Tag: Albany

It’s over 90 degrees as I sit here, and I’m thinking about energy, the environment, and leadership.  If you read my prior post on the subject, you know that I believe leaders are those who can convince people to cooperate toward a common goal, trusting that their goodwill will not be abused by those who are just out for themselves.  I said there was no leadership on energy.

We don’t have air conditioning because in this climate, unless you have it and become dependent on it, you only really miss it a few days a year a few years a decade.  And on those days, you are begged not to use it.  With energy scarce and the environment only capable of holding so much carbon, with with so many billions living in multiple dwellings without cross ventilation, with so many people who are old and without health problems, I’ve decided air conditioning is one amenity we can live without.  But somewhere in the west, I’m sure Dick Cheney, who considers conservation a “personal virtue,” has an air conditioned dog house.

It’s over 90 degrees as I sit here, and I’m thinking about energy, the environment, and leadership.  If you read my prior post on the subject, you know that I believe leaders are those who can convince people to cooperate toward a common goal, trusting that their goodwill will not be abused by those who are just out for themselves.  I said there was no leadership on energy.

We don’t have air conditioning because in this climate, unless you have it and become dependent on it, you only really miss it a few days a year a few years a decade.  And on those days, you are begged not to use it.  With energy scarce and the environment only capable of holding so much carbon, with with so many billions living in multiple dwellings without cross ventilation, with so many people who are old and without health problems, I’ve decided air conditioning is one amenity we can live without.  But somewhere in the west, I’m sure Dick Cheney, who considers conservation a “personal virtue,” has an air conditioned dog house.

In my prior post, I pointed out that although New York City’s poverty rate is 55% higher than the national average, its private, mostly non-profit employment in the Social Assistance sub-sector relative to population is 154% higher than the national average — 2 ½ times that average.  Yet, despite all these people hired, at first glance, to tend to their well being, advocates and analysts say the city’s poor are not well off compared with poor people elsewhere.  Disaggregating 2004 annual average employment relative to population for this sub-sector into specific industries, on finds a complex picture that raises many issues, but let’s put the headline up front.  Excluding one industry, one finds that New York City employment in the rest of the Social Assistance sector relative to population is just 54% higher than the national average, dead on what one would expect given the city’s higher poverty rate.  On a net basis, therefore, that one industry can explain all the additional Social Assistance employment in excess of what one would expect given the city’s higher poverty rate.  In that industry, New York City’s employment per 100,000 residents is seven times the national average, a greater disproportion than for just about any other sector.  That industry is…

In my prior post, I pointed out that although New York City’s poverty rate is 55% higher than the national average, its private, mostly non-profit employment in the Social Assistance sub-sector relative to population is 154% higher than the national average — 2 ½ times that average.  Yet, despite all these people hired, at first glance, to tend to their well being, advocates and analysts say the city’s poor are not well off compared with poor people elsewhere.  Disaggregating 2004 annual average employment relative to population for this sub-sector into specific industries, on finds a complex picture that raises many issues, but let’s put the headline up front.  Excluding one industry, one finds that New York City employment in the rest of the Social Assistance sector relative to population is just 54% higher than the national average, dead on what one would expect given the city’s higher poverty rate.  On a net basis, therefore, that one industry can explain all the additional Social Assistance employment in excess of what one would expect given the city’s higher poverty rate.  In that industry, New York City’s employment per 100,000 residents is seven times the national average, a greater disproportion than for just about any other sector.  That industry is…

In my prior post, I pointed out that although New York City’s poverty rate is 55% higher than the national average, its private, mostly non-profit employment in the Social Assistance sub-sector relative to population is 154% higher than the national average — 2 ½ times that average.  Yet, despite all these people hired, at first glance, to tend to their well being, advocates and analysts say the city’s poor are not well off compared with poor people elsewhere.  Disaggregating 2004 annual average employment relative to population for this sub-sector into specific industries, on finds a complex picture that raises many issues, but let’s put the headline up front.  Excluding one industry, one finds that New York City employment in the rest of the Social Assistance sector relative to population is just 54% higher than the national average, dead on what one would expect given the city’s higher poverty rate.  On a net basis, therefore, that one industry can explain all the additional Social Assistance employment in excess of what one would expect given the city’s higher poverty rate.  In that industry, New York City’s employment per 100,000 residents is seven times the national average, a greater disproportion than for just about any other sector.  That industry is…

