6 ms·

I was born poor. One american idea that does resonate with me after coming to USA is that a lot of poor people do not see themselves as poor. While their strugg

I was born poor. One american idea that does resonate with me after coming to USA is that a lot of poor people do not see themselves as poor. While their struggles are real they do not see themselves as losers but rather see themselves as strugglers who will eventually make it some day. They make life better for themselves and others. That was the case with my family. We lived in a house whose floor was basically painted with cowdung, roof leaked, we could not afford meat and we borrowed newspapers from others to read. Yet, not once we would call ourselves poor and demand that someone else take care of us. It would be insulting for our pride. A lot of well off people in India and USA automatically think of poor people as losers or without agency. They then propose that government must help them. Guess what, other than a small fraction of poor people most DO NOT want that help. They would rather prefer to do what they want to do. Poor people do not want your food, clothing and shelter, they have their own desires. We can not possibly know what they are. India is an extremely social country and lockdowns have much bigger costs for people. If people are angry and fed up and willing to risk their lives, I can understand. I do not think assurance of food or money per month will keep them indoors. What we need is some humility to recognize that just because someone else has less money than we do, that does not reduce their self worth or gives us the right to know "what they need". PS. Shortage of food was not a problem in India during last lockdown it is not a problem today either. Food Corporation of India has a record stockpile of rice right now.

supernovae 5y ago
There is a HUGE difference in accepting a dole because you're shut down for the survival of your species and can't work vs how you see yourself functioning in a society where you can work.
- KorematsuFred 5y ago
  I do acknowledge the difference, what I am trying to highlight that perhaps dole is not what they want. Perhaps the poor people are not interested in staying indoors in return for dole and would rather risk their lives to seek things that value more than dole. It is not the lack of dole that is causing the failure of lockdowns.
  - supernovae 5y ago
    It is the lack of dole that caused the failures of lockdowns in combination with a lack of systemic social safety nets to help support people