Is poverty voluntary?

[realibrad]

I posted this in another thread but it applies to this one as well:

I spent a huge chunk of my childhood in a very poor rural part of CA. Here is the break down of the city.

Racial and Ethnic Composition of Population, City of Merced Race/Ethnic Origin Total
Asian 12.6%
Black or African American 6.6%
Hispanic or Latino 49.6%
Milti-race/ Other 1.2%
White 30%

Most of my friends were Hispanic as you would expect from the demographics. Most of my friends did not make it through HS. The biggest issue I saw was that once kids got to about 9th grade, they just gave up. They looked around, and most of the adults they saw made minimum wage and got by, so why stay in school, when you could start working. Racism was around, but honestly, it was mainly coming from non whites. I don't want to imply there was not white racism, because there was, but the majority came from non whites.

I remember talking to a girl in my math class, and she flat out told me that black people cannot be racist. At first I thought she meant that when black people were racist, society shamed them, but nope. She told me that black people cannot be racist, because, racism is not liking non whites. Black people had a right to resent whites because of what they had done. So when I asked if she resented me, she said yes, because I was white. I said I had not done anything to anyone, but that did not matter.

I am sure on the distribution racism is a factor for some, but it was not the majority from what I saw.

 

[Paratus]

I spent a huge chunk of my childhood in a very poor rural part of CA. Here is the break down of the city.

Racial and Ethnic Composition of Population, City of Merced Race/Ethnic Origin Total
Asian 12.6%
Black or African American 6.6%
Hispanic or Latino 49.6%
Milti-race/ Other 1.2%
White 30%

Most of my friends were Hispanic as you would expect from the demographics. Most of my friends did not make it through HS. The biggest issue I saw was that once kids got to about 9th grade, they just gave up. They looked around, and most of the adults they saw made minimum wage and got by, so why stay in school, when you could start working. Racism was around, but honestly, it was mainly coming from non whites. I don't want to imply there was not white racism, because there was, but the majority came from non whites.

I remember talking to a girl in my math class, and she flat out told me that black people cannot be racist. At first I thought she meant that when black people were racist, society shamed them, but nope. She told me that black people cannot be racist, because, racism is not liking non whites. Black people had a right to resent whites because of what they had done. So when I asked if she resented me, she said yes, because I was white. I said I had not done anything to anyone, but that did not matter.

I am sure on the distribution racism is a factor for some, but it was not the majority from what I saw.

Let me try and explain where I'm coming from.
We had a class given at work called Innovation and Inclusion. The instructor had a background in neuroscience.

The class showed that diverse groups tend to outperform homogenous groups on a given task. It also showed from a neuroscience/psychological perspective how discrimination impairs performance.

Discrimination is a stressor, so is poverty. People given cognitive tests after being stressed perform more poorly.

The physiology behind the decrease in performance is the subject tends to have higher levels of stress hormones like cortisol / adrenaline, in their system. Those hormones were great for a minute when you were running for your life from a bear. They are damaging when the "bear" is in your head and lasts months or years.

So poor/minority people are at a cognitive disadvantage when it comes to making good decisions. And for poor people they have little margin if they do make a bad decision.

Since this particular problem is one of human physiology it also means if you or I were in this situation we would suffer the same cognitive impairment.

Now this doesn't mean people in these situations can't make good decisions. It also doesn't mean that upbringing can't have positive or negative effects on someone's decision making capabilities. It is a factor though and shouldn't be dismissed.

 

[Subyman]

This is interesting. If someone works hard at their job, then why do you say that their poverty is voluntary? Not everyone is smart enough and/or has the opportunity to go out and get degrees. I have a hard time believing that someone exhibiting a good if not superior work ethic is choosing to be poor.

I think you need to reread what I said. I said it is not voluntary.

