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.
A lot of times, poverty is NOT a choice, though, too. Sure there may be many who stay poor to take advantage of the system (most of those are the ones who have no desire to progress in life anyway), but many who WANT to succeed but cant qualify for anything more than the average 'Joe' jobs without getting a degree. Right now isnt a god time though, to try and look for work as a banker, loan officer, real estate agent or car salesman.
Im happy being a simple person. Not rich, not poor, but live a simple life somewhat out in the country. No need for a fancy house or to make a statement in an Escalade SUV....Im just me and as long as my family is safe, Im content. End of story.
Location: The Chatterdome in La La Land, CaliFUNia
39,031 posts, read 23,027,552 times
Reputation: 36027
I doubt people would deliberately choose to be poor but there is a correlation between poverty and certain lifestyle choices in many cases. I do think it is unfair to make such sweeping generalizations such as "people choosing to be poor" as poverty can happen in the face of tragedy which has no bearing on lifestyle choices.
I have always wondered this myself. we all know that poverty is a choice, so why do so many chose to live in it? with all the government grants, educational opportunities, and other government programs out there, why do so many choose to do so little? show me a poor person, and I will show you a reason. unless you are physically or mentally disabled, there is no excuse for being poor.
some people are poor because they made the wrong choices in life. I for one quit school when i was 16. I do not know my math very well and that stopped me from going to college but people do not want to be poor but they are.
so your answer is that you have no answer. gotcha.
Obviously not. I forget that some people require things explained in more detail. Forgive me. [sigh] Not only that, but there isn't always time for the "long version". Ok then. Obviously being poor isn't a choice. That's a fundamentally ignorant (or abusive) remark. For every person who is well nourished several people starve. That isn't an opinion, and I suspect for the people involved it isn't a choice. We live in a nation where the main nutritional problem is obesity, on a planet where the main nutritional problem is starvation. The Neoconservatives have an easy answer for this; "it's their fault for not chosing to be white middle class Americans". The actual answer actually involves brain cells in double digits to understand. If you add up all the food and other goods and services produced on this planet in a year and compare it to the amount consumed its easy to show that the poplulation outgrew the supply of food, water, clothing, etc. in late 1978. Prior to then, any problems of starvation or malnutrition were problems of distribution. Every year the annual "product" of the planet is fully consumed at an earlier date. Usually the Neoconservatives will respond, "that's easy, all "they" have to do is practice responsible birth control like white middle class Americans do" (an idea borrowed from the Communist Chinese). Not so, for several reasons. One, even with zero population growth the consumption of resources is not equal. The obesity/starvation example implies this. The amount of land required to produce everything required for the average person on this planet in an ongoing way is 2.5-3.5 hectares. For a middle class white american it is 6.5-7.5 hectares. An average 3 year old in this country has already consumed more resources than the average Asian or African will in their entire lifetime.
Now clearly the difference can be accounted for by the differences in life style, not some moral defect. It is easy to say they should learn from us and grow more grain, etc. In fact, the policy the USA and Europe (now the EU) have had toward these countries since the late 1800's has been to discourage modern farming both with trade barriers and with grain purchased cheaply on the world market and "dumped" below cost into the markets of these countries. Only now is there talk of a new policy. Consumption of native foods has been similarly discouraged.
Much of the difference in consumption, especially energy is related to our technology, especially digital technology. Because this technology is
entrepreneurial it can be created, rather than being based on a fixed amount. Thus there are no limits. For this reason the gap between the haves and the have-nots continues to widen, both internationally and at home. HDTV's for example consume around $100.00/month more electricity than CRT television.
Poverty in the USA generally reflects the demopgraphics that prevail elsewhere. Next to race, gender plays a major role, at home and abroad. As people try to find a balance on this difficult issue, the emerging nations are surprisingly willing to negotiate compromise, and the established nations unsurprisingly willing to resort to military force.
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.
being poor.
get payed
