The World Beyond BetterMost > Anything Goes
Why are the poor, poor?
Clyde-B:
It's always seemed to me to be risky and a bit arrogant to suggest solutions to society's ills that you would not care to be subjected to yourself. You may have the good life now, but it is presumptuous to assume that it will always be so. Karma can be a bitch.
I also notice that, for some, the discussion of the poor sounds strictly theoretical. As though the people speaking had never known anyone poor. In some ways it reminds me of the discussions I used to hear of straight people discussing us gays. Do we really want to do the poor the same kind of disservice that was done to us?
brokeplex:
--- Quote from: seriouscrayons on May 04, 2008, 08:54:57 pm ---Of course. But that doesn't mean businesses shrug off taxes as no big deal. They like to keep expenses down, even if they pass them on to the consumer, because if their prices increase, demand decreases. And if demand decreases, profits decrease, and eventually jobs decrease. But you knew that.
But again here, you're making a big presumption based on a mixture of hearsay and myth and conservative doctrine. No doubt there are people here and there who fit this profile. But when you say that "the underclass expects" something or other "as a given right" -- i.e., the entire demographic group of people on welfare, or people whose income falls below the poverty line, shares some vast monolithic unreasonable attitude -- I'm afraid I don't find it convincing without evidence. And not just some essay from a conservative website, but poll results or sociological studies or Census figures or something empirical and ideologically neutral.
Perhaps something like this, from Wikipedia:
Yes, it's a wonder they manage, but nevertheless lots of people do it, including many in the middle class. From About.com, quoting a report released by the Census Bureau:
It is easier, of course, when there is reliable and affordable daycare available.
And, conversely, I'm guessing not only the poor like Oprah and Twinkies. ;D
I'm sorry, broketrash, I know this is an ugly generalization, and I hope I made it clear I did not include you. But the fact is, the concept of racism or classism influencing some people's opinions on this issue is absolutely not false. if we're going to toss around generalizations, here's one I've actually seen, on numerous occasions, with my own eyes and ears.
Hmm. Well, I do recall seeing something like that by HerrKaiser, and I wouldn't even call it "qualified."
--- End quote ---
As far as taxes on businesses. Of course businesses would love to not have to pay local, state and federal taxes. But, the ultimate payer of business taxes are the consumers : poor, middle, and rich. And I would add, that many businesses can write their various taxes off to a large extent : hence the IRS honored phrase "cost of doing business". This shift the tax burden on to others who can't write off their taxes to the degree that businesses do, usually middle class families.
I don't mean to be difficult and you are so patient, but tell me again, what is the point that you are making with the references to the Census Bureau data?
I freely agree that there are people who are at or below the national standard of poverty set by the census bureau. I earlier agreed that there were single parents who also held jobs. I opined that the children must be cared for by neighbors, or relatives. I did not consider day care as an option, but I am sure that it is also true. If your point is that not all single parents are at home watching Oprah eating Twinkies, I am sure that you are correct. National standards of poverty are very misleading. A uniform national standard does not take into account the regional differences in the cost of living in a country as large as the US. What is middle class in Waco, might not allow you to pay the bills in Manhattan.
But, you know, I have an even better vision for that single parent working that job while someone else watches the kids. Avoid the pregnancy in the first place. Don't go on welfare, don't get trapped in an insidious system. Finish an education which opens the doors of opportunity for you so you don't have to be a part of an underclass. Isn't that a better vision? And shouldn't we really get back to what I was speaking of a few days ago? That is how do we either eliminate or reform the welfare system, the educational system, the penal system, so that we can eliminate the present seemingly intractable poverty of the underclass? Can we go forward on that basis?
p.s. I think that if you look you will see some agreement with me by a few other than my bud Kaiser!
brokeplex:
--- Quote from: seriouscrayons on May 04, 2008, 08:54:57 pm ---
I'm sorry, broketrash, I know this is an ugly generalization, and I hope I made it clear I did not include you. But the fact is, the concept of racism or classism influencing some people's opinions on this issue is absolutely not false. if we're going to toss around generalizations, here's one I've actually seen, on numerous occasions, with my own eyes and ears.
--- End quote ---
I did not think that you were targeting me. :) My point is, that type of generalization takes our eyes off what should be discussed within this context, and that context would be alternatives to the present welfare system.
It is clear to me that someone who is not interested in changing the present system may wish to throw up red herrings that do not contribute to a meaningful discussion, and that is fine if they wish to discuss "classism" and "racism" within the context of the debate over welfare. There are people on this web site who are more interested in making little debating points than meaningful discussions of public policy. But from my point of view that is a waste of time, as I won all the debates that I needed to win back in high school. So, I would prefer to look at what is ailing the present system and look for realistic alternatives.
brokeplex:
--- Quote from: Jeff Wrangler on May 04, 2008, 09:14:15 pm ---Well, first of all, I'm going to take another risk at being offensive and suggest that you can cut out the civics lessons on the Constitution, etc. We've all been to school around here, and, frankly, I find the sentences I've highlighted in red more than a little condescending in its tone, and it is not appreciated.
As for interstate migration, I brought that up on Friday, 5/2, as follows:
I question the validity of your comparison to the migration of Southern Blacks to the North and Dust Bowl "Okies" to California because the world and the economy have changed a great deal since those days. For example, the industrial jobs for which those people migrated North no longer exist.
--- End quote ---
Jeff, it is truly regrettable that you are offended. Since I have no desire to offend you, and since based upon your responses here and elsewhere I feel compelled to make the same points again and again, I will not comment any further on any of your posts. Have a nice evening.
HerrKaiser:
Well, well, well...the hornets' nest seems to have been stirred up on this one! :) :) :) I've got my spray can ready just in case...and according to the label, it can hit a nest from 25 feet away! :)
Personally, having read through the commentary and having BTDT (been there done that) with the snide and sarcastic remarks that have become commonplace, I am not so interested in joining the fray with my point of view and possibly valuable insights. However, some facts about the sarcasm and/or personal digs may help get some misinformation on the right track for you all to continue the war:
1) Holland is often viewed as one of the most liberal and progressive countires in the world. Not sure of the status at the moment, but they are planning to institute a eugenics program that controls birth rate and death based on a variety of factors. Fact is, nearly all major issues on the left or right side of the polictical/social spectrum can be traced back, quite easily, to too many people.
2) "forced labor" is a buzz term that is often misused and has been here. When the U.S. "forced" german pow's to work the ag fields during WWII, it was not called such. Prisoners on prison are forced to perform tasks. Even full time, happy employees are forced to perform or they get fired. Sure, they may have a choice, but ulimately everyone has to buck and and perform or they are left on the sideline. For those on public aid, their being required to perform as all other workers do for compensastion is not forced labor.
3) actually, the idea that one's opinion is as valid as another's is somewhat absurd. Opinions not based on facts and not supported with logic are not as valid.
4) if the princilple "he who has the money makes the rules" is a conservative tenet (which it is not), then conservatives would have failed. The welfare rules are largely made by the power of the lobbyists for special interests for the poor. Conservatives are attempting to add reason and responsibility to the entitlements.
5) "My goodness the conservatives miss the days of mint juleps and tea on the veranda (as the sound of whips reverberate thru the evening air!)" Good example of why not to participate. ;) :-X
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version