7 ms·

A journey through a land of extreme poverty: welcome to America

72 points by SQL2219 9y ago

SQL2219 9y ago
San Francisco, California, 6 December https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/dec/15/america-extreme-poverty-un-special-rapporteur#img-5 https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/dec/15/america-extr...
Feniks 9y ago
Interesting but hypocritical coming from the UK. Ultimately its a decision by society: safety net or not? I consider homelessness a personal and national insult and would never stand for it. I also pay 21% VAT on everything I buy.
- ape4 9y ago
  There's no hypocrisy. The Guardian newspaper doesn't run the UK.
  - richardknop 9y ago
    It’s a UK newspaper though wouldn’t you agree?
    - jdietrich 9y ago
      A UK newspaper that has been relentlessly critical of the Conservative government from the minute they took office. A UK newspaper that has run stories about the effects of austerity on an almost daily basis since 2008. A UK newspaper that's currently running a charity telethon to raise funds for homelessness charities. There's no hypocrisy here.
      - richardknop 9y ago
        A UK newspaper which has been supportive of Blairite neo-liberal establishment, including but not limited to foreign adventurism such as invasion of Iraq based on rock solid evidence that there were weapons of mass destruction and we were in danger of mushroom clouds over Europe and US?
      - rbanffy 9y ago
        I think missing the point it's a UN report is rather tragic. This is not a criticism of conservatism. It's a statement of facts.
  - rbanffy 9y ago
    > The Guardian newspaper doesn't run the UK. Which is kind of sad. They'd do a much better job than the tories.
- cgmg 9y ago
  > hypocritical coming from the UK I don't understand what you're saying. Can you clarify?
umeshunni 9y ago
>> California made a suitable starting point for the UN visit. It epitomizes both the vast wealth generated in the tech boom for the 0.001%, and the resulting surge in housing costs that has sent homelessness soaring. Or you know, the decades or under-investing in housing and public services that has sent homelessness soaring.
junkscience2017 9y ago
the US leads in inequality go see Aboriginal communities in Canada and Australia, the story is similar including the substance abuse. and nations which have rejected wealth polarization like Venezuela are no better off. indeed they simply have eliminated prosperity instead of poverty Californians like to sneer from some moral high ground as if this is strictly a facet of a right wing society they've tried to "correct", despite the West Coast turning into a Hunger Games world poverty will be part of the human condition forever. we are not bees, we are apes, it simply isn't in our code to act as a colony
doublerebel 9y ago
The poverty in the cities is easy to see. But these people have services, unlike the Colonias: > The majority of these communities have no water infrastructures and lack wastewater or sewage services [3][5] Where sewer systems do exist there are no treatment plants in the area, and untreated wastewater is dumped into arroyos and creeks that flow into the Rio Grande or the Gulf of Mexico. > More than 2000 colonias are identified within the U.S.... https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonia_(United_States) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonia_(United_States) Even the political articles about 'the wall' refuse to acknowledge this because it is so horrifying. The problem we (Americans) have allowed is far deeper than most anyone realizes.
- rtx 9y ago
  I wonder is it solvable without authoritarianism.
d_burfoot 9y ago
Liberals and conservatives can take a look at the same data about homelessness and poverty in the US and come to radically different policy conclusions. The liberals say: look at this terrible poverty! We need to raise taxes and provide more social services! The conservatives say: look at this terrible poverty, that still exists in spite of the fact that we spend VAST TRILLIONS of dollars on social services! Apparently the services have nearly zero benefit, so we might as well cut them and lower taxes. If you think the conservative position is obviously wrong, study Hong Kong and Singapore. They have radically lower taxes than the US (14% and 17% of GDP vs 37% in the US), and yet exceed the US in every dimension of social welfare: better education, health, and infrastructure; lower crime, drug use, poverty and homelessness.
- nickthemagicman 9y ago
  So you're saying basic income is a better solution? Just cut the government out of it and give people the money? I completely agree.
- mcphage 9y ago
  > If you think the conservative position is obviously wrong, study Hong Kong and Singapore. Or study the US, where the states with the highest taxes have the lowest poverty levels, and where the states with lowest taxes have the highest levels of poverty.
  - indubitable 9y ago