 

[Skyclad1uhm1]

Nope, it's a matter of discipline. Not all "rich" people got their money that way, some inherited theirs (and they would be poor if they weren't so wealthy, given their spending habits), but the rest are some of the most focused people you'll ever meet in terms of finances. While it's true that many people are simply too stupid to become wealthy, any person of average intelligence can.

Not all rich people inherited money or were helped by friends and family. But where some retard whose last name is Bush can easily enter top schools based on their last name and daddy's money someone whose parents are poor and who don't have contacts will have to work 10 times as hard and pray they can get a scholarship to even be able to get a community college grant.

 

[Newell Steamer]

If a person or persons disgusts you, anything they do is voluntary.

You hate them so much you feel they must be THAT vile that they exist as they do, because their core and every fiber of their being represents the very thing that revolts you.

Just as the comic that Jaepheth posted, it is perception - people who say poverty is voluntary are refusing to view the world for what it is.

And, when they do claim they are stating the facts (telling it like it is), they just being selective; they see one poor person on the street wasted and they immediately assume all poor people are druggies.

 

[JockoJohnson]

...The government only does what we tell it to do....

Did we tell the government to spy on its citizens through the NSA? Congress passes bills that we don't always know what is in it until later down the road.

Now, back on topic. I agree with most points about the rich having too much money. Companies worry too much about their stockholders instead of its employees. When just about everything in a company is motivated to please stockholders, employees and Americans suffer.

Something needs to be done with how the stock market works. I don't know what exactly but what we have now is only making the rich a lot richer.

 

[Orignal Earl]

I spent a huge chunk of my childhood in a very poor rural part of CA. Here is the break down of the city.

Racial and Ethnic Composition of Population, City of Merced Race/Ethnic Origin Total
Asian 12.6%
Black or African American 6.6%
Hispanic or Latino 49.6%
Milti-race/ Other 1.2%
White 30%

Most of my friends were Hispanic as you would expect from just the demographics. Most of my friends did not make it through HS. The biggest issue I saw was that once kids got to about 9th grade, they just gave up. They looked around, and most of the adults they saw made minimum wage and got by, so why stay in school, when you could start working. Racism was around, but honestly, it was mainly coming from non whites. I don't want to imply there was not white racism, because there was, but the majority came from non whites.

I wouldn't just expect what you describe from the demographics.
First off those demographics may be recent and not from when you were in grade nine.
You could of been a loner and not had any friends.
You could of came from a well to do family and not associated with the poor people
When I was in grade nine, there was really no one looking around and deciding min wage was all a guy needed. What was the difference between you and most of your peers?

Yes, the majority of racism would come from the majority race, what was the majority race when you were in grade nine?

 

[rudeguy]

Seems like the right wing mentality is that being poor is somehow a choice and not an issue of circumstance. The progressive liberal socialist stance that i take recognizes that poverty is violence of the worst kind and to alleiviate that requires thorough control of scarcity and that equates wealth redistribution. An untrained propagandized mind will say that is communism but they fail to realize that soviet communism had a heirarchical brutal pyrimid structural and the brutality wasnt/isnt a result of wealth redistribution but the general violent culture of the time or place. Marx was right all along about capitalism and i think this calls for an updated form of communism. The ecology of the esrth, stability of the society, and the sustainability of the human race depend on it.

You are in poverty because you choose not to work.


/thread

 

[sm625]

Something needs to be done with how the stock market works. I don't know what exactly but what we have now is only making the rich a lot richer.

The stock market is broken because the top marginal tax rate is much too low. Far too low. The low tax rate incentivizes profit taking, which leads to all this buyback frenzy. A higher tax rate incentivizes capital formation (ie capex) which is what actually creates jobs and sustainable growth and long term profits. Stock buybacks only generate long term losses because companies are borrowing at low rates and buying back stock and then when rates rise they could very easily be ruined. What is going on today is what forms the bedrock of a 10+ year bear market.

This is also enabled by federal reserve manipulation of interest rates and outright money printing.

