limited ability to break past those barriers. A person constantly worrying about catching up or getting on their feet ends up creating a cycle of debt trying to stay afloat.In households with children, this inevitably teaches the same coping habits and money management to the next generation who then perpetuate the cycle forward. In addition to poverty, this creates an environment for mental illnesses to take root and become part of that cycle too. As a community, we are faced with record numbers of families struggling to make ends meet because of something they had no control over, and being turned away from the programs designed to help them because they’re running out of funding far faster than they receive it. So many bright minds that could be working towards solutions to the bigger issues are instead preoccupied with uncertainty of their next meal or if they’ll have a place to live next month. If these programs were embraced with the understanding of people’s potential, rather than the possibility of someone taking it for granted, I believe we’d see an increase of scientists, inventors, creators of all kinds. Simply because their basic human needs were better met.
For my own research, I ultimately decided to use a custom generated survey (through Google, you can take the survey yourself here). Based on the data we have access to, decision making as well as money management and life patterns clearly carry over to the next generation. If a family is financially insecure while a child is growing up, those survival mode techniques will carry into adulthood and perpetuate the cycle. When resources are limited, children are not encouraged to explore, learn and grow; they are required to take on some of the burden of surviving. Into adulthood, they enter that same mindset and instead of thriving, tread water or drown completely. Food insecurity did not appear to be an issue, thankfully, but every other statistic shows public assistance programs could do a great deal to help set future generations up for success and give current generations a chance to level out as well.This data clearly reinforces the theory that poverty and some mental illnesses (and the trauma associated with them) are generational, and not easily overcome simply through perseverance. In addition to public assistance programs, another option being discussed is a Universal Basic Income (UBI). The budget for these stimulus checks came from our government essentially giving IOU’s to the Federal Reserve Bank in which we’ll pay back with interest over time or funding from private charities and donations (Bloom, 2020). While the idea for a stimulus was a good short term solution, it is not a great long term one. A UBI is a great alternative that would allow families to make better long term decisions without the stress of short term options (Amadeo, 2020). If however, a UBI cannot be agreed upon, our local and state government could better implement the budget elsewhere by giving those funds to public assistance programs. Programs that offer food, medical, rental, child care assistance and so on can help set families up for success and could give long term benefits to people that truly need them. Each person’s basic needs are met and so this is when the theory that hard work is all you need to succeed would have a higher likelihood of standing true. An issue with public assistance programs is called the “poverty trap” in that, if a family makes too much money to qualify for state assistance (based on regulations set in early 90's), they then lose the help they were getting with those programs. A family is then forced between staying in their situation so that their family can qualify for health insurance, food stamps or help with childcare because losing any of that assistance would be even more of a hindrance. That’s where the idea of a Universal Basic Income (UBI) for families making below a certain amount a year is great in that it sets each person off at the same starting point, so to speak. States that have already implemented test programs have shown an increase in emotional, mental and community health. A UBI allows people to make the decision between going to school or stay home to take care of relatives that otherwise can’t. This kind of safety net would also allow people to leave situations they would otherwise be stuck in due to financial insecurity, such as domestically violent households. When asked what they’d do if given a stimulus check or an UBI, 96.8% of the people that received a stimulus check immediately spent most (if not all) on bills and needed life maintenance such as car/house repairs or medical bills. 71% of people said a UBI would be an above average benefit to their home and every person answered that they’d use it to take care of debts, go back to school, take care of family or pursue passions in their free time.
In discussing these ideas, the argument has been made that if you just give people money, they won’t be motivated to work and be productive members of society. In my experience, the people making this argument come from families that were at least financially well off enough that they never had to rely on a public assistance program and have a different experience for how they achieved their position in life now. Because their basic human needs were met throughout their lives, they truly believe that hard work is all you need to succeed because they were fortunate enough to actually have that experience. The other face to this two sides coin though, also gives that narrative that people that are poor and struggling are like that because of poor life choices, are lazy and unmotivated and don’t deserve handouts. In reality, this experience is only true for people born into a well off situation. Whereas it’s common place for one or both parents to have several jobs, simply to make ends meet, which cannot be classified as lazy or unmotivated. If those families were able to have basic needs met without having to work more than one job, the family dynamic would be healthier, they may be motivated to spend their time on more conventionally productive and useful things like furthering their education or taking care of family members.
Moving forward, the rules for public assistance programs needs to be updated to current fiscal poverty standards and further research done to confirm or deny these links. By simply updating the standards, it’d increase the benefits for those that already qualify and further studies could be done on their family's financial and mental well being. My hope is to use this information to open the eyes of our local and state governments on how we allocate funding to public resource programs. As it stands now, our programs are set up to help after the fact, as a reaction to a situation with rigid rules and often very limited in available funds. I think if we took a more proactive approach, we can help our communities flourish and prosper once it’s citizen’s basic needs are better met. Imagine how great our communities (but also our country) would be if each person was free from the mental and emotional anguish of simply surviving, and could actually pursue talents and interests. How many more doctors, scientists, teachers and so on there could be if money (and paying for the schooling needed) wasn’t the absolute top priority. Imagine the art, music, technology innovations we’d have as a human race if our pressing concern was prosperity as a race instead of individual wealth.
Works Cited:
Amadeo, Kimberly. “What Is Universal Basic Income? Pros and Cons of a Guaranteed Income” The Balance, The Balance, 19 Aug. 2020, www.thebalance.com/universal-basic-income-4160668
Bloom, Sahil. “Where the Money Comes from for Your Stimulus Check.” CNBC, uploaded by CNBC, 21 Aug. 2020, www.cnbc.com/video/2020/08/21/second-stimulus-check-where-the-1200-payment-comes-from.html
Elliott, I. (June 2016) Poverty and Mental Health: A review to inform the Joseph Rowntree Foundation’s Anti-Poverty Strategy. London: Mental Health Foundation.
Comments