    What is your reason for saying this? That was quite an interesting comment, but after working to verify it - it seems to be simply false? States by tax level ##: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/what-us-states-have-the-highest-and-lowest-taxes/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/what-us-states-have-the-highest... States by poverty rate: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_poverty_rate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_poverty... --- Wyoming - lowest tax rate, 3rd lowest poverty rate Alaska - 2nd lowest tax rate, 8th lowest poverty rate Nevada - 3rd lowest tax rate, 29th lowest poverty rate South Dakota - 4th lowest tax rate, 23rd lowest poverty rate Florida - 5th lowest tax rate, 37th lowest poverty rate - New York - highest tax rate, 32nd lowest poverty rate California - 2nd highest tax rate, 35th lowest poverty rate Nebraska - 3rd highest tax rate, 15th lowest poverty rate Connecticut - 4th highest tax rate, 4th lowest poverty rate Illinois - 5th highest tax rate, 24th lowest poverty rate --- I'm not going to map out all 50 states, but at least for the top and bottom there seems to be no correlation at all. The low tax nations average to the 20th lowest poverty rate. The high tax states average out to the 22nd lowest poverty rate. To be clear, that means the high tax states suffer more poverty - at least when just considering the top 5 for each. --- ## = The reason I used that article instead of Wiki's list of states by tax level ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_tax_levels_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_tax_levels_in_the_United... ) is that the Wiki page just offers data on state tax income, not about the actual rates.
indubitable 9y ago
I find something quite difficult to answer. Imagine you have all the political power, and all the money in the world. You are tasked with creating as close to a utopia as you can. Now let's consider a group. Think of those on the top of our society who have a seemingly insatiable drive towards indulgence of drug, drink, and other such harmful vices. In spite of access to the the world's best rehabilitation centers, counseling, and often wide social networks - we not infrequently see these people indulge themselves literally to death. On the bottom of society we also have the same sorts. The only difference is that in this case they tend to be unable to sustain their habit and end up on the streets instead of in a coffin. How do deal with this problem? I suppose the 'safe' answer is to try to pretend that these people might not exist if we had an otherwise 'better' world, but I think that's improbable. This affliction is something that affects people of all classes in all societies, and has since the advent of civilization. And the reason I focused on the top of society first is that I think they're clear evidence that in some cases you simply cannot counsel or rehab the problem away. And it is those specific cases that a humane solution seems almost impossible to find.
- lostlogin 9y ago
  If some are too far gone to save, how do you explain the fact that US poverty rates differ to other countries and between states? And if some can’t be saved, does that mean you don’t try to help anyone? The toxic open sewers and resurgent third world (what ever that term means) diseases seem like something even those at the top of society wouldn’t want in their country. Reduction in poverty has been achieved elsewhere and blaming the victim doesn’t really stand up to scrutiny.
  - indubitable 9y ago
    That is quite the bit of straw manning! I'm simply asking how anybody would propose to solve the problem even given the unreasonably simple scenario of absolute power and no economic considerations. Even in this 'toy scenario', nothing really seems particularly viable. One major problem you'll have with comparing other nations (or even states) is genetic issues. The exact heritability of addiction is not clear, but the fact that it has a heritability that ranges from significant to extremely significant [1] is clear. As always, not all people are the same. [1] - http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1360-0443.2008.02213.x/abstract http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1360-0443.2008....
gwright 9y ago
From the article: > His fact-finding mission into the richest nation the world has ever known has led him to investigate the tragedy at its core: the 41 million people who officially live in poverty. Sounds bad, but that number "officially" leaves out almost all assistance provided by the government to low-income beneficiaries such as food stamps, housing etc. It is a measure of cash income poverty and not a measure of income + government benefits. It is a misleading metric because you can effectively feed, house, and clothe all those with "poverty" level income and you won't change that poverty statistic at all. There is plenty of room for discussion on improved social welfare programs but it might be prudent to actually acknowledge the existing benefits before figuring out what to do next.
- locopati 9y ago
  The existing benefits that come with so many strings and restrictions and limitations and political manipulations that they cannot be reliably counted upon?
- mempko 9y ago
  to get those welfare benefits, you have to go through bureaucratic hell. Many don't do it because you have to give up some freedom to get those benefits.
  - gwright 9y ago
    Fair point, but also a different point. I also suspect it is a tiny number of people out of the "41 million". Even with a low-friction delivery of government services some people will opt-out on principle. I have several acquaintances that live in poverty if you only count cash income but they are living on their own terms and certainly wouldn't describe themselves as "living in poverty".
paulus_magnus2 9y ago
Back in the day you'd chop down some trees, build yourself a shelter on none's land and live of fishing + farming + hunting. It gets harder (impossible?) to live without assets or ability to make money for someone else hired work. Perhaps if they pooled their efforts?
- lostlogin 9y ago
  Framing it as our problem rather than their problem would help more in my opinion.

