$31,000/year take home is poverty?

[SMMcP]

http://inplainsight.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/03/22/17404578-sprawling-and-struggling-poverty-hits-americas-suburbs?lite&ocid=msnhp&pos=1

The subject of this article takes home $470/week plus $127/week in child support and yet she is described as living in poverty.  She says " I basically pay to say I live in West Hartford. It is worth it."  She has had to resort to payday loans and public assistance.  I understand her concerns for raising her daughter in a nice place, but I still don't understand how this can be considered poverty.  I think many in this forum live well on less than this.

[Spork]

I actually think this is a real problem in the US.  We redefine "poverty" and "middle class" in such a complainypants way as to make ourselves much worse off than we really are.

There is such a thing as poverty.  You can drive around and see folks living in the streets or in ramshackle tar paper shacks.  It exists... but that's not what this is about.  This is about finding some magic line on the pay scale of "what people make" and saying "under this line is poverty." 

The article seems to be about someone living above their means, not someone that lives in poverty.

[the fixer]

It sounds like her biggest problem is the debt spiral she's in. Yeah, if I had no debt I could probably eke out a living on $2300-2400 per month while also feeding a teenage athlete. Add a few hundred per month of debt payments... I dunno.

The position, as a customer service representative for a local health products company, pays $14 an hour. That leaves her with take-home pay of about $460 to $480 a week, plus about $127 a week in child support.
...
She got one-time aid from the city’s crisis fund to help with the down payment for her new, cheaper apartment. Still, the $1125 rent eats up more than half of her monthly take-home pay.

No it doesn't, it's slightly less than half: (460+127)*52/12 = $2543 avg takehome pay per month, 44% goes to rent, which is still a lot of housing for that level of income.

Based on her future plans, my advice to her would be:

• Cut waaaay back on expenses. Shower every other day. Keep the lights/heat off as much as possible. Unplug everything but the fridge. If it's yellow leave it mellow. If you can't pay utility bills, you can't afford to use utilities. If you keep using them anyway, eventually you won't have them at all, so cutting back isn't so bad when you consider the alternative. I'm assuming she's not eating out, buying lots of new clothes or wasting money anywhere else.
• Try to refi loans using a consumer lender like Lending Club. Payday loans and credit card debt interest rates are ridiculous.
• Try to accumulate at least $2000 in savings while making minimum payments to loans (the more savings the better).
• Move to Florida to establish residency, using that savings to make the move. Sell the stuff and move into a furnished apartment to save on moving expenses. Get a new job.
• Daughter applies to UF, writes a killer essay about her awesome Mom teaching her about motivation and courage through hardship, gets financial aid and in-state tuition (if they can move far enough in advance).
• Mom has lowered expenses thanks to financial aid and a daughter on a meal plan.

[ShavenLlama]

My back-door neighbor at my last apartment had a daughter who was super awesome at soccer, but they could barely afford it, as the single mom probably made less than this woman. She supplemented some of the cost of the club dues by volunteering to set and tear down the goals each weekend at a couple of the parks.
The daughter could have been eligible for scholarships if she had put any effort into her academics in high school, but instead the daughter flunked out of her 1st semester at jr college, job hopped for a while, and finally was kicked out of the home.

I hope the daughter in this story isn't just taking advantage of mom's hard work and uses the lacrosse to get a scholarship and lift herself out of this "poverty."

Second, are the knee-boots the most appropriate style of shoe for an interview??? (Picture in article)

[noob515]

Simons expected to work for the rug retailer until retirement, but about a year ago she quit after disputes with one of the two owners. She had never had trouble finding a new job and was unprepared for how hard it would be.

You quit your job without having another one lined up, knowing you live in a very expensive suburb.  COME ON! 

“I’m basically paying to say I live in West Hartford,” she said. “It is worth it.”

If you're late on bills and are embarrassed about your inability to afford various items, I don't see that as worth it. 

