4 ms·

I'd say that energy, rather than time, could be a limiting factor when you're poor. Working minimum wage jobs is often repetitive, soul-crushing, and/or physica

I'd say that energy, rather than time, could be a limiting factor when you're poor. Working minimum wage jobs is often repetitive, soul-crushing, and/or physically demanding. By the time you leave work, you might want to buy finished products (e.g. fast food) instead of spending time shopping for and cooking healthy food. Middle-class jobs more often feel meaningful or at least allow for more self-determination during tasks which might be helpful for replenishing lost energy. I agree though that habits and familiarity with the diet one grows up with contribute a greal deal. Many poorer parents may not be able to break their own habits, esp when economic incentives push them otherwise. Kids imitate the way their parents eat. That is why some nudging, through economic incentives, PR, or other means, is necessary to break the inter-generational vicious cycle.

yummyfajitas 11y ago
If the job is physically demanding, you should be getting plenty of exercise. When I was tearing down houses, I definitely didn't need an additional workout [1]. Cook a healthy meal - not particularly physically taxing - and you should be good! Of course, this theory makes the (incorrect) assumption that poor folks are working. Most are not, and very few of the remainder work full time. I think part of the problem might be our modern culture of victimhood; it's become socially acceptable to make excuses for being fat, weak, unhealthy and lazy, so why bother trying to change it? [1] I'd amend this a bit; I didn't need an additional workout to maintain a base level of fitness. Specific goals - quad/ham separation, 6 pack, surviving 5 rounds in the ring - do of course require additional training.
- czep 11y ago
  > Of course, this theory makes the (incorrect) assumption that poor folks are working. Most poor are working. Not sure what your point was, but don't try to pull the "their poor because they're lazy" argument.
  - Artistry121 11y ago
    Reposting of another comment on this thread. YF never mentioned the reasons they didn't work - just that the fact they were working cannot be linked to their health. ~%40 of the poor work and ~%28 work full time according to the below article. > Of course, this theory makes the (incorrect) assumption that poor folks are working. Most are not, and very few of the remainder work full time. Would you mind supporting this factual claim with evidence? Here's the most detailed examination of this I could quickly find http://www.epi.org/publication/poor-people-work-a-majority-o.. http://www.epi.org/publication/poor-people-work-a-majority-o.... * 35.2 percent of the poor (18 - 64) are NOT ELIGIBLE to work (retired, going to school, or disabled) * 64.8 percent of working-age poor ARE CURRENTLY ELIGIBLE to work * 62.6 percent of eligible workers are working * 44.3 percent of eligible workers are working full-time * 37.4 percent of working age poor eligible for employment are not working (this includes 3.3 million unemployed poor people currently seeking a employment)
- iak8god 11y ago
  > Of course, this theory makes the (incorrect) assumption that poor folks are working. Most are not, and very few of the remainder work full time. Would you mind supporting this factual claim with evidence? Here's the most detailed examination of this I could quickly find http://www.epi.org/publication/poor-people-work-a-majority-of-poor-people-who-can-work-do/ http://www.epi.org/publication/poor-people-work-a-majority-o... * 35.2 percent of the poor (18 - 64) are NOT ELIGIBLE to work (retired, going to school, or disabled) * 64.8 percent of working-age poor ARE CURRENTLY ELIGIBLE to work * 62.6 percent of eligible workers are working * 44.3 percent of eligible workers are working full-time * 37.4 percent of working age poor eligible for employment are not working (this includes 3.3 million unemployed poor people currently seeking a employment)
  - wfo 11y ago
    edit -- in light of iak8god's post below, deleting this since while accurate it doesn't particularly contribute to the discussion in a positive way. Instead I'll summarize in a slightly more polite way by saying this: every discussion I have seen between these two viewpoints -- the one who blames the poor for being poor and the other supporting the notion that there's more going on than individual personal failings -- one of these two interlocutors provides data and evidence and the other provides only anecdotes, and the roles are NEVER switched.
    - iak8god 11y ago
      Just trying to be polite and open-minded. I have met a lot of well-intentioned folks who are blind to the roles of chance and circumstance in their own lives because they correctly perceive that they've had to work very hard to get where they are. And though I don't agree, I can at least understand the appeal in just assuming that anyone who's less successful is just not trying hard enough.
  - Artistry121 11y ago
    This supports exactly what yf just said. Only 64.8*62.6 = ~40% of the poor are working at all. And only 29% have full time work. EDIT: And in comparison with other cultures and times throughout history being weak and out of shape has never been more in fashion than in America. There are entire stores dedicated to fashion for obese men and women and songs specifically designed to appeal to their sense of worth.
- JamesBarney 11y ago
  You seem to be making the point that differences in health outcomes between the poor and wealthy are due to culture factors. That they lack a "can do attitude" which keeps them from being able to take care of themselves and live a healthy lifestyle. If the "can do attitude" could be instilled into poor people then their health outcomes would improve substantially. It seems that the evidence you have provided is 1. Some poor people have free time 2. Given free time people can improve their health outcomes. 3. Medicaid did not improve health outcomes substantially in 2 years. It seems to me that while these are all true. They do not provide a good deal of evidence for you working model. Many things could lead to these problems. 1. Poor lack "can do attitude" which affects both job prospects and health.(YF theory of health inequality) 2. Being poor is stressful and cognitively demanding. This reduces the poor's ability to make healthy long term choices.(There is some evidence for this) 3. People who have problems with executive function(ADHD) tend to become both poor, and make unhealthy choices.( I would imagine this is true to some degree) 4. When a person becomes ill they have a much greater likelihood of being poor.(I imagine this is also true to some degree) I don't think the fact the first three are true has any influence on how much of the health inequality is explained by your theory vs other possibilities.
akshatpradhan 11y ago
>Working minimum wage jobs is often repetitive, soul-crushing, and/or physically demanding. By the time you leave work, you might want to buy finished products (e.g. fast food) instead of spending time shopping for and cooking healthy food. This. People just can't seem to understand how much cognitive stress that puts on a person. Its so easy to be diligent when you're not under so much cognitive stress.

