121–130 of 216 posts
"It should also strive to measure how secure people feel". So now were basing poverty on feelings. I can't even say how ridiculous this sounds.
"It should also strive to measure how secure people feel". So now were basing poverty on feelings. I can't even say how ridiculous this sounds.
Seeing as I'm being down-voted, I figured I should respond. We cannot measure anything without quantifiable measurements. Feelings cannot be quantified. This was my point.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm a well off software developer. I've been using a $50 Nokia Lumia 520 for the past 3 years or so. When this one dies I'll likely "splurge" and buy a Nokia 2 ($100). That our I'll buy a Blu phone ($50). I would consider my neighbors poor. They have state-subsidized rent, for example. They use food stamps. They also smoke a pack a day each. All they need to do to buy a new phone is not smoke for 5 days. Not that it…
Having an iPhone isn't inexplicable. You can finance or lease a phone for $30-$40 a month. And given the extraordinary advantages having a smartphone provides, it would be inexplicable if they did not do so. Also, cigarettes are an appetite suppressant and in many places are cheaper than food. Food stamps are hardly comprehensive. Cheaper, that is, until it all catches up to you medically. One thing I've learned in m…
It's inexplicable when there are alternative phones available for 1/10 the cost. Why would you choose to take on a $40/mo expense when you could buy an entire fully functioning low end Android phone for $40?
> And so on and so on. I pay more upfront to save a ton down the line.
But my example is that I'm paying less upfront than my neighbors. They are the ones buying iPhones and name brand cereal with SNAP while I'm over here using cheap phones and eating generic brand cereal. It just seems paradoxical is all I'm saying.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> above all it is primarily a consequence, not a cause It absolutely is a cause, of many things, including more poverty. In the US, the largest determiner of a child's future socioeconomic status is her parent's wealth. Whether a disease model is the best one to use is arguable, but blanket denial that poverty is a primary cause of much social disruption, dysfunction, and lack of economic achievement is just nonsense…
Poverty is observably the consequence of social disruption, dysfunction, and lack of economic achievement. Wet streets do not cause rain. Germany for example had rampant poverty in the late 1940s and 1950s. That poverty didn't cause the war, it was caused by it. The Marshall plan helped speed up the recovery, but the real factor was the lack of punitive reparations and the industry of the German people. The same occu…
You are being disingenuous by trying to argue that wealth is a genetically heritable trait. I don't think you're actually even engaging in honest debate here, just doing the standard right-wing gish gallop of disinformation and distraction. This applies to all of your comment, not just the above.
Noted and ignored.
"Thanks in part to increased government assistance, U.S. poverty according to this measure has fallen, especially for children." Pardon me but I'm a tight-ass when it comes to words / language and how their use effects perception. In short, (gov) assistance does __not__ decrease poverty. It might sugar coat poverty. It might keep the poverty stricken alive. Etc. But poverty remains the same. It's there. Alive and wel…
> In short, (gov) assistance does __not__ decrease poverty Source? I feel as though the equal housing act and low-income housing decrease this definition of poverty by making housing secure.
That aside, to answer your interpretation of my statement, I would sight the article as a starter source.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Poverty is observably the consequence of social disruption, dysfunction, and lack of economic achievement. Wet streets do not cause rain. Germany for example had rampant poverty in the late 1940s and 1950s. That poverty didn't cause the war, it was caused by it. The Marshall plan helped speed up the recovery, but the real factor was the lack of punitive reparations and the industry of the German people. The same occu…
> As for parental wealth, well you'd be hard-pressed to find any trait in a child that isn't statistically more likely when their parents possess it. Are we to address poverty by forcing people to procreate by lottery? You are being disingenuous by trying to argue that wealth is a genetically heritable trait. I don't think you're actually even engaging in honest debate here, just doing the standard right-wing gish ga…
The rest of parent (and subsequent replies by same) is clearly undeserving of a response.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm a well off software developer. I've been using a $50 Nokia Lumia 520 for the past 3 years or so. When this one dies I'll likely "splurge" and buy a Nokia 2 ($100). That our I'll buy a Blu phone ($50). I would consider my neighbors poor. They have state-subsidized rent, for example. They use food stamps. They also smoke a pack a day each. All they need to do to buy a new phone is not smoke for 5 days. Not that it…
I wonder what they would say if they were posting on HN. Here, people who lack money are usually the 'other' about whom we talk, often in stereotypes. But these are a large number of individuals, each with their own widely varying needs and situations; the only way to learn about someone is to ask. Certainly, to understand me, I would not want anyone to rely on what my neighbors say. The parent comment presumes knowi…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Having an iPhone isn't inexplicable. You can finance or lease a phone for $30-$40 a month. And given the extraordinary advantages having a smartphone provides, it would be inexplicable if they did not do so. Also, cigarettes are an appetite suppressant and in many places are cheaper than food. Food stamps are hardly comprehensive. Cheaper, that is, until it all catches up to you medically. One thing I've learned in m…
> Having an iPhone isn't inexplicable. You can finance or lease a phone for $30-$40 a month. And given the extraordinary advantages having a smartphone provides, it would be inexplicable if they did not do so. It's inexplicable when there are alternative phones available for 1/10 the cost. Why would you choose to take on a $40/mo expense when you could buy an entire fully functioning low end Android phone for $40? >…
Not if their phone is their only computing device.
name brand cereal
Sometimes when you're struggling, affording yourself some basic pleasures keeps you from giving up entirely.
>A reasonable, common-sense definition of poverty should include not just an absolute measure of material deprivation and a relative gauge of a person’s situation compared to the rest of society. It should also strive to measure how secure people feel — in their homes, their health, and their jobs. I generally agree, but this has potential downsides. A good friend of mine from college comes from a very conservative f…
Why did you choose the word insecure rather than bitter or something similar? Insecure means feeling that things around may easy fall apart or collapse. It doesn’t sound like your friend’s parents are remotely close to that.
They're not really "angry" that LGBT folks, Hispanics, and Muslims are able to vote, for example. A better way to think of it is that the root cause is fear. Does that result in anger? Sometimes... but they're insecure insofar as they believe their way of life, their financial independence, and their freedom is on the verge of being taken away. They see prosperity and opportunity as a zero sum game where the Hispanics are here to either not work at all and force the whites to pay for them and the ones that are willing to work are only stealing the opportunity from the "real Americans".
Before you respond - this isn't a topic of debate.
I mean, I'm revealing conversations I've had with these people over dinner in their home. This is what they believe, from their own mouths.
At the end of the day, these are people who I consider family, even though I almost violently disagree with their views and believe they have been brainwashed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> As for parental wealth, well you'd be hard-pressed to find any trait in a child that isn't statistically more likely when their parents possess it. Are we to address poverty by forcing people to procreate by lottery? You are being disingenuous by trying to argue that wealth is a genetically heritable trait. I don't think you're actually even engaging in honest debate here, just doing the standard right-wing gish ga…
For the benefit of others who have adequate reading comprehension skills, I'd like to explicitly point out that I never wrote anything about genetically heritable traits. I chose my words carefully precisely to avoid this misunderstanding. To be clear, there are many traits that are not, as far as I can tell, genetically heritable, but still statistically more likely in children when their parents have them. Attendin…
You make my original point for me.