And like ShavenLlama said, I hope that the daughter's lacrosse can translate into a scholarship, but it sounds like the mom just wanted to move to FL because it's warmer there.  I didn't get the impression that she sees the lacrosse (which is apparently one of the primary reasons for staying in West Hartford) as a means of benefiting her daughter's future.  So, what, she's okay with saying "yeah, I'm 80 and still can't afford to retire, but my daughter had SO MUCH FUN playing lacrosse in highschool"? 

At the end of the day, if you can't afford to live someplace, you have to move. And if the daughter refuses to accept that, then good luck making it in the Real World.  Would she rather play lacrosse, or have heat? 

[SwordGuy]

The daughter is old enough to earn her own sports money by babysitting or mowing yards.

[SwordGuy]

>Her fall from a more financially secure suburban life to one among the working poor
>also happened for the same reason it’s happened to so many others.
>She had a bout of unemployment and couldn’t find a new job that paid very well.

No, she didn't have "a bout of unemployment". 

That makes it sound like it just happened to her, like a meteor landing on her head.

She quit her job before she had another one lined up. 

That was - to put it mildly - very stupid.

This is one of the major rules to follow if you do not want to be poor.  I'll say it simply for the logic-impaired:

"Never quit your job unless you already have another job."

Apparently she did not have big cash savings to cushion her while she was without a job.

I don't have enough information to determine whether she was stupid not to have that cash cushion, i.e., she spent her money on unnecessary luxuries instead of saving it for a rainy day.

I can say that quitting her job without another job lined up and without a big cash cushion was - frankly - very stupid.

>“I’m basically paying to say I live in West Hartford,” she said. “It is worth it.”

No, she's not paying to say that.  She's going into debt because she's not paying to say that.

This country is chock full of inexpensive locations where nice parents raise good kids each and every day.  Living in an expensive location that you can't afford and can't find work in is - again - frankly stupid.

>It’s a struggle that many Americans bruised by the weak economy can relate to.

That is because many Americans are equally stupid with their money and their livelihoods.

>The number of suburban residents living in poverty rose by nearly 64 percent between 2000 and 2011,

Gee, a person who was only vaguely clueless about the news over the last decade would know that jobs are in short supply, that this decade has not been "boom times".
So, quitting a job without another job already lined up, when jobs have been scarce for the last 10 years was, frankly, very stupid.  Again.

>“I think we have an outdated perception of where poverty is and who it is affecting,” said Elizabeth Kneebone,
> a fellow at the Brookings Institution and co-author of the research.
>“We tend to think of it as a very urban and a very rural phenomenon, but it is increasingly suburban.”

I've seen real poverty.  This is not real poverty unless you want to describe it as "poverty of common sense" or "poverty of financial acumen".

>Simons’ situation is complicated by the fact she’s a single mom.
>Poverty and financial insecurity among single moms is far higher than for households headed by single dads or two parents.

No, it's complicated by quitting her job.  It's complicated by her refusing to give up on luxuries and living in an area that's more expensive than she can afford. 

>Simons expected to work for the rug retailer until retirement,

This is a damn fool idea.  Businesses come and go.  Workers have to continually prepare themselves to land and keep a new job.

> but about a year ago she quit after disputes with one of the two owners.
>She had never had trouble finding a new job and was unprepared for how hard it would be.
>“I know that part of it is my fault and I absolutely take responsibility for that,
>but I never in a million years thought that I would (be in this position),” she said.

No, all of it is your fault.  You quit a paying job in a recession without having another job lined up.

>Like many working poor people, she has fallen into a debt spiral.

She is not poor.  She is not spending her money wisely.

>She took out an $800 payday loan, and she estimates
>that it will end up costing her $1,600 to pay it back.

That was probably stupid.  It's possible that there was a true emergency that required cash, but from other info presented, it was much more likely due to spending too much elsewhere in her budget.

>and has worked to pay off hundreds of dollars in bank overdraft fees.

