3 ms·

May I respectfully suggest that there are very different kinds of poverty, and that not all kinds of poverty are due to cultural choices. I came to the conclus

May I respectfully suggest that there are very different kinds of poverty, and that not all kinds of poverty are due to cultural choices. I came to the conclusion many years ago that in America poverty is a contagious mindset, nothing more. You are making very, very broad generalizations and stereotyping an entire socio-economic category of people. My parents grew up in rural Minnesota in absolute poverty. My father didn't use a toilet or shower until he was 17 and moved to a "large" high school where they could shower after gym class. He worked his way through 3 Bachelor's degrees and a Master's degree in Education, and then chose a live of relative poverty to become a minister and work in Central America. I've had to be financially independent since I was 17. I've worked a job to pay my own bills since I was 14. I grew up rarely buying clothes at a store, and wearing hand me downs. None of that was a matter of contagious mindset. I worked in the ghetto in Chicago as an ER and trauma nurse for years, and yes, there are definitely choices that people make that make them continue in poverty, but there are also systemic issues that make escaping poverty in the inner city extremely difficult. In the inner city, it takes a lot more time to take a bus to the grocery store, purchase food and bring it back home and cook it. Groceries are _tons more expensive in large cities. Access to banking is more difficult because of similar reasons, so people use check cashing services, which cost exorbitant amounts. Transportation is much more difficult, because you end up having to take expensive public transportation back and forth to work. Banks make Billions of dollars a year on bounced check fees and overdraft charges. That means that banking is much more expensive for those people that can least afford it. Credit card companies make Billions of dollars each year in over limit fees, and late fees. In fact, people who max out their credit cards are a creditor's best customer. These are systemic problems that keep people in poverty. That's not a cultural mindset. Who would ever dream of commuting 2 hours a day for a minimum wage job. I worked with plenty of people at Walgreens on Rush and Division in Chicago that did just that. Those were the jobs available to them. Yes, people make choices that keep them in poverty. Yes, there are mindsets that keep people in poverty. But, to ignore systemic, structural problems that keep people in poverty in America is just plain wrong.

ctdonath 15y ago
Life is hard to live in a place where life is hard to live. There is some push to discuss "food deserts" as a social problem subject to sociopolitical solutions. Thing is, a desert is what it is because there is little there to sustain life - and the prime way to deal with that, short of either imposing expensive infrastructure or accepting grinding bare-sustenance living, is MOVE: don't be there. Ditto these urban "food deserts" (or "banking deserts", or ...): the solution isn't trying to impose an infrastructure on a system which has a natural resistance thereto, and will require enormous costs with little payback, the solution is to recognize "this is a bad place to exist in" and get out. Yes, it can be hard to move for many reasons; which is cumulatively harder - leaving, or staying? If you're going to commute 2 hours every day, you've already proven you can move. And people do! There are plenty of towns and cities (Detroit a good current example) where people finally realized "this isn't working, I'm outta here" and left, leaving the systemic structural problems behind. My recurring conclusion on the issue: the problem isn't opportunity, the problem is people not acting on opportunity. You can't force them to, and if they won't then nothing will change for them.
- mindcrime 15y ago
  Thing is, a desert is what it is because there is little there to sustain life - and the prime way to deal with that, short of either imposing expensive infrastructure or accepting grinding bare-sustenance living, is MOVE: don't be there. I wanted to work in high-tech and eventually be a tech entrepreneur. I lived in rural East Bumfuck, NC, where the dominant industries were: tobacco farming, golf courses, shrimping, fishing, and logging. We had no broadband availability, no (or little) access to VC money, angel money, mentorship from experienced entrepreneurs, and a limited pool of technology aware people. I could have stayed there, and moaned about how "we don't have broadband" or "I can't find any other techies to work with," etc. Instead, I packed up my stuff and moved to the RTP area which is an environment much more suited to the kind of life I wanted. (No, it's not silicon valley, but it's better than where I was). I know some people don't like to hear "move" as an option, whether it's because of a sense of entitlement, lack of ambition, or just lack of resources to move. But it's simply true that - for many people - picking up and moving is exactly the right choice (maybe a necessary choice) if they want a different kind of life.
ellyagg 15y ago
IQ is an extremely important factor in success, but studies show that students obtain better outcomes if they think hard work is the most important factor. Social and systemic factors play an extremely important role in an individual's momentary poverty, but I'd bet a lot that those who believe otherwise are far more likely to overcome it. Mainly, the folks I've known personally who blame their bad situations on social and systemic factors were losers.
detokaal 15y ago
As a teacher in a ghetto school, and as a child of parents who grew up poor (and of grandparents who survived the great depression), let me help him make some distinctions. I have noticed two distinct types of poverty. The first is the OP type: generational poverty based on dependence and a mind-set of either victimization or unbreakable poor choice habits. They are stuck. Getting these kids out of the situation, is as he says, nigh impossible. I've taught 1000s of these kids, and their upbringing, the habits they learn, and don't learn, the role models they have, are difficult to escape and change. A handful of students out of each grade somehow leave - and never come back. The one characteristic they all seem to share is that somewhere along the line (genetics or personality) they have a work ethic or type A character. Even so, they do not have the social skills to advance very far in their careers past college and entry-level job. The second type is the working poor. They don't really exist anymore as I know them in my parent's generation. They bust ass in 16 hour days of hard labor, save money and penny pinch, always planning for the future. Now days, this attitude is found in many middle class families. My uncle won't even collect his SS check because "he doesn't need it." My relatives would rather starve than take anything from the government or even their local church. The first type learns how to do the opposite: game the welfare and social system for every penny and benefit and get, even if it requires dishonesty. These people coach their children on what to say at school to the adults to ensure they get all of the free benefits, and to ensure we don't call welfare for an inspection of their homes or income. /rant off