But there is also a socio-political element that ties in nicely with the theme of this thread. People do indeed voluntarily choose poverty. They choose it by electing leaders who produce bad policies and bad legislation. People also submit to propaganda and dogma that crushes them financially. For example, the common man should know better when a bunch of rich organizations, think tanks, and foundations spew endless drivel about how low taxes creates prosperity. Almost everyone believes this. Even today, after living through the mass rape of our economy and the mass rape of the middle class, a majority of people still believe this claptrap about how it is good to have a low top marginal tax rate. It's just completely wrong, and we will pay a very heavy price for listening to the wrong people. We need a high top marginal tax rate and yet we also need low corporate taxes. The low corporate tax rate is how you draw in corporations and the high top marginal tax rate is how you incentivize capex to create jobs and growth. But because our society is practically run by these vulture type predatory capitalists who only want to outsource and globalize, too many of us have learned to think as they do, which is obviously very bad for the US as a nation. (But very good for the profits of the vulture capitalists.)

We choose poverty by choosing to perceive the world in the way that wealthy interests wish us to perceive the world. It's only right for them, not for everyone. But everyone cannot see that, because they cannot discern propaganda. Failing to discern is how we choose poverty. It is yet one more form of failure to educate. Every time a person decide to diddle some mindless game on their smartphone instead of actually reading and learning, they choose poverty.

 

[rudeguy]

Here is the real answer to the OP:

Poverty is a choice the majority of the time. Poverty is not a disease, its a circumstance. If you don't want to live in poverty, you don't have to. The problem is that it takes hard work a lot of the time and Americans have been given such a sense of entitlement that they don't think they should have to work hard to have nice things.

I won't call anyone out but there are MULTIPLE people in this thread who live in poverty solely because they don't want to have to work. I did not come from money, I don't have a degree, I didn't have someone hand me a $50k/year job out of high school. I started at the bottom of the bottom, worked hard, learned everything I could, and climbed like a mother fucker. The owner of the company I work for now had the same experience. He came from nothing. Some podunk town in the middle of a snowfield in MN. Now he owns a company that will hit close to $750M in sales this year. The vast, VAST majority of my friends did not come from money. They all put their noses to the grindstone, started off poor, then worked their asses off.

The government and media have convinced the public that all they need to do is go to college, get a degree, then they will be handed a well paying job as soon as they get their degree. We've had how many generations now believe that lie? How many of these kids are coming out of college with no useful skills or knowledge? They aren't capable of running a register at McDonalds but they believe they should be paid $70k/year because they have a degree.

At the same time the government is handing out more money than ever to anyone who wants it. Free food, free money, free house, free internet, free cell phone...why would any rational person want to put in years of hard work to get what they want when they can go to the government and get it all for free? And they won't have to deal with all the bullshit that goes along with working: asshole bosses, schedules, rules. No way they will deal with all that when the government is happy to hand them all they need.

Americans are lazy. Americans are too afraid of not being politically correct and telling the lazy fucks to get off their asses and get jobs. Americans are too afraid of being called a monster just for telling the truth.

Well I'm not one of those people. I'm tired of having to pay all your lazy fucks' way. I have my own family to support, I don't need to support yours as well. Get a job and help pay for all the debt we've racked up paying for you lazy bastards. Get a job and help pay for the people who really need help. Just get a damn job already.

 

[fskimospy]

Here is the real answer to the OP:

Poverty is a choice the majority of the time. Poverty is not a disease, its a circumstance. If you don't want to live in poverty, you don't have to. The problem is that it takes hard work a lot of the time and Americans have been given such a sense of entitlement that they don't think they should have to work hard to have nice things.

I won't call anyone out but there are MULTIPLE people in this thread who live in poverty solely because they don't want to have to work. I did not come from money, I don't have a degree, I didn't have someone hand me a $50k/year job out of high school. I started at the bottom of the bottom, worked hard, learned everything I could, and climbed like a mother fucker. The owner of the company I work for now had the same experience. He came from nothing. Some podunk town in the middle of a snowfield in MN. Now he owns a company that will hit close to $750M in sales this year. The vast, VAST majority of my friends did not come from money. They all put their noses to the grindstone, started off poor, then worked their asses off.