Apparently she is either totally inattentive of her finances or intentionally spending money she knows she does not have.

She has not gotten serious about cutting her expenses.

$400 for lacrosse when she's hemmorhaging money is moronic.   Her daughter should be mowing yards or babysitting to earn that money.  Or, better yet, using it to help her family survive this debacle.

>She’s sold jewelry for cash.

I see a cell phone or ipad device on the stove.  That needs to be sold and the plan canceled to save money. 

>She went on Medicaid after being unable to afford health insurance.

So, we get to work to pay her healthcare after she quit a job that probably paid healthcare benefits.  Thanks for sharing.
I don't mind helping people who've been dealt a bad hand, but I'm less than happy paying to subsidize stupidity.

>“The kid’s been through enough,” Simons said. “So, I just want her to
>feel as safe and settled as possible, and I want her to know that she can
>count on her mom to keep her where she is and keep promises.”

Well, mom won't be doing that much longer if she doesn't learn to control her expenses or increase her income with some side hustles.  Her daughter would be far better off learning proper money management and how not to blame others for one's own mistakes.

[ace1224]

articles like this legitimately confuse me.  are people so far in that they can't see the forest for the trees?  and who in the hell just up and quits their job without a back up plan?  that was just dumb. dumb dumb dumb.

[gdborton]

I can't give her any grief over quitting without another job lined up.  The article doesn't state what caused her to quit other than "disputes"

Simons expected to work for the rug retailer until retirement, but about a year ago she quit after disputes with one of the two owners.

It's entirely possible (unlikely imo) that the "dispute" was bad enough to warrant a quit.  There are some things that no matter my circumstance I just wouldn't stand for.



I think the real problem here is her unwillingness to change her lifestyle to match her income.

[mpbaker22]

owes nearly $400 to her daughter’s club lacrosse team,

Still, the $1125 rent...

$31,564 take home a year.



She takes home approximately what I do.  Granted, I don't have a child, but I only spend about 1/3 of my take home, so I don't feel bad for her at all.

[SwordGuy]

I can't give her any grief over quitting without another job lined up.  The article doesn't state what caused her to quit other than "disputes"

Simons expected to work for the rug retailer until retirement, but about a year ago she quit after disputes with one of the two owners.

It's entirely possible (unlikely imo) that the "dispute" was bad enough to warrant a quit.  There are some things that no matter my circumstance I just wouldn't stand for.

I'll assume this wasn't an organized crime takeover of the business where she needed to quit or get sucked in to criminal activity or die.  Why?  Because the odds are overwhelmingly against it.  If it was, then the right thing to do is run, and run fast.  And then cut expenses... 

So, if not that, what would be so bad that you would quit without a backup plan rather than just put up with it until landing a new job?

I will first point out that all the following advice can be followed in a (to start with) non-antagonistic, ultra-professional manner.  If they turn antagonistic, you can respond as necessary.  It's not to your advantage to force it there at the beginning.  However, once you know you will not be staying at the job, every extra paycheck you get (or every unemployment check you get) is better than the $0 you would get for just up and quiting.

Sexual harassment?  Say NO!  Put the NO! in writing!  Have witnesses sign that you delivered the NO! message to management (even if that means a friend shows up during work hours and witnesses it).  Sure they can fire you for a trumped up reason if they want to.

But then at least you can get unemployment or they can spend a lot of lawyers at a sexual harassment hearing.  They have  a rug store to lose, you have nothing to lose.  They are unlikely to dispute the unemployment when faced with that option.

Then again, they may be unwilling to face a sexual harassment lawyer working on a contingency fee for firing you, either, once that option is explained to them.  In which case you still have your wages until you locate a new job.

Perhaps they want you to do something unethical or criminal.  Send them an email message detailing your understanding of what they have asked you to do and make sure you keep a printed copy.  Point out that it is illegal or unethical and ask for clarification, in writing, that they want you to proceed.  Get someone to witness that copy.   If need be, send a registered receipt postal letter, signature required. 

