Earlier quoted context omitted.
My taxes also make an enormous difference to my welfare. There are things that are best done collectively.
That's actually the entire point they are trying to make. They don't make an enormous difference to your welfare. At least not when compared to someone making $15k / year and trying to support a family. You really can't understand what it's like to not know where your next meal is coming from unless you have been there.
Being poor changes your thinking about everything
191–196 of 196 posts
Re: Being poor changes your thinking about everything
#192Being poor in America is a state of mind. Do you think that the majority of people in the world today would consider themselves "poor" if they suddenly traded places with a "poor" American? Do you think that the majority of people would think that it was "too hard to bear" if they had to work, live in low rent apartment AND go to school? America's poor are the worlds wealthiest. The sad state of mind that people fall…
I asked a question on Quora that garnered a number of interesting replies to this question: http://www.quora.com/Poverty/Which-is-harder-being-poor-in-A... The basic gist is that just looking at quantity of physical possessions is an impoverished way of analyzing the situation.
Re: Being poor changes your thinking about everything
#193Being poor in America is a state of mind. Do you think that the majority of people in the world today would consider themselves "poor" if they suddenly traded places with a "poor" American? Do you think that the majority of people would think that it was "too hard to bear" if they had to work, live in low rent apartment AND go to school? America's poor are the worlds wealthiest. The sad state of mind that people fall…
"Being poor in America is a state of mind." Having spent most of my childhood living with my mom and my three siblings on her meager $8,000 / year income, I'd say I have to agree. Poor is a state of mind. But, I'll argue that it's not a state of mind that the poor take on themselves. "Poor" is a distinction that others will give to you, not the other way around. Being poor is about being relegated by the other member…
Are you saying that a poor kid does not start to realize that they are poor by their own observations pretty early on? Mom, can we eat at that restaurant. Mom, why don't we get a car like other people have? Mom, why don't we have a telephone like people on TV do? Why am I wearing worn out clothes, socks and shoes? Why do we eat lentils, rice or beans for every meal? ETC...
I grew up poor and knew we were poor from very early on. Not because anyone stigmatized me either. It was blatantly obvious. If everyone else around me and on TV had was in the exact same financial circumstances that we lived in.
Even in your case, I don't see the point of your statement. Is it to place blame on the haves for persecuting the have nots? This is America. I realize that being poor may negatively affect social status among peers, but I don't consider this a limitation. Look at immigrants/refugees. Not only do they act, look, eat, smell and talk differently. They are also minorities and poor. They have far less going for them at first glance. They are stigmatized for a host of reasons.
A deeper look reveals that they have two assets that most inner city kids do not have. A strong determination to work hard/succeed and a strong family presence to reinforce and encourage that determination.
My guess is that if you had a strong full family with a father at home who taught you kids to believe in yourselves and not to listen to naysayers things would have been much different in your life (even if you still were dirt poor)
Why do I think that? Because that is my story. There are popular poor kids and there are unpopular rich kids. Same with fat kids, skinny kids, athletic, clumsy, ugly, handsome ETC. The biggest determining factor is how much self confidence they have. When people truly believe in themselves, they will rise to the top. Their peers will believe as they do. That they are valuable to others.
The government "nanny" will continue to try to replace God and family, but it will never even come close to succeeding. The more the government tries, the worse things get. No amount of money will ever replace what a child gets from being reared in a good healthy and loving family.
Nothing will ever keep a family together like a true belief and faith in God can. Broken families are a result of selfishness. The government does nothing but promote more selfishness.
Re: Being poor changes your thinking about everything
#194Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Being poor in America is a state of mind." Having spent most of my childhood living with my mom and my three siblings on her meager $8,000 / year income, I'd say I have to agree. Poor is a state of mind. But, I'll argue that it's not a state of mind that the poor take on themselves. "Poor" is a distinction that others will give to you, not the other way around. Being poor is about being relegated by the other member…
I am not convinced of your opinion. It may be true for your own life - but in general I don't think that this is accurate. Are you saying that a poor kid does not start to realize that they are poor by their own observations pretty early on? Mom, can we eat at that restaurant. Mom, why don't we get a car like other people have? Mom, why don't we have a telephone like people on TV do? Why am I wearing worn out clothes…
Reading through your past posts, I see that there's a trend. You have a distinct, extreme ideology of free market libertarianism. And, you try to cherry pick reality to fit into your ideology. You're not convincing anyone that way.
Poor immigrants and minorities with two-parent households don't succeed any more (and probably less) than poor white kids with single parents.
Re: Being poor changes your thinking about everything
#195Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Why do you equate lack of population growth with a bad future? When the health of your social programs is based on continued population growth the future may indeed be grim without it.
Actually, the health of our social programs isn't that based on continued population growth; they'd work pretty much the same with a stable population size. However, the bane of those social programs is quickly increasing lifespans. No matter if population growth is zero or huge, if you're currently below 45, you anyway have to "prepare for yourself" rather than expect them to survive in the current form - unless the…