2 ms·

If I was in poverty and I wanted to get out of it, I'd go get 2 jobs and make a lot of sacrifices. It wouldn't be pretty, it wouldn't be fair, it wouldn't be fu

If I was in poverty and I wanted to get out of it, I'd go get 2 jobs and make a lot of sacrifices. It wouldn't be pretty, it wouldn't be fair, it wouldn't be fun. But it's not impossible. Not everybody gets to be healthy, naturally beautiful, natively speak English, work 40 hours a week with full benefits, and get paid thousands/tens of thousands/millions of dollars a month. I'm sorry that people dealt the worst card in life in terms of net worth (those in poverty) are staring up at a proverbial mountain to climb, but I don't really see another solution other than work + sacrifice. Wealth and opportunity aren't going to fall from the sky for them. > "if I/$self_made_person_of_the_week got out of poverty, why can't you?" are both pointless questions. Are they though? There's a recipe to get out of poverty. Start exchanging as much of your time/mental health as you can for more money, and don't inflate your lifestyle. Why can't people in poverty be bothered to have to sacrifice more than those that are wealthy? I have no idea. Why do 18 year old supermodels get to date and live off of millionaires while I have to work for a living? Life isn't fair.

zbentley 7y ago
> If I was in poverty and I wanted to get out of it, I'd go get 2 jobs and make a lot of sacrifices. It wouldn't be pretty, it wouldn't be fair, it wouldn't be fun. But it's not impossible. Overwhelmingly that seems not to be occurring. It either does not work as well as you think it does or is not undertaken. People, as I said, do not want to suffer economic hardships. This isn't an appeal to fairness or egalitarianism, but to the reality that intense suffering is endured by the poor, and that it can be alleviated from the outside regardless of whether or not you think they are responsible for their own suffering. This is an obvious thing to want if you don't like others suffering and acknowledge that most people, no matter how much they want to, do not leave poverty on their own. > Why can't people in poverty be bothered to have to sacrifice more than those that are wealthy? That's . . . incredibly insensitive. I understand that ad-hominems are frowned upon here, but that statement is both callous and makes some seriously flawed assumptions about who is sacrificing/suffering, and how much. It also reflects a very "fuck you, I've got mine" mentality, which is not conducive to the formation of functional, compassionate, good-to-inhabit communities at any scale.
- watwut 7y ago
  One reason for why it does not happen is that two full time jobs are possible only if st least one of them allows you slacking. The issue is not just lack of fun, but being too tired to function properly. And also when you have no outside of job duties.
  - barry-cotter 7y ago
    Jobs that don’t allow slacking pay well because otherwise they have comically high turnover. I worked night shift in one service station and a day shift in another one for over six months and I’ve worker bar with a day job in a supermarket. Working 60 hours a week is easily within reach for any able bodied person under 40, even on a construction site. Over 60 hours or once your body starts to go you’ll be more restricted but once you have a few years in any job you can do the average work that you do on autopilot basically in your sleep.
_ah 7y ago
This argument is incredibly uniformed and privileged. You are assuming that you start from zero... healthy body, no obligations, mental stamina, stable living situation, no unexpected problems. The reality is far worse. It's much more likely that you'd be in debt from past mistakes, which drains your monthly income and removes access to emergency credit. You're probably taking lower quality jobs, which means bad hours and a longer commute. This directly leads to less sleep and lower quality food, affecting your health and your ability to work. You are stressed about money all the time, affecting your willpower and measurably lowering your base IQ. You are probably responsible for other people (children, parents) and unlike to have a stable partner helping you. WHEN (not if) something goes wrong in your life like a car repair, illness, etc your fragile plan is shattered. Your only option is to go deeper into debt, probably at very high interest. Depending on the circumstance you may end up losing your job(s). Yes, everyone should work hard. Some do escape, and everyone should try! No one is "owed" anything. However, the fact that a person remains trapped in poverty does not mean that they are at fault. "Pick yourself up by your own bootstraps" remains almost completely disconnected from reality.

zbentley 7y ago

> If I was in poverty and I wanted to get out of it, I'd go get 2 jobs and make a lot of sacrifices. It wouldn't be pretty, it wouldn't be fair, it wouldn't be fun. But it's not impossible. Overwhelmingly that seems not to be occurring. It either does not work as well as you think it does or is not undertaken. People, as I said, do not want to suffer economic hardships. This isn't an appeal to fairness or egalitarianism, but to the reality that intense suffering is endured by the poor, and that it can be alleviated from the outside regardless of whether or not you think they are responsible for their own suffering. This is an obvious thing to want if you don't like others suffering and acknowledge that most people, no matter how much they want to, do not leave poverty on their own. > Why can't people in poverty be bothered to have to sacrifice more than those that are wealthy? That's . . . incredibly insensitive. I understand that ad-hominems are frowned upon here, but that statement is both callous and makes some seriously flawed assumptions about who is sacrificing/suffering, and how much. It also reflects a very "fuck you, I've got mine" mentality, which is not conducive to the formation of functional, compassionate, good-to-inhabit communities at any scale.

watwut 7y ago
One reason for why it does not happen is that two full time jobs are possible only if st least one of them allows you slacking. The issue is not just lack of fun, but being too tired to function properly. And also when you have no outside of job duties.
- barry-cotter 7y ago
  Jobs that don’t allow slacking pay well because otherwise they have comically high turnover. I worked night shift in one service station and a day shift in another one for over six months and I’ve worker bar with a day job in a supermarket. Working 60 hours a week is easily within reach for any able bodied person under 40, even on a construction site. Over 60 hours or once your body starts to go you’ll be more restricted but once you have a few years in any job you can do the average work that you do on autopilot basically in your sleep.

_ah 7y ago

This argument is incredibly uniformed and privileged. You are assuming that you start from zero... healthy body, no obligations, mental stamina, stable living situation, no unexpected problems. The reality is far worse. It's much more likely that you'd be in debt from past mistakes, which drains your monthly income and removes access to emergency credit. You're probably taking lower quality jobs, which means bad hours and a longer commute. This directly leads to less sleep and lower quality food, affecting your health and your ability to work. You are stressed about money all the time, affecting your willpower and measurably lowering your base IQ. You are probably responsible for other people (children, parents) and unlike to have a stable partner helping you. WHEN (not if) something goes wrong in your life like a car repair, illness, etc your fragile plan is shattered. Your only option is to go deeper into debt, probably at very high interest. Depending on the circumstance you may end up losing your job(s). Yes, everyone should work hard. Some do escape, and everyone should try! No one is "owed" anything. However, the fact that a person remains trapped in poverty does not mean that they are at fault. "Pick yourself up by your own bootstraps" remains almost completely disconnected from reality.