6 ms·

You can't easily fix a broken culture from the outside. All people need to be treated equally, above all else, including race, gender, beliefs, and economic sta

by zo1 10y ago

You can't easily fix a broken culture from the outside. All people need to be treated equally, above all else, including race, gender, beliefs, and economic status (yes). I simply think it is unfair to nullify and demean the good work that hard-working individuals have done. By claiming that their position in life is a product of "privilege" or their parent's privilege, and simply giving those that did not do said hard work a free pass and cash. Those are the beliefs, uncomfortable or not, and as is often the case with this type of topic, they are the products of a fundamentally different view of the world. I am not here to fix cosmic injustices using further injustice, nor do I want my tax money going towards it either.

rmxt 10y ago
Putting your ideological motivations aside, how do programs promoting home computer ownership or basic literacy (with the ultimate aim of getting people up to par in literacy, before encouraging development in the sciences) in impoverished areas "nullify and demean the good work that hard-working individuals have done"? There's no logical connection there, nor any sort of free pass being offered. Furthermore, the implication that people in poverty are any less "hard-working" than those that have achieved financial success/accessibility to the sciences seems like a claim that needs some citations. Quick Google searches suggest that escaping poverty with children would actually require working more than 40-hours a week. Seems like a catch-22 for trying to achieve financial, familial and educational success. [1] [1] http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2015/05/06/u-s-minimum-wage-employees-must-work-50-hours-a-week-to-escape-poverty-oecd-says/ http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2015/05/06/u-s-minimum-wage-e...
- yummyfajitas 10y ago
  Furthermore, the implication that people in poverty are any less "hard-working" than those that have achieved financial success/accessibility to the sciences seems like a claim that needs some citations 60% of poor adults (age 18-64) don't work at all. In contrast, 81% of non-poor adults do. 58% of non-poor adults worked full time year round, whereas only 11% of poor adults did. http://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2015/demo/p60-252.pdf http://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publication... Table 3 on page 21. Why is this a remotely controversial claim, as opposed to simply standard knowledge that all educated people know? Would you also require a citation that proves Trump is a Republican, or that rich people don't commit much violent crime?
  - sidlls 10y ago
    African-America men are incarcerated at a much higher rate than white men. Does that mean black men are more likely than white men to commit crimes? The answer is no, because there are confounding issues I left out. This should sound familiar, you just did it yourself.
    - yummyfajitas 10y ago
      Yes, they probably do. Crime victimization surveys (e.g. the NCVS) strongly suggest that blacks do, in fact, commit a lot more violent crimes than other groups. Here's a great blog post that reviews the academic literature: http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/11/25/race-and-justice-much-more-than-you-wanted-to-know/ http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/11/25/race-and-justice-much-m... Since you seem to believe there is some confounding factor that causes the census to incorrectly count the number of poor people who work, feel free to expand on it.
  - dragonwriter 10y ago
    > > Furthermore, the implication that people in poverty are any less "hard-working" than those that have achieved financial success/accessibility to the sciences seems like a claim that needs some citations > 60% of poor adults (age 18-64) don't work at all. In contrast, 81% of non-poor adults do. I'm having trouble believing that it is possible to make an argument that % of people in a group who are employed is a good representation of the degree to which people in the group are hardworkers seriously, no matter what the group in question is. But when its poor vs. non-poor -- that is, when the groups are divided up by an attribute which is fairly strongly influenced by whether or not you have the income derived from a job -- its even harder to believe. > Why is this a remotely controversial claim, as opposed to simply standard knowledge that all educated people know? That poor people are less likely to be employed is not a controversial claim, nor was it the claim at issue. That they are less "hard-working" was the claim at issue, which is not one which can be resolved by looking at the degree to which they are employed.
    - yummyfajitas 10y ago
      Here is data suggesting most poor people aren't looking for work - only 35% of poor adults were in the labor force: http://www.bls.gov/opub/reports/working-poor/archive/a-profile-of-the-working-poor-2013.pdf http://www.bls.gov/opub/reports/working-poor/archive/a-profi... (To get that number, I took 10.5M in labor force / (45.3M poor people - 16M poor children).) So yes, I think it's fair to characterize a group of people who don't work, and aren't even looking for work, as "less hard working" than a group that disproportionately is working. What does "hard working" mean to you? And why do you believe poor people are comparably hard working to the non-poor?
r00fus 10y ago
> I simply think it is unfair to nullify and demean the good work that hard-working individuals have done. By claiming that their position in life is a product of "privilege" or their parent's privilege, and simply giving those that did not do said hard work a free pass and cash. And here it is - you think those who didn't have the same benefits as you and me (presumably) are takers who want "a free pass" and "cash". What's missing in your diatribe is the fact that what everyone wants is opportunity or even a chance of opportunity. Not a handout - most people just want a fair break.