yummyfajitas 11y ago

If the job is physically demanding, you should be getting plenty of exercise. When I was tearing down houses, I definitely didn't need an additional workout [1]. Cook a healthy meal - not particularly physically taxing - and you should be good! Of course, this theory makes the (incorrect) assumption that poor folks are working. Most are not, and very few of the remainder work full time. I think part of the problem might be our modern culture of victimhood; it's become socially acceptable to make excuses for being fat, weak, unhealthy and lazy, so why bother trying to change it? [1] I'd amend this a bit; I didn't need an additional workout to maintain a base level of fitness. Specific goals - quad/ham separation, 6 pack, surviving 5 rounds in the ring - do of course require additional training.

czep 11y ago
> Of course, this theory makes the (incorrect) assumption that poor folks are working. Most poor are working. Not sure what your point was, but don't try to pull the "their poor because they're lazy" argument.
- Artistry121 11y ago
  Reposting of another comment on this thread. YF never mentioned the reasons they didn't work - just that the fact they were working cannot be linked to their health. ~%40 of the poor work and ~%28 work full time according to the below article. > Of course, this theory makes the (incorrect) assumption that poor folks are working. Most are not, and very few of the remainder work full time. Would you mind supporting this factual claim with evidence? Here's the most detailed examination of this I could quickly find http://www.epi.org/publication/poor-people-work-a-majority-o.. http://www.epi.org/publication/poor-people-work-a-majority-o.... * 35.2 percent of the poor (18 - 64) are NOT ELIGIBLE to work (retired, going to school, or disabled) * 64.8 percent of working-age poor ARE CURRENTLY ELIGIBLE to work * 62.6 percent of eligible workers are working * 44.3 percent of eligible workers are working full-time * 37.4 percent of working age poor eligible for employment are not working (this includes 3.3 million unemployed poor people currently seeking a employment)
iak8god 11y ago
> Of course, this theory makes the (incorrect) assumption that poor folks are working. Most are not, and very few of the remainder work full time. Would you mind supporting this factual claim with evidence? Here's the most detailed examination of this I could quickly find http://www.epi.org/publication/poor-people-work-a-majority-of-poor-people-who-can-work-do/ http://www.epi.org/publication/poor-people-work-a-majority-o... * 35.2 percent of the poor (18 - 64) are NOT ELIGIBLE to work (retired, going to school, or disabled) * 64.8 percent of working-age poor ARE CURRENTLY ELIGIBLE to work * 62.6 percent of eligible workers are working * 44.3 percent of eligible workers are working full-time * 37.4 percent of working age poor eligible for employment are not working (this includes 3.3 million unemployed poor people currently seeking a employment)
- wfo 11y ago
  edit -- in light of iak8god's post below, deleting this since while accurate it doesn't particularly contribute to the discussion in a positive way. Instead I'll summarize in a slightly more polite way by saying this: every discussion I have seen between these two viewpoints -- the one who blames the poor for being poor and the other supporting the notion that there's more going on than individual personal failings -- one of these two interlocutors provides data and evidence and the other provides only anecdotes, and the roles are NEVER switched.
  - iak8god 11y ago
    Just trying to be polite and open-minded. I have met a lot of well-intentioned folks who are blind to the roles of chance and circumstance in their own lives because they correctly perceive that they've had to work very hard to get where they are. And though I don't agree, I can at least understand the appeal in just assuming that anyone who's less successful is just not trying hard enough.
- Artistry121 11y ago
  This supports exactly what yf just said. Only 64.8*62.6 = ~40% of the poor are working at all. And only 29% have full time work. EDIT: And in comparison with other cultures and times throughout history being weak and out of shape has never been more in fashion than in America. There are entire stores dedicated to fashion for obese men and women and songs specifically designed to appeal to their sense of worth.
JamesBarney 11y ago
You seem to be making the point that differences in health outcomes between the poor and wealthy are due to culture factors. That they lack a "can do attitude" which keeps them from being able to take care of themselves and live a healthy lifestyle. If the "can do attitude" could be instilled into poor people then their health outcomes would improve substantially. It seems that the evidence you have provided is 1. Some poor people have free time 2. Given free time people can improve their health outcomes. 3. Medicaid did not improve health outcomes substantially in 2 years. It seems to me that while these are all true. They do not provide a good deal of evidence for you working model. Many things could lead to these problems. 1. Poor lack "can do attitude" which affects both job prospects and health.(YF theory of health inequality) 2. Being poor is stressful and cognitively demanding. This reduces the poor's ability to make healthy long term choices.(There is some evidence for this) 3. People who have problems with executive function(ADHD) tend to become both poor, and make unhealthy choices.( I would imagine this is true to some degree) 4. When a person becomes ill they have a much greater likelihood of being poor.(I imagine this is also true to some degree) I don't think the fact the first three are true has any influence on how much of the health inequality is explained by your theory vs other possibilities.

akshatpradhan 11y ago

>Working minimum wage jobs is often repetitive, soul-crushing, and/or physically demanding. By the time you leave work, you might want to buy finished products (e.g. fast food) instead of spending time shopping for and cooking healthy food. This. People just can't seem to understand how much cognitive stress that puts on a person. Its so easy to be diligent when you're not under so much cognitive stress.