Keep copies of all correspondence on this topic.  Refuse to act on this topic except in writing.  They may drop the request.  Or they may fire you.

If they do, ask if they want to discuss the issue with the newspapers or the police.  They may prefer not to fire you at that point.  Either way, leave a clear, witnessed paper trail that you refused to do the illegal or unethical behavior.

Get printed, witnessed copies of stellar employee performance reviews, too.  They will come in handy during any jury trial.  Make sure they know you have them if they get antagonistic and you choose to respond that way.

Does this take some moxie?  Yep.  It does.  So does being a mustachean badass. 


   

[sheepstache]

Does this take some moxie?  Yep.  It does.  So does being a mustachean badass. 

You know, it's funny, because my objection was going to be that it takes some moxie to do and not everybody has that kind of backbone (and people who do tend to take it for granted and look down on anybody else who doesn't).  But then it occurred to me that it really shouldn't take any more moxie than quitting your job without having another lined up or a cushy stash of FU money.

However, I think you haven't considered the work history aspect of it.  Quitting looks better than getting fired. Even if it was getting fired for noble reasons, the sad truth is a lot of jobs out there are looking for non-troublemakers who keep their heads down so making a stink even about sexual harassment might not be worth the unemployment benefits.  Put another way, though you may be ultra-professional about it, firing someone is a big pain in the ass for companies (because of the unemployment benefits, risk of lawsuits, other legal hoops, etc.) so requiring to be fired rather than resigning gracefully might be a black mark you can't afford.  Put yet another way, even a scummy employer is going to give you a decent reference if you quit gracefully and for most jobs interviews, you just want a nice gloss like that and not a digression into how you fought the good fight to get fired.  Again, we're talking about a person in the customer service field where employers tend to want as little "moxie" as possible :)

[the fixer]

I've heard many stories of low-wage people who have to deal with really mean supervisors who just don't like them, and treat them terribly. The impact on motivation and self-esteem from enduring it must be huge, like a bully in the schoolyard. But when stuff like this happens an employee has no recourse: the closest thing is employer discrimination laws, and you can't bring a claim against an employer for that unless one can show that the employer treats everyone of the same protected class this way. In many cases it's just the one person they just don't like.

This is just an example I happen to be familiar with; there are probably other situations where the best course of action is to resign. So without more information I can't fault her for that, either.

The bigger problem is people living so close to the edge that if they lose their job they're suddenly poor and have no options. These days no job or industry is safe, especially with lower education, if you're not saving at least 20% in liquid investments there's a high chance of becoming poor in one's lifetime.

This was on the radio this morning about even more: http://www.npr.org/2013/03/26/175274579/american-winter-families-struggle-to-survive-fall-from-middle-class

[jp]

Absurd. 

[SwordGuy]

Does this take some moxie?  Yep.  It does.  So does being a mustachean badass. 

You know, it's funny, because my objection was going to be that it takes some moxie to do and not everybody has that kind of backbone (and people who do tend to take it for granted and look down on anybody else who doesn't).  But then it occurred to me that it really shouldn't take any more moxie than quitting your job without having another lined up or a cushy stash of FU money.

However, I think you haven't considered the work history aspect of it.  Quitting looks better than getting fired. Even if it was getting fired for noble reasons, the sad truth is a lot of jobs out there are looking for non-troublemakers who keep their heads down so making a stink even about sexual harassment might not be worth the unemployment benefits.  Put another way, though you may be ultra-professional about it, firing someone is a big pain in the ass for companies (because of the unemployment benefits, risk of lawsuits, other legal hoops, etc.) so requiring to be fired rather than resigning gracefully might be a black mark you can't afford.  Put yet another way, even a scummy employer is going to give you a decent reference if you quit gracefully and for most jobs interviews, you just want a nice gloss like that and not a digression into how you fought the good fight to get fired.  Again, we're talking about a person in the customer service field where employers tend to want as little "moxie" as possible :)

You don't have to stick it out forever.  In this example, sticking it out for 5 months would have been enough.   Negotiating being "laid off with good references" vs being "fired" is an option if they've done something wrong and would prefer both that you're gone and you won't raise a stink. 