In my prior post, I pointed out that although New York City’s poverty rate is 55% higher than the national average, its private, mostly non-profit employment in the Social Assistance sub-sector relative to population is 154% higher than the national average — 2 ½ times that average.  Yet, despite all these people hired, at first glance, to tend to their well being, advocates and analysts say the city’s poor are not well off compared with poor people elsewhere.  Disaggregating 2004 annual average employment relative to population for this sub-sector into specific industries, on finds a complex picture that raises many issues, but let’s put the headline up front.  Excluding one industry, one finds that New York City employment in the rest of the Social Assistance sector relative to population is just 54% higher than the national average, dead on what one would expect given the city’s higher poverty rate.  On a net basis, therefore, that one industry can explain all the additional Social Assistance employment in excess of what one would expect given the city’s higher poverty rate.  In that industry, New York City’s employment per 100,000 residents is seven times the national average, a greater disproportion than for just about any other sector.  That industry is…

Is New York City the best place to be poor?  If the measure of quality of life for the poor and troubled is the number of people hired to provide them with services, it certainly appears, at first glance, to be one of the best places.   Or at least it should be.

In 2004, according to data from the Governments Division of the U.S. Census Bureau attached to a prior post here, the City of New York employed 278 persons in “public welfare” agencies for every 100,000 residents.  The national average was 93; the rest of New York State averaged 231 and New Jersey averaged 121.  Much of the social service work in the city, however, is actually done by private, mostly non-profit agencies in the Social Assistance sub-sector which, according to the current industry classification system, “provide a wide variety of social assistance services directly to their clients.”  According to covered employment (ES202) data for the second quarter of 2005, New York City had 1,857 people employed in this sub-sector for every 100,000 residents.  The national average was 708; the rest of the New York State averaged 1,048 and New Jersey averaged 730.

Is New York City the best place to be poor?  If the measure of quality of life for the poor and troubled is the number of people hired to provide them with services, it certainly appears, at first glance, to be one of the best places.   Or at least it should be.

In 2004, according to data from the Governments Division of the U.S. Census Bureau attached to a prior post here, the City of New York employed 278 persons in “public welfare” agencies for every 100,000 residents.  The national average was 93; the rest of New York State averaged 231 and New Jersey averaged 121.  Much of the social service work in the city, however, is actually done by private, mostly non-profit agencies in the Social Assistance sub-sector which, according to the current industry classification system, “provide a wide variety of social assistance services directly to their clients.”  According to covered employment (ES202) data for the second quarter of 2005, New York City had 1,857 people employed in this sub-sector for every 100,000 residents.  The national average was 708; the rest of the New York State averaged 1,048 and New Jersey averaged 730.

Is New York City the best place to be poor?  If the measure of quality of life for the poor and troubled is the number of people hired to provide them with services, it certainly appears, at first glance, to be one of the best places.   Or at least it should be.

In 2004, according to data from the Governments Division of the U.S. Census Bureau attached to a prior post here, the City of New York employed 278 persons in “public welfare” agencies for every 100,000 residents.  The national average was 93; the rest of New York State averaged 231 and New Jersey averaged 121.  Much of the social service work in the city, however, is actually done by private, mostly non-profit agencies in the Social Assistance sub-sector which, according to the current industry classification system, “provide a wide variety of social assistance services directly to their clients.”  According to covered employment (ES202) data for the second quarter of 2005, New York City had 1,857 people employed in this sub-sector for every 100,000 residents.  The national average was 708; the rest of the New York State averaged 1,048 and New Jersey averaged 730.

Is New York City the best place to be poor?  If the measure of quality of life for the poor and troubled is the number of people hired to provide them with services, it certainly appears, at first glance, to be one of the best places.   Or at least it should be.

In 2004, according to data from the Governments Division of the U.S. Census Bureau attached to a prior post here, the City of New York employed 278 persons in “public welfare” agencies for every 100,000 residents.  The national average was 93; the rest of New York State averaged 231 and New Jersey averaged 121.  Much of the social service work in the city, however, is actually done by private, mostly non-profit agencies in the Social Assistance sub-sector which, according to the current industry classification system, “provide a wide variety of social assistance services directly to their clients.”  According to covered employment (ES202) data for the second quarter of 2005, New York City had 1,857 people employed in this sub-sector for every 100,000 residents.  The national average was 708; the rest of the New York State averaged 1,048 and New Jersey averaged 730.