ctdonath 15y ago

Life is hard to live in a place where life is hard to live. There is some push to discuss "food deserts" as a social problem subject to sociopolitical solutions. Thing is, a desert is what it is because there is little there to sustain life - and the prime way to deal with that, short of either imposing expensive infrastructure or accepting grinding bare-sustenance living, is MOVE: don't be there. Ditto these urban "food deserts" (or "banking deserts", or ...): the solution isn't trying to impose an infrastructure on a system which has a natural resistance thereto, and will require enormous costs with little payback, the solution is to recognize "this is a bad place to exist in" and get out. Yes, it can be hard to move for many reasons; which is cumulatively harder - leaving, or staying? If you're going to commute 2 hours every day, you've already proven you can move. And people do! There are plenty of towns and cities (Detroit a good current example) where people finally realized "this isn't working, I'm outta here" and left, leaving the systemic structural problems behind. My recurring conclusion on the issue: the problem isn't opportunity, the problem is people not acting on opportunity. You can't force them to, and if they won't then nothing will change for them.

mindcrime 15y ago
Thing is, a desert is what it is because there is little there to sustain life - and the prime way to deal with that, short of either imposing expensive infrastructure or accepting grinding bare-sustenance living, is MOVE: don't be there. I wanted to work in high-tech and eventually be a tech entrepreneur. I lived in rural East Bumfuck, NC, where the dominant industries were: tobacco farming, golf courses, shrimping, fishing, and logging. We had no broadband availability, no (or little) access to VC money, angel money, mentorship from experienced entrepreneurs, and a limited pool of technology aware people. I could have stayed there, and moaned about how "we don't have broadband" or "I can't find any other techies to work with," etc. Instead, I packed up my stuff and moved to the RTP area which is an environment much more suited to the kind of life I wanted. (No, it's not silicon valley, but it's better than where I was). I know some people don't like to hear "move" as an option, whether it's because of a sense of entitlement, lack of ambition, or just lack of resources to move. But it's simply true that - for many people - picking up and moving is exactly the right choice (maybe a necessary choice) if they want a different kind of life.

ellyagg 15y ago

IQ is an extremely important factor in success, but studies show that students obtain better outcomes if they think hard work is the most important factor. Social and systemic factors play an extremely important role in an individual's momentary poverty, but I'd bet a lot that those who believe otherwise are far more likely to overcome it. Mainly, the folks I've known personally who blame their bad situations on social and systemic factors were losers.

detokaal 15y ago

As a teacher in a ghetto school, and as a child of parents who grew up poor (and of grandparents who survived the great depression), let me help him make some distinctions. I have noticed two distinct types of poverty. The first is the OP type: generational poverty based on dependence and a mind-set of either victimization or unbreakable poor choice habits. They are stuck. Getting these kids out of the situation, is as he says, nigh impossible. I've taught 1000s of these kids, and their upbringing, the habits they learn, and don't learn, the role models they have, are difficult to escape and change. A handful of students out of each grade somehow leave - and never come back. The one characteristic they all seem to share is that somewhere along the line (genetics or personality) they have a work ethic or type A character. Even so, they do not have the social skills to advance very far in their careers past college and entry-level job. The second type is the working poor. They don't really exist anymore as I know them in my parent's generation. They bust ass in 16 hour days of hard labor, save money and penny pinch, always planning for the future. Now days, this attitude is found in many middle class families. My uncle won't even collect his SS check because "he doesn't need it." My relatives would rather starve than take anything from the government or even their local church. The first type learns how to do the opposite: game the welfare and social system for every penny and benefit and get, even if it requires dishonesty. These people coach their children on what to say at school to the adults to ensure they get all of the free benefits, and to ensure we don't call welfare for an inspection of their homes or income. /rant off