72 points by SQL2219 9y ago

San Francisco, California, 6 December https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/dec/15/america-extreme-poverty-un-special-rapporteur#img-5 https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/dec/15/america-extr...

Feniks 9y ago

Interesting but hypocritical coming from the UK. Ultimately its a decision by society: safety net or not? I consider homelessness a personal and national insult and would never stand for it. I also pay 21% VAT on everything I buy.

ape4 9y ago
There's no hypocrisy. The Guardian newspaper doesn't run the UK.
- richardknop 9y ago
  It’s a UK newspaper though wouldn’t you agree?
  - jdietrich 9y ago
    A UK newspaper that has been relentlessly critical of the Conservative government from the minute they took office. A UK newspaper that has run stories about the effects of austerity on an almost daily basis since 2008. A UK newspaper that's currently running a charity telethon to raise funds for homelessness charities. There's no hypocrisy here.
    - richardknop 9y ago
      A UK newspaper which has been supportive of Blairite neo-liberal establishment, including but not limited to foreign adventurism such as invasion of Iraq based on rock solid evidence that there were weapons of mass destruction and we were in danger of mushroom clouds over Europe and US?
    - rbanffy 9y ago
      I think missing the point it's a UN report is rather tragic. This is not a criticism of conservatism. It's a statement of facts.
- rbanffy 9y ago
  > The Guardian newspaper doesn't run the UK. Which is kind of sad. They'd do a much better job than the tories.
cgmg 9y ago
> hypocritical coming from the UK I don't understand what you're saying. Can you clarify?

umeshunni 9y ago

>> California made a suitable starting point for the UN visit. It epitomizes both the vast wealth generated in the tech boom for the 0.001%, and the resulting surge in housing costs that has sent homelessness soaring. Or you know, the decades or under-investing in housing and public services that has sent homelessness soaring.

junkscience2017 9y ago

the US leads in inequality go see Aboriginal communities in Canada and Australia, the story is similar including the substance abuse. and nations which have rejected wealth polarization like Venezuela are no better off. indeed they simply have eliminated prosperity instead of poverty Californians like to sneer from some moral high ground as if this is strictly a facet of a right wing society they've tried to "correct", despite the West Coast turning into a Hunger Games world poverty will be part of the human condition forever. we are not bees, we are apes, it simply isn't in our code to act as a colony

doublerebel 9y ago

The poverty in the cities is easy to see. But these people have services, unlike the Colonias: > The majority of these communities have no water infrastructures and lack wastewater or sewage services [3][5] Where sewer systems do exist there are no treatment plants in the area, and untreated wastewater is dumped into arroyos and creeks that flow into the Rio Grande or the Gulf of Mexico. > More than 2000 colonias are identified within the U.S.... https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonia_(United_States) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonia_(United_States) Even the political articles about 'the wall' refuse to acknowledge this because it is so horrifying. The problem we (Americans) have allowed is far deeper than most anyone realizes.

rtx 9y ago
I wonder is it solvable without authoritarianism.

d_burfoot 9y ago

Liberals and conservatives can take a look at the same data about homelessness and poverty in the US and come to radically different policy conclusions. The liberals say: look at this terrible poverty! We need to raise taxes and provide more social services! The conservatives say: look at this terrible poverty, that still exists in spite of the fact that we spend VAST TRILLIONS of dollars on social services! Apparently the services have nearly zero benefit, so we might as well cut them and lower taxes. If you think the conservative position is obviously wrong, study Hong Kong and Singapore. They have radically lower taxes than the US (14% and 17% of GDP vs 37% in the US), and yet exceed the US in every dimension of social welfare: better education, health, and infrastructure; lower crime, drug use, poverty and homelessness.

