4 ms·
There's a lot more to being poor than not having money. Being poor and healthy is not the same as being poor and unhealthy, as the most obvious example. Being p
by notacoward 8y ago
There's a lot more to being poor than not having money. Being poor and healthy is not the same as being poor and unhealthy, as the most obvious example. Being poor but healthy, smart and/or educated, non-addicted, connected to family and friends who will keep you off that last step to oblivion is different than being poor and none of those things. Poor nutrition and sleep and being cold all the time can really do a number on your brain. So can the stress of not knowing where your - or your children's - next meal is coming from. The isolation and despair and distrust that come with spending any time at all in that condition can stay with you for years.
So yeah, poor people follow a very different decision process, which might not seem rational to people who have only ever been poor in the low-bank-balance sense (if that). Don't tell someone who's already deprived to deprive themselves further. Those small indulgences might be the only thing keeping people from giving up entirely. To the extent that the truly poor need advice from the less poor at all, it's advice on how to secure the most basic of needs in the short to medium term. Only then, only when the most severe psychological effects of being poor have been dealt with, is it rational to expect that people will start looking further up Maslow's pyramid to things like longer-term financial security.
- username90 8y agoThe problem is that these people are addicted to things they don't need which makes them unable to fulfill their actual needs. It is impossible to help people who easily gives in to their addictions like this, so the first tip should always be to get off their addictions. Of course they don't want to do that so they don't listen, but that doesn't make the tip bad.
- zozbot123 8y ago> Those small indulgences might be the only thing keeping people from giving up entirely. I might be sympathetic to that point of view... but then what about the 'indulgence' of keeping a rainy-day fund? You know, the one indulgence that OP fails to acknowledge in any way and even disparages, despite the fact that indulging in this gets rid of a major source of stress in a poor person's life? This is why you should save, even at strenuous cost. Because when you save, you do feel better.