Has Idaho effectively made itself the worst place in the nation to be poor? (Coeur d'Alene: middle-class, crime)

[VelvetSky]

well if i was poor i would rather live in a place where people treated me with dignity and respect. So that is good to know about Idaho

[mistyriver]

Originally Posted by Keim

Don't underestimate the role of bad luck, Joryjim. Especially with health matters.

[Sage of Sagle]

Originally Posted by joryjim

I thought you moved to Georgia and don't live in Idaho anymore? People who are poor likely made life decisions that made them poor. It's mostly a choice. If you're lazy, an alcoholic, uneducated, unskilled, overly indebted or had too many kids, you're probably poor by choice.

JJ,

While you and I often agree, I just can't go with you here. As far to the right as I am politically, painting with that broad of a brush is a problem for me. Of the people I know who are really struggling (and are "poor" by economic definition) around us here in North Idaho, I'd say the majority of them don't fit your criteria above. It's either single moms doing their best, older folks who've had life deal them some rough blows, families who through no fault or even lack of planning have had the crap hit the fan one too many times, people who have been wiped out by medical problems or illness, disabilities, etc.

Now, I will grant you that's only going by my sphere of influence and that outside that circle there are certainly a great number of [lazy/ alcoholic/ drug-using/ ignorant] people feeding from the government trough even here in North Idaho. However, if you look at the number of people traditionally needing government assistance the number (prior to "big government" spending) was typically around 15-20% of the population. The fact that number has doubled or tripled in the past decade is frightening, but doesn't negate the face that the base 15-20% probably DO in fact need our help legitimately.

While I still contend that community and religious organizations do a dramatically better job that any government entity channeling aid to the needy, I'm not going to come unglued about paying taxes knowing that 15-20% of the population is getting some sort of public assistance. It's the current number (nearing 50% of the population) that has me riled up.

But as a place to be poor? Again...if you're talking about handouts from the government...I guess Idaho wouldn't have as much to give out as blue states like California...but I still contend that if you were plugged into the community it would be a much better place (and a much easier place TO get plugged into a community without being judged or denigrated for your social status).

[chevpu1967]

Well said, Sage.

[Cdarocks]

Originally Posted by joryjim

I thought you moved to Georgia and don't live in Idaho anymore? People who are poor likely made life decisions that made them poor. It's mostly a choice. If you're lazy, an alcoholic, uneducated, unskilled, overly indebted or had too many kids, you're probably poor by choice.

Yes, I did move to Georgia recently. I fail to see what that has to do with anything. I still have significant connections to the CDA area and always will. We lived there for 13 years.

We moved to CDA as seedling adults. I did say that a number of the poor we knew at the time were that way because of choices and laziness. I dislike it that our tax dollars pay the way for some of these people. However, by no means does lazy, stupid, drugged out or irresponsible describe everyone who is struggling.

[DEADTIME]

There are towns like CDA who have their poor and help them, they pull them in and accept them they treat them as if they are no different. Then their are places...mostly big blue city's that cut them checks, hold their hands, serve them Wellfare on a golden platter and make them feel as though they are owed this treatment.

Who among us forgot the Detroit citizens who celebrated when Obama was elected and talk about "them Obama bucks, now they won't need to pay their rent or buy their food"

You can embrace, support and help, or you can enable and entitle.

In CDA we have plenty of "poor" but we don't see them as disabled, ignorant masses who need to be kept fat and happy with the bread and circus of Rome. We take care of our own, we donate time, food, and love. We don't need uncle sugar handing out walkin round money.

[chevpu1967]

Amen, DT. There are plenty of disabled, myself included, who would love the opportunity to be useful again. To be downgraded by a few who think that I'm lazy or that I feel entitled is disheartening. 26 years of service to the defense of this nation and I'm judged by a few who have no clue what I have been through. I remember those who talked about "them Obama bucks" and "getting what we are owed". Political points of view aside, charity always begins at home and understanding begins with knowledge. I might not be able to physically do what I used to do, but I still have the knowledge to teach someone else how to do it and that helps me feel useful. I might not be able to carry a big pot of soup to help out the poor, but I can sure still use a ladle. I can teach my children and my neighbors how to do some things that I used to be able to do. And I can still learn. So if anybody has any good homemade soup recipes, feel free to send them to me, the weather is turning colder. It only reached 94 today where I currently live.

[CMartel2]

Originally Posted by Highpointer

This article, from the April 16, 1998 edition of The New York Times, is titled "As Idaho Booms, Prisons Fill And Spending on Poor Lags."

You get more of what you subsidize. The NY Times has it backwards, of course.

That said, rural regions are going to have more poverty than suburban regions simply due to the lack of jobs due to an incomplete economy and the effects of booms and busts.

[Reziac]

This discussion hasn't figured in the fact that there are two such classes:

Poor people, and people with no money.

The difference? Give $5 to a poor person, and they'll buy one meal at McDonalds, then whine when you don't give them a ride home. Give $5 to a person with no money, and they'll buy a week's worth of groceries, then wash your windshield.

It's not the lack of money that makes poor people poor, it's attitude and lack of ability to plan beyond the moment. People with no money might be just as bad (or worse) off financially, but they'll do better with what they have, and those are the ones that, barring bad luck, will eventually haul themselves out of it.

Bad luck, of course, can always jerk the rug out from under you no matter how you live.

As to where it's "better"... I had no money in MT, and I had no money in CA. In MT, there seemed to be a lot more people doing the sort of charity that's really beneficial -- providing clothes and surplus food and the like, very much hands-on. In CA, there's more gov't aid IF you qualify, but as a rule you have to be poor, not without money, to do so, and if you're frugal enough to own a jalopy that's enough to disqualify you... and there just didn't seem to be much by way of charitable works like in MT. I'd be surprised if ID wasn't more akin to MT, judging from the more personable attitude of the folks I've talked to here.

[GraniteStater]

Idaho is a right to work state with significant structural problems within its economy that makes certain sectors dependent on low skilled labor. This is particularly true in agricultural regions of the state, the potato belt. Educational attainment is trending very poor in many of these areas that have larger immigration flows and minority residents. Wages are also some of the lowest of any state in the West, even when adjusted for cost of living. Boise and the immediate area are the prime counter to the state stats. Wages are also kept lower due to demographics as Idaho has one of the youngest populations of any state in the US. A greater supply of workers in a local workforce even with some specialized skills or traning almost always means lower rates of pay.