nickthemagicman 9y ago
So you're saying basic income is a better solution? Just cut the government out of it and give people the money? I completely agree.
mcphage 9y ago
> If you think the conservative position is obviously wrong, study Hong Kong and Singapore. Or study the US, where the states with the highest taxes have the lowest poverty levels, and where the states with lowest taxes have the highest levels of poverty.
- indubitable 9y ago
  What is your reason for saying this? That was quite an interesting comment, but after working to verify it - it seems to be simply false? States by tax level ##: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/what-us-states-have-the-highest-and-lowest-taxes/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/what-us-states-have-the-highest... States by poverty rate: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_poverty_rate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_poverty... --- Wyoming - lowest tax rate, 3rd lowest poverty rate Alaska - 2nd lowest tax rate, 8th lowest poverty rate Nevada - 3rd lowest tax rate, 29th lowest poverty rate South Dakota - 4th lowest tax rate, 23rd lowest poverty rate Florida - 5th lowest tax rate, 37th lowest poverty rate - New York - highest tax rate, 32nd lowest poverty rate California - 2nd highest tax rate, 35th lowest poverty rate Nebraska - 3rd highest tax rate, 15th lowest poverty rate Connecticut - 4th highest tax rate, 4th lowest poverty rate Illinois - 5th highest tax rate, 24th lowest poverty rate --- I'm not going to map out all 50 states, but at least for the top and bottom there seems to be no correlation at all. The low tax nations average to the 20th lowest poverty rate. The high tax states average out to the 22nd lowest poverty rate. To be clear, that means the high tax states suffer more poverty - at least when just considering the top 5 for each. --- ## = The reason I used that article instead of Wiki's list of states by tax level ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_tax_levels_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_tax_levels_in_the_United... ) is that the Wiki page just offers data on state tax income, not about the actual rates.

indubitable 9y ago

I find something quite difficult to answer. Imagine you have all the political power, and all the money in the world. You are tasked with creating as close to a utopia as you can. Now let's consider a group. Think of those on the top of our society who have a seemingly insatiable drive towards indulgence of drug, drink, and other such harmful vices. In spite of access to the the world's best rehabilitation centers, counseling, and often wide social networks - we not infrequently see these people indulge themselves literally to death. On the bottom of society we also have the same sorts. The only difference is that in this case they tend to be unable to sustain their habit and end up on the streets instead of in a coffin. How do deal with this problem? I suppose the 'safe' answer is to try to pretend that these people might not exist if we had an otherwise 'better' world, but I think that's improbable. This affliction is something that affects people of all classes in all societies, and has since the advent of civilization. And the reason I focused on the top of society first is that I think they're clear evidence that in some cases you simply cannot counsel or rehab the problem away. And it is those specific cases that a humane solution seems almost impossible to find.

lostlogin 9y ago
If some are too far gone to save, how do you explain the fact that US poverty rates differ to other countries and between states? And if some can’t be saved, does that mean you don’t try to help anyone? The toxic open sewers and resurgent third world (what ever that term means) diseases seem like something even those at the top of society wouldn’t want in their country. Reduction in poverty has been achieved elsewhere and blaming the victim doesn’t really stand up to scrutiny.
- indubitable 9y ago
  That is quite the bit of straw manning! I'm simply asking how anybody would propose to solve the problem even given the unreasonably simple scenario of absolute power and no economic considerations. Even in this 'toy scenario', nothing really seems particularly viable. One major problem you'll have with comparing other nations (or even states) is genetic issues. The exact heritability of addiction is not clear, but the fact that it has a heritability that ranges from significant to extremely significant [1] is clear. As always, not all people are the same. [1] - http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1360-0443.2008.02213.x/abstract http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1360-0443.2008....

gwright 9y ago

From the article: > His fact-finding mission into the richest nation the world has ever known has led him to investigate the tragedy at its core: the 41 million people who officially live in poverty. Sounds bad, but that number "officially" leaves out almost all assistance provided by the government to low-income beneficiaries such as food stamps, housing etc. It is a measure of cash income poverty and not a measure of income + government benefits. It is a misleading metric because you can effectively feed, house, and clothe all those with "poverty" level income and you won't change that poverty statistic at all. There is plenty of room for discussion on improved social welfare programs but it might be prudent to actually acknowledge the existing benefits before figuring out what to do next.

locopati 9y ago
The existing benefits that come with so many strings and restrictions and limitations and political manipulations that they cannot be reliably counted upon?
mempko 9y ago
to get those welfare benefits, you have to go through bureaucratic hell. Many don't do it because you have to give up some freedom to get those benefits.
- gwright 9y ago
  Fair point, but also a different point. I also suspect it is a tiny number of people out of the "41 million". Even with a low-friction delivery of government services some people will opt-out on principle. I have several acquaintances that live in poverty if you only count cash income but they are living on their own terms and certainly wouldn't describe themselves as "living in poverty".

paulus_magnus2 9y ago

Back in the day you'd chop down some trees, build yourself a shelter on none's land and live of fishing + farming + hunting. It gets harder (impossible?) to live without assets or ability to make money for someone else hired work. Perhaps if they pooled their efforts?

lostlogin 9y ago
Framing it as our problem rather than their problem would help more in my opinion.