by zo1 10y ago

rmxt 10y ago

Putting your ideological motivations aside, how do programs promoting home computer ownership or basic literacy (with the ultimate aim of getting people up to par in literacy, before encouraging development in the sciences) in impoverished areas "nullify and demean the good work that hard-working individuals have done"? There's no logical connection there, nor any sort of free pass being offered. Furthermore, the implication that people in poverty are any less "hard-working" than those that have achieved financial success/accessibility to the sciences seems like a claim that needs some citations. Quick Google searches suggest that escaping poverty with children would actually require working more than 40-hours a week. Seems like a catch-22 for trying to achieve financial, familial and educational success. [1] [1] http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2015/05/06/u-s-minimum-wage-employees-must-work-50-hours-a-week-to-escape-poverty-oecd-says/ http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2015/05/06/u-s-minimum-wage-e...

yummyfajitas 10y ago
Furthermore, the implication that people in poverty are any less "hard-working" than those that have achieved financial success/accessibility to the sciences seems like a claim that needs some citations 60% of poor adults (age 18-64) don't work at all. In contrast, 81% of non-poor adults do. 58% of non-poor adults worked full time year round, whereas only 11% of poor adults did. http://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2015/demo/p60-252.pdf http://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publication... Table 3 on page 21. Why is this a remotely controversial claim, as opposed to simply standard knowledge that all educated people know? Would you also require a citation that proves Trump is a Republican, or that rich people don't commit much violent crime?
- sidlls 10y ago
  African-America men are incarcerated at a much higher rate than white men. Does that mean black men are more likely than white men to commit crimes? The answer is no, because there are confounding issues I left out. This should sound familiar, you just did it yourself.
  - yummyfajitas 10y ago
    Yes, they probably do. Crime victimization surveys (e.g. the NCVS) strongly suggest that blacks do, in fact, commit a lot more violent crimes than other groups. Here's a great blog post that reviews the academic literature: http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/11/25/race-and-justice-much-more-than-you-wanted-to-know/ http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/11/25/race-and-justice-much-m... Since you seem to believe there is some confounding factor that causes the census to incorrectly count the number of poor people who work, feel free to expand on it.
- dragonwriter 10y ago
  > > Furthermore, the implication that people in poverty are any less "hard-working" than those that have achieved financial success/accessibility to the sciences seems like a claim that needs some citations > 60% of poor adults (age 18-64) don't work at all. In contrast, 81% of non-poor adults do. I'm having trouble believing that it is possible to make an argument that % of people in a group who are employed is a good representation of the degree to which people in the group are hardworkers seriously, no matter what the group in question is. But when its poor vs. non-poor -- that is, when the groups are divided up by an attribute which is fairly strongly influenced by whether or not you have the income derived from a job -- its even harder to believe. > Why is this a remotely controversial claim, as opposed to simply standard knowledge that all educated people know? That poor people are less likely to be employed is not a controversial claim, nor was it the claim at issue. That they are less "hard-working" was the claim at issue, which is not one which can be resolved by looking at the degree to which they are employed.
  - yummyfajitas 10y ago
    Here is data suggesting most poor people aren't looking for work - only 35% of poor adults were in the labor force: http://www.bls.gov/opub/reports/working-poor/archive/a-profile-of-the-working-poor-2013.pdf http://www.bls.gov/opub/reports/working-poor/archive/a-profi... (To get that number, I took 10.5M in labor force / (45.3M poor people - 16M poor children).) So yes, I think it's fair to characterize a group of people who don't work, and aren't even looking for work, as "less hard working" than a group that disproportionately is working. What does "hard working" mean to you? And why do you believe poor people are comparably hard working to the non-poor?

r00fus 10y ago

> I simply think it is unfair to nullify and demean the good work that hard-working individuals have done. By claiming that their position in life is a product of "privilege" or their parent's privilege, and simply giving those that did not do said hard work a free pass and cash. And here it is - you think those who didn't have the same benefits as you and me (presumably) are takers who want "a free pass" and "cash". What's missing in your diatribe is the fact that what everyone wants is opportunity or even a chance of opportunity. Not a handout - most people just want a fair break.