I read a great article in the Wall St. journal some 40 years ago.  (You can tell how well it stuck with me from that!)  It was from a professional negotiator.  His point was that you ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS have something to negotiate with, no matter how powerless you think you are.   You just have to put on your thinking cap and get the moxie to use what you think up.

Frederick Douglas is a personal hero of mine.  He was born a slave.  He taught himself how to read and write.  He worked in a Baltimore shipyard when young and he learned to carve 4 letters of the alphabet to put onto the wooden ship pieces he helped make:  F, A, P, S.  (First initial of Forward, Aft, Port and Starboard, which was the quarter of the ship the piece would be installed in.)   He would steal food from his master's house and find poor white kids and wager with them that he knew more letters than they did.  He always made them write their letters first.   That's how he learned the rest.

He wasn't obedient enough so he was sent off to the equivalent of slave obedience school.  Basically, a farmer in the area had a tough reputation for breaking disobedient slaves into docile ones.   Douglas waited until they were out alone in the fields where no one could see them, then he purposely beat the ever-livin' snot out of the farmer.   This was a hanging offense.  He couldn't possibly have negotiating power, could he?  After all, he was a slave in a slave state!

He calmly and deliberately explained to the farmer the two choices the farmer had.  One, he could report Douglas and have him hung.  Of course, he would lose all the lucrative money he had been earning on the side by breaking in slaves for others because his reputation would be shattered.  Or, two, he could leave Douglas the hell alone and declare victory for public consumption.

You always have negotiating room if you care to think it through.

And you can pretty much suck it up and put up with almost anything for six months while you look for another job.

[sheepstache]

Okay, but that example is silly.  What, every other slave stayed in slavery because they were rubes and pussies and didn't have enough moxie to get themselves out of it?  Geez, too bad you weren't around in the 1800s, could have solved that whole thing and our history books would be a lot less embarrassing :P

[I Love Cake]

Does this take some moxie?  Yep.  It does.  So does being a mustachean badass. 

You know, it's funny, because my objection was going to be that it takes some moxie to do and not everybody has that kind of backbone (and people who do tend to take it for granted and look down on anybody else who doesn't).  But then it occurred to me that it really shouldn't take any more moxie than quitting your job without having another lined up or a cushy stash of FU money.

However, I think you haven't considered the work history aspect of it.  Quitting looks better than getting fired. Even if it was getting fired for noble reasons, the sad truth is a lot of jobs out there are looking for non-troublemakers who keep their heads down so making a stink even about sexual harassment might not be worth the unemployment benefits.  Put another way, though you may be ultra-professional about it, firing someone is a big pain in the ass for companies (because of the unemployment benefits, risk of lawsuits, other legal hoops, etc.) so requiring to be fired rather than resigning gracefully might be a black mark you can't afford.  Put yet another way, even a scummy employer is going to give you a decent reference if you quit gracefully and for most jobs interviews, you just want a nice gloss like that and not a digression into how you fought the good fight to get fired.  Again, we're talking about a person in the customer service field where employers tend to want as little "moxie" as possible :)

You don't have to stick it out forever.  In this example, sticking it out for 5 months would have been enough.   Negotiating being "laid off with good references" vs being "fired" is an option if they've done something wrong and would prefer both that you're gone and you won't raise a stink. 

I read a great article in the Wall St. journal some 40 years ago.  (You can tell how well it stuck with me from that!)  It was from a professional negotiator.  His point was that you ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS have something to negotiate with, no matter how powerless you think you are.   You just have to put on your thinking cap and get the moxie to use what you think up.