The government and media have convinced the public that all they need to do is go to college, get a degree, then they will be handed a well paying job as soon as they get their degree. We've had how many generations now believe that lie? How many of these kids are coming out of college with no useful skills or knowledge? They aren't capable of running a register at McDonalds but they believe they should be paid $70k/year because they have a degree.

At the same time the government is handing out more money than ever to anyone who wants it. Free food, free money, free house, free internet, free cell phone...why would any rational person want to put in years of hard work to get what they want when they can go to the government and get it all for free? And they won't have to deal with all the bullshit that goes along with working: asshole bosses, schedules, rules. No way they will deal with all that when the government is happy to hand them all they need.

Americans are lazy. Americans are too afraid of not being politically correct and telling the lazy fucks to get off their asses and get jobs. Americans are too afraid of being called a monster just for telling the truth.

Well I'm not one of those people. I'm tired of having to pay all your lazy fucks' way. I have my own family to support, I don't need to support yours as well. Get a job and help pay for all the debt we've racked up paying for you lazy bastards. Get a job and help pay for the people who really need help. Just get a damn job already.

For most of American history (and in most of the world) there was/is no appreciable safety net, so people who didn't "work their ass off" simply starved to death. In those cases there were still huge masses of poor people, far more than are in the United States today, in fact.

How do you square that with your idea that poverty is voluntary?

 

[rudeguy]

For most of American history (and in most of the world) there was/is no appreciable safety net, so people who didn't "work their ass off" simply starved to death. In those cases there were still huge masses of poor people, far more than are in the United States today, in fact.

How do you square that with your idea that poverty is voluntary?

Please post these periods of American history where vast numbers of people starved to death. For the vast majority of history, the vast majority of Americans didn't need much money.

But I'm very curious: Please post these times in American history where vast numbers of Americans starved to death.

 

[sm625]

Here is a very clear picture of how and why poverty is voluntary:

This image represents a battle that has been going on for a very very long time. It is a war of wits between common sense and massive well funded elitist propaganda. The Aldrich Plan is what we have now, under the Federal Reserve Act. It has sucked massive amounts of wealth into the elite vortex. The only way we prospered for so many years was due to the destruction of europe in WWII, and the mass extraction of natural resources. But most people simply refuse to educate themselves about this system. They will vote for leaders who do not speak of it. That is the choice that leads to poverty.

 

[fskimospy]

Please post these periods of American history where vast numbers of people starved to death. For the vast majority of history, the vast majority of Americans didn't need much money.

But I'm very curious: Please post these times in American history where vast numbers of Americans starved to death.

Can you point to the post where I said vast numbers of Americans starved to death? I said there was no social safety net, so if you didn't work you would eventually starve. Is your argument that a smaller proportion of the American population was poor in the past? If not, then that's pretty much the game right there.

You are saying that we are allowing/encouraging people to be poor/lazy/not working because of our social safety net. If that's the case, we should see more poor people as the social safety net increases. Yet, in the early 20th century and in the 18th century poverty was MUCH higher than it is today. You would think that with all that incentive to work that poverty would have been much lower. Why wasn't it?

 

[waggy]

To a point i agree with what RG is saying. A degree is nice but it is no guarantee of success. Though also hard work is not just the answer either.

My SIL is one that lives in poverty and has no desire to get out of it. I can see why too. She knows that she since she is a "single" mother with a kid she gets a welfare. She gets enough in food stamps to pay for food (shit food..but food). She gets medical card for her and her son. But she also knows how to scam everyone. i put "single" because her boyfriend lives with her.

