dinner parties at ainslie street

at these dinners, at least one thing is experimental (we've never made it before)

first: italian (naturally, a good starting point). No Pics! (lasagna, garlic bread, salad, apple pie)

second: south american-cuban (chips and salsa, empanadas, spiced grilled squash, maduros, cheesecake)

tomorrow night is med-greek night (hummous-pita-cucumber-feta plate, greek meatballs, greek cauliflower&cheese bake, green beans, birthday cake for dessert! 

here's some pics from night 2...

stay tuned for some from night 3, with a special guest appearance by Alex! 

funny cartoon of the day

 

new obsession!

www.freerice.com

seriously! 

fun with video

short clip from last month's roadtrip to VT. I just wanted to share how pretty that snow was! NYC snow isn't quite as lovely... enjoy!!

Tax Credits Are More Socially Acceptable

The following post is my personal, un-endorsed opinion:

This week, in honor of Women's History Month (children are inextricably linked to women, and children's programs are apparently more palatable to big funders than women's programs- more on that thought later) , Mayor Michael Bloomberg announced an ad campaign to get the word out about something that will help many women (read: women with children): the NYC Child Care Tax Credit.

Now, of course, I am all for increasing (and advertising) tax credits for low-income women!, but as an enraptured member of the audience when this was announced, I have to admit that I was somewhat disappointed by the punchline: he acknowledged that a barrier to women staying in the workforce is the lack of affordable childcare. I naturally expected him to announce an increase in funding for subsidized childcare, or even an ad-campaign to help qualified women learn where to go to get it. But, the big news, which warranted an appearance by the model Iman, was an ad campaign for a $1733 (total!) tax credit that is estimated to aid less than 50, 000 families (the income limit is $30, 000 and the children have to be under 4).

The childcare subsidy's financial eligibility guidelines, on the other hand, serve families earning between $37, 000-$62,000 and allow them to pay substantially reduced copays (as little as $3/wk) for quality, regulated childcare.

Considering that the cost of childcare in NYC can be as much or more as rent (we are talking $800-$1400 per month!), any direct assistance will make a difference. A subsidy is the more effective way to ensure that women can retain employment month-to-month, not a once-a-year tax credit that may or may not get refunded in time to make a difference.

Again, I will take what I can get (as always!), but let's get real here: if the city is serious about targeting services to allow low-income women with children to maintain employment by securing access to childcare, they should put that money into subsidies.

Poverty Measurement Bullshit

This is a post written in my old blog that I thought deserved a place in the new blog

Regarding This Article in the New York Times on December 30, 2007

People working in the social service system in NYC, particularly those people like myself who work in the precarious crosshatch of "access to public benefits" and "career development for higher wages," understand that the current measure of poverty is not only outdated, but completely inappropriate for NYC. I knew about the mayor's plan a few months ago, through the inner circle of nonprofit buzz, but I was still happy to see it in the front page of the Metro section this morning.

The object of my frustration, aside from the ridiculously long time it has taken for the politicos in NYC to realize how wrong the Orshansky measure is for NYC, is the logic behind the objection to changing the method. Simply put by the journalist "skeptics predict [the new formula] is certain to conclude there are more poor here than previously counted...[which] could be met with opposition..."

So, in other words, we should all be living in denial.

The journalist interviewed Douglas Besharov of the American Enterprise Institute, who is, apparently, "watching the New York experiment intently and not without some cynicism that the city will come up with a far too generous formula."

I would like Mr. Besharov and others who think that setting a threshold of $17, 600 for a family of 3 is generous enough. I would like him to pay rent in Brooklyn, say, which averages out at about $12-$14K per year, and use the remaining $400-$500/month to pay for food, childcare, healthcare, clothing, cleaning supplies, transportation, telephone for three people.

Bare bones costs of living in NYC is about $40K more than this level per year, and doesn't even include buying birthday presents, paying for a cell phone, or enjoying cable TV, three things that I am sure Besharov and other "skeptics" have no trouble affording.