Frederick Douglas is a personal hero of mine.  He was born a slave.  He taught himself how to read and write.  He worked in a Baltimore shipyard when young and he learned to carve 4 letters of the alphabet to put onto the wooden ship pieces he helped make:  F, A, P, S.  (First initial of Forward, Aft, Port and Starboard, which was the quarter of the ship the piece would be installed in.)   He would steal food from his master's house and find poor white kids and wager with them that he knew more letters than they did.  He always made them write their letters first.   That's how he learned the rest.

He wasn't obedient enough so he was sent off to the equivalent of slave obedience school.  Basically, a farmer in the area had a tough reputation for breaking disobedient slaves into docile ones.   Douglas waited until they were out alone in the fields where no one could see them, then he purposely beat the ever-livin' snot out of the farmer.   This was a hanging offense.  He couldn't possibly have negotiating power, could he?  After all, he was a slave in a slave state!

He calmly and deliberately explained to the farmer the two choices the farmer had.  One, he could report Douglas and have him hung.  Of course, he would lose all the lucrative money he had been earning on the side by breaking in slaves for others because his reputation would be shattered.  Or, two, he could leave Douglas the hell alone and declare victory for public consumption.

You always have negotiating room if you care to think it through.

And you can pretty much suck it up and put up with almost anything for six months while you look for another job.

I love this story! Thanks for sharing and you are right-you always have negotiating room!

[sheepstache]

Oh this might not have been clear but the point of my response was not to say that she was helpless in her situation with the rug retailer and couldn't do anything about it but that she may have made the conscious decision that quitting was the best course of action for her, for exactly the reasons I stated about work history.  You and I might disagree with her assessment of the risk she was accepting vs. the pay-off, but we can't assume someone didn't think just because the outcome of their thinking was different from what our own would have produced.  The way the article is written makes it sound to me like she realized she made a miscalculation.

He calmly and deliberately explained to the farmer the two choices the farmer had.  One, he could report Douglas and have him hung. 

Yeah, exactly, one of the options was that he would get hung.  In this case he got lucky and the farmer was rational but one of the things about the prejudice that leads to things like slavery is that it's not rational.  You think no one else thought of this and ended up getting hung?  Or have the farmer accept the offer but then go lynch him some night with some buddies?  We don't get to read those people's autobiographies because they didn't get a chance to write them.
But really, you're saying in the choice between slavery or death you would accept death as an option?  A lot of people aren't willing to take a chance with their lives.  Slave owners knew that and that's what kept the system going.  Therefore, people preferred living in slavery to death.  You might say 'well, I would feel different' and that's perfectly fine; it's a subjective thing.  But I don't think you can criticize it as being ignorance of their bargaining position.  Nor do I think you can say, 'well you made a choice not to risk your life so if you've got a problem with being a slave then you're a complainypants" :P
When enough about their environment, both socially and physically, changed centuries later, people took risks to win their freedoms and rights but to not notice that the risks they took were far less dire or certain than in Frederick Douglas' time is to be either naive or a poor student of history or both.

I know we're not trying to have a debate about slavery and that this example is simply a story that you like and find inspiring on its own merits.  But it sets off alarm bells for me about what's wrong with this heavily internal-locus of control mindset when combined with fixed expected outcomes.  You can always say, 'people have control over their actions' but that doesn't necessarily lead to, 'therefore they can be free' or 'therefore they should never be poor,' etc.

[sisca]

Everyone can have a streak of bad luck, of course. This person seems to have a streak of bad judgement as well. To me, this is just one more reason to build a large stash, to be able to not only survive hard times, but to take advantage of them. Think the ant and the grasshopper.

Most people are grasshoppers. I am an ant, and damn proud of it.