They know if they move into a place and don't pay rent the laws and courts are on her side. To get them out they have to evict them. that can take months! Also nearly every time they will agree that if she just moves they will drop the punitive damages (back rent..damage etc). So she lives damn near rent free.

work? lol. I don't think either has had a job for more then 2 months. even not close to 40 hours a week. Why work to get out of poverty when all the basic needs are given to you?

on the flip both my sisters married men who work hard. One is a mechanic who travels around working on oil fields and other big equipment. He makes enough to support them including my sisters daughter and child (she finished cooking school. now a head manager of 3 restaurants). My other BIL works for com-ed. he started right out of high school and now makes more then they need.

But both put in tons of hours and rarely miss a day. are they rich? no. both are middle class.

We have a few factories around here. they are always hireing. starting pay is $12 an hour and tons of overtime (within 2 years you at 16 an hour). it's not a ton but enough to survive. I have a buddy who works at one and with all the overtime he gets roughly 50k a year. with is wife's pay they have enough to survive nicely.

 

[rudeguy]

Can you point to the post where I said vast numbers of Americans starved to death? I said there was no social safety net, so if you didn't work you would eventually starve. Is your argument that a smaller proportion of the American population was poor in the past? If not, then that's pretty much the game right there.

You are saying that we are allowing/encouraging people to be poor/lazy/not working because of our social safety net. If that's the case, we should see more poor people as the social safety net increases. Yet, in the early 20th century and in the 18th century poverty was MUCH higher than it is today. You would think that with all that incentive to work that poverty would have been much lower. Why wasn't it?

For most of American history (and in most of the world) there was/is no appreciable safety net, so people who didn't "work their ass off" simply starved to death.

That never happened.

Now if you would like to debate something in my post, feel free. But moving the goal posts isn't something I'm in the mood for.

 

[realibrad]

I wouldn't just expect what you describe from the demographics.
First off those demographics may be recent and not from when you were in grade nine.
You could of been a loner and not had any friends.
You could of came from a well to do family and not associated with the poor people
When I was in grade nine, there was really no one looking around and deciding min wage was all a guy needed. What was the difference between you and most of your peers?

Yes, the majority of racism would come from the majority race, what was the majority race when you were in grade nine?

So finding old Census data on Merced was a pain in the ass.
Here is something that helps.

http://censusviewer.com/city/CA/Merced

http://merced.areaconnect.com/statistics.htm

Both are annoying in how they lay out the data. The first link combines white with Hispanic. You have to go down and see where they talk about Hispanic or Latino origin to see the break down.

The 2nd is just as bad, but they do have this.

Hispanic or Latino and race
Total Population 63893 100.00%
Hispanic or Latino(of any race) 26425 41.36%
Mexican 22616 35.4%
Puerto Rican 200 0.31%
Cuban 44 0.07%
Other Hispanic or Latino 3565 5.58%
Not Hispanic or Latino 37468 58.64%
White alone 24121 37.75%

Either way, its about the best I can find, and it shows not much has changed. 9th grade was 2001-2002 so not a world of change in 13 years.

What was the difference between you and most of your peers?

My mom was a single mom and received both SSI (Supplemental Security Income) and SSID (Social Security disability insurance). By no means was I not poor. There were 2 main differences. One was that I was not okay with being poor for the rest of my life if I could change it. If I came across any money, I would not blow it on drugs or alcohol. Most of my friends and peers started drinking and doing drugs around 12, and I wanted to spend my money on better things.

The main difference was that I became smart around my 2nd 7th grade year. I was always thought to have a learning disability up until that point. I almost was not allowed to pass the 4th grade because my standardized scores were 2-3 grades behind. Eventually, I was not able to pass 7th grade. I ended up moving that year, so when I did 7th grade again I lived in Merced. Something clicked, because by the end of that year, I was scoring in the 90th percentile. It was very strange, because I knew it was happening. One of the hardest things growing up was pushing my friends to not give up, and them giving me the excuse that I did not know what it was like to be dumb.

 

[fskimospy]

That never happened.

