Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't think this is something that one can make a blanket statement about. Yes in some cases, no in others. I try not to make assumptions about people that I know nothing about. As the saying goes "never judge a book by it's cover." Unless they tell you their life story, you have no idea of what a person has gone through to get where they are.
I don't think this is something that one can make a blanket statement about. Yes in some cases, no in others. I try not to make assumptions about people that I know nothing about. As the saying goes "never judge a book by it's cover." Unless they tell you their life story, you have no idea of what a person has gone through to get where they are.
Exactly.
Not every "rich" guy sits around some board room (the position handed to him from his daddy) from 9-5, has 5 houses all over the world, with a full staff waiting at his beck and call.
Not every "poor" guy wants to be poor and spends all his money on smokes and beef jerky and has 7 kids by 5 different baby-mammas (or 7 kids by 5 different baby daddies).
But if any semblance of a rational discussion about the "poor" or the "rich" is ever to take place, the specifics need to be spelled out about how that "rich" guy/group you want to complain about fits in to your argument as well as who that "poor" guy/group you want to complain about fits in to your argument.
An easy preface to make. It does happen every now and again, it just tends to get glossed over or lost in the defense or outrage.
Disclaimer: "You" and "your" meant in general, not specific.
I don't think this is something that one can make a blanket statement about. Yes in some cases, no in others. I try not to make assumptions about people that I know nothing about. As the saying goes "never judge a book by it's cover." Unless they tell you their life story, you have no idea of what a person has gone through to get where they are.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sawdustmaker
Exactly.
Not every "rich" guy sits around some board room (the position handed to him from his daddy) from 9-5, has 5 houses all over the world, with a full staff waiting at his beck and call.
Not every "poor" guy wants to be poor and spends all his money on smokes and beef jerky and has 7 kids by 5 different baby-mammas (or 7 kids by 5 different baby daddies).
But if any semblance of a rational discussion about the "poor" or the "rich" is ever to take place, the specifics need to be spelled out about how that "rich" guy/group you want to complain about fits in to your argument as well as who that "poor" guy/group you want to complain about fits in to your argument.
An easy preface to make. It does happen every now and again, it just tends to get glossed over or lost in the defense or outrage.
Disclaimer: "You" and "your" meant in general, not specific.
I'm sorry these last two posts were way to rational and not befitting of the types of posts that are expected in Politics and Controversies. Please return to calling each other Liberals or Conservatives and using ad hominem attacks or I'll be forced to report you both.
Here's my experience, however anecdotal it might be.
I consulted for a local housing authority. Part of my contract involved interviewing public housing residents, 200 in all. My range of questions ranged the gamut, from their tenure there to hobbies. The objective was to get more residents interested in using the extensive array of mainstreaming programs, from job training to education to childcare programs. As it was, roughly 20% of the adult residents availed themselves of the programs.
So I interviewed 200 residents and found they fell into two broad categories:
1) Those who had hit on hard times and were trying to work their way back out into regular society. I met a woman with two kids whose husband left her and was learning basic office skills. I met a guy who had been injured on the job and was having to find a new way to support his family. And there were the people who had lost their jobs and were doing their best to get back on their feet.
2) The second group were the ones who were the long-term residents. They literally did nothing all day. I found most of them to be lucid and pretty smart. They simply chose the life. Several were rather frank with me. One guy said that he could mow a few yards for cash, get benefits, and live in public housing, and never have to work a regular job. In other words, he thought working was for chumps. These people were just gaming the system.
The ratio between #1 and #2 was roughly even. I think society has a duty to the people who fall in the first category. I have no duty to the ones who fall into the second.
Here's my experience, however anecdotal it might be.
I consulted for a local housing authority. Part of my contract involved interviewing public housing residents, 200 in all. My range of questions ranged the gamut, from their tenure there to hobbies. The objective was to get more residents interested in using the extensive array of mainstreaming programs, from job training to education to childcare programs. As it was, roughly 20% of the adult residents availed themselves of the programs.
So I interviewed 200 residents and found they fell into two broad categories:
1) Those who had hit on hard times and were trying to work their way back out into regular society. I met a woman with two kids whose husband left her and was learning basic office skills. I met a guy who had been injured on the job and was having to find a new way to support his family. And there were the people who had lost their jobs and were doing their best to get back on their feet.
2) The second group were the ones who were the long-term residents. They literally did nothing all day. I found most of them to be lucid and pretty smart. They simply chose the life. Several were rather frank with me. One guy said that he could mow a few yards for cash, get benefits, and live in public housing, and never have to work a regular job. In other words, he thought working was for chumps. These people were just gaming the system.
The ratio between #1 and #2 was roughly even. I think society has a duty to the people who fall in the first category. I have no duty to the ones who fall into the second.
May I ask what happens to those who are gaming the system?
Person A was always a hard worker, then the recession hit 2008. Person A tried really hard to find a job, went to the unemployment office on a regular basis to check the postings, pounded on doors, and even applied for a jobs waiting tables. Person A decides to go back to school and his just down on his luck for the time being and can't find a job. Person A is not to blame for his circumstances.
Person B got pregnant when she was 14. She rebelled against her parents and dated boys twice her age. She dropped out of high school at the age of 16 and applied for welfare, Section 8, and all the other government "goodies." She continues to get pregnant and spread her legs for any ole jerk because she likes the welfare checks and beautiful apartment paid for by the taxpayer and doesn't want to mess with a pesky job or get her GED. She has six kids by the age of 30. Person B is responsible for her situation.
Person C is a nurse. She is a darn good nurse. Her son is later diagnosed with brain cancer. She is forced to take off work to help her son. Her husband is a teacher. His hours are cut to half time. The medical bills pile up and Person C is now poor. Person C is not at fault here.
The point is there are poor people who are not at fault for their circumstances and some that are. In every group of people, there are good and bad people.
Really? Do you REALLY think that it is possible for EVERY person in America who is 'poor' to wake up on January 3rd and go out and find three jobs?
I sure wish that every poor person in America, including myself, would wake up on January 3 with two or three jobs. Although, I would be dreaming if that happened. Dreams are good. Geez, I wish it was 2005.
There are jobs out there. Just not enough for everyone who is out of work. There aren't even enough Burger King and McDonald's jobs out there for everyone on unemployment. I wish there were.
Many are scams or looking for applicant pools. Craigslist is filled with scam job postings. I know because I applied for a job on Craigslist and got an e-mail back asking for all sorts of personal information(i.e. social security numbers, credit card info). Subway in my hometown regularly posts a Now Hiring a sign. I went in and asked for an application and they said that they weren't actually hiring. They just wanted people to keep coming in and filling out applications in case someone quit.
Quite a position to take there. So the rise income disparity is caused by poor people wanted to become poorer? Huh. I didn't know that. I thought it was due to stagnation of income, the income/racial gap (since Black people were not allowed to own property for a long time, they lost out on acquired wealth...only relatively recently Black people were allowed to own property anywhere they would like...so it'll take a LONG time to close the gap), the increasing cost of education, the increasing cost of living while income has not matched. So I guess all those factors are simply because poor people are lazy?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Geez, I wish it was 2005.