[SwordGuy]

Oh this might not have been clear but the point of my response was not to say that she was helpless in her situation with the rug retailer and couldn't do anything about it but that she may have made the conscious decision that quitting was the best course of action for her, for exactly the reasons I stated about work history.  You and I might disagree with her assessment of the risk she was accepting vs. the pay-off, but we can't assume someone didn't think just because the outcome of their thinking was different from what our own would have produced.  The way the article is written makes it sound to me like she realized she made a miscalculation.

We were in a recession.  Jobs are ALWAYS harder to come by in a recession unless you're in a temporarily lucky field, and retail rug sales is unlikely to EVER be one of those special jobs in demand.  She was surprised it took so long to find a job.   She should not have been surprised.  That's why she quit, because she thought she could just go out and get another job easily.  That was her own reasoning, as stated.

A more realistic assessment of the likelihood of finding a replacement job (which could have been determined by sucking it up for a couple of weeks while testing the waters) would have reduced the chance of her being surprised there weren't many good jobs open out there.   She failed to do due diligence.

I know we're not trying to have a debate about slavery and that this example is simply a story that you like and find inspiring on its own merits.  But it sets off alarm bells for me about what's wrong with this heavily internal-locus of control mindset when combined with fixed expected outcomes.  You can always say, 'people have control over their actions' but that doesn't necessarily lead to, 'therefore they can be free' or 'therefore they should never be poor,' etc.

The point of the story was not that a regular person in a normal situation has to take things to that extreme.  It was to show how even an extremely powerless person has much more negotiating room than they typically think they do - if they are willing to look for the angle that allows both parties to win from the deal.   

Fully agree with the last sentence.  You can only control your own actions, not those of others or the workings of fate.

[jrhampt]

ahahaha!!  I had to click on the article when I saw "West Hartford," since I live in CT, although decidedly not in West Hartford.  So, I think her problems can be summed up in three words: West Hartford and lacrosse.  I mean, good grief.  The only thing more ridiculous than lacrosse is polo.  If you're not a rich person, there's no reason to try to act like one, or to live where they live.  In fact, if my median income was significantly lower than the neighborhood where I wanted to live, I'd re-think that neighborhood, because I probably can't afford it.  Since West Hartford has two Whole Foods within a couple of miles of each other, hopefully that's not where she's shopping.

[Helsinki]

It sounds like her biggest problem is the debt spiral she's in. Yeah, if I had no debt I could probably eke out a living on $2300-2400 per month while also feeding a teenage athlete. Add a few hundred per month of debt payments... I dunno.

The position, as a customer service representative for a local health products company, pays $14 an hour. That leaves her with take-home pay of about $460 to $480 a week, plus about $127 a week in child support.
...
She got one-time aid from the city’s crisis fund to help with the down payment for her new, cheaper apartment. Still, the $1125 rent eats up more than half of her monthly take-home pay.

No it doesn't, it's slightly less than half: (460+127)*52/12 = $2543 avg takehome pay per month, 44% goes to rent, which is still a lot of housing for that level of income.

Based on her future plans, my advice to her would be:

• Cut waaaay back on expenses. Shower every other day. Keep the lights/heat off as much as possible. Unplug everything but the fridge. If it's yellow leave it mellow. If you can't pay utility bills, you can't afford to use utilities. If you keep using them anyway, eventually you won't have them at all, so cutting back isn't so bad when you consider the alternative. I'm assuming she's not eating out, buying lots of new clothes or wasting money anywhere else.
• Try to refi loans using a consumer lender like Lending Club. Payday loans and credit card debt interest rates are ridiculous.
• Try to accumulate at least $2000 in savings while making minimum payments to loans (the more savings the better).
• Move to Florida to establish residency, using that savings to make the move. Sell the stuff and move into a furnished apartment to save on moving expenses. Get a new job.
• Daughter applies to UF, writes a killer essay about her awesome Mom teaching her about motivation and courage through hardship, gets financial aid and in-state tuition (if they can move far enough in advance).
• Mom has lowered expenses thanks to financial aid and a daughter on a meal plan.

Ha! Awesome advice!