Now if you would like to debate something in my post, feel free. But moving the goal posts isn't something I'm in the mood for.

It most certainly did, regardless the actual act of starvation is irrelevant.

Please go back and discuss the actual thrust of my point though. Safety net didn't exist before, yet poverty was much higher. How do you square that with your contention that the safety net is a cause of poverty?

 

[rudeguy]

It most certainly did, regardless the actual act of starvation is irrelevant.

Please go back and discuss the actual thrust of my point though. Safety net didn't exist before, yet poverty was much higher. How do you square that with your contention that the safety net is a cause of poverty?

You moron. You said people who didn't work hard starved to death. THAT IS NOT TRUE.

There is no need to debate the matter since its flat out a lie.

 

[fskimospy]

You moron. You said people who didn't work hard starved to death. THAT IS NOT TRUE.

There is no need to debate the matter since its flat out a lie.

I'll ask you for a third time and provide you with a quote:

Now if you would like to debate something in my post, feel free. But moving the goal posts isn't something I'm in the mood for.

I would like to debate your contention that the safety net contributes to people being poor: The safety net didn't exist before, yet poverty was much higher. How do you square that with your contention that the safety net is a cause of poverty?

 

[realibrad]

It most certainly did, regardless the actual act of starvation is irrelevant.

Please go back and discuss the actual thrust of my point though. Safety net didn't exist before, yet poverty was much higher. How do you square that with your contention that the safety net is a cause of poverty?

Could it not be a possibility that poverty being a multi-factor problem, making 1 thing worse could be outweighed by other factors? A safety net as its own factor could cause more poverty, but you could still see a decrease in overall poverty because of other factors.

I would bet that is how he would square it. It would not prove anything though, as the data for either side is pretty shitty.

 

[fskimospy]

Could it not be a possibility that poverty being a multi-factor problem, making 1 thing worse could be outweighed by other factors? A safety net as its own factor could cause more poverty, but you could still see a decrease in overall poverty because of other factors.

I would bet that is how he would square it. It would not prove anything though, as the data for either side is pretty shitty.

It is clearly a multi-factor problem, but I think a reasonable person would be concerned for their hypothesis when one of the factors they are claiming for poverty is in fact strongly inversely correlated with it, no?

 

[rudeguy]

I'll ask you for a third time and provide you with a quote:



I would like to debate your contention that the safety net contributes to people being poor: The safety net didn't exist before, yet poverty was much higher. How do you square that with your contention that the safety net is a cause of poverty?

I said it was a part of the problem.

I also said for the vast majority of American history, people didn't need money like they do today.


Again..if you would like to debate something I said, go for it. But quit lying and ignoring my answers.

 

[fskimospy]

I said it was a part of the problem.

I also said for the vast majority of American history, people didn't need money like they do today.

Again..if you would like to debate something I said, go for it. But quit lying and ignoring my answers.

So again, how do you square it being part of the problem with it being strongly inversely correlated with the problem? Doesn't that imply the exact opposite? If not, why?

I keep debating things you said and you keep trying not to.

 

[Texashiker]

I understand that you obfuscate, assume opportunity in a situation where you admit a dearth of it. Yes, the system allows a relative few to escape poverty, but it's still a hierarchical organization the structure of which is determined from the top down.

You do understand, I hope, that a lot of those jobs are semi-hereditary, particularly at the top & the bottom.

Really?

Is that why high school dropouts can make 50k, 70k,,, even upwards to 100k in the industrial field?

In Beaumont Texas Exxon has applied for permits to expand one of their refineries. The expansion will take years to complete. Once complete the refinery will be one of the largest in the world. I think the Exxon Beaumont facility will be in the top 5 largest refineries in the world.

Besides Exxon, another LNG (liquified natural gas) refinery is in the works just south of Beaumont.

Cheniere Energy has been working on their facilities in Sabine Pass for years.

Then there are the oil fields in the Dakotas.

Tell me again how this "system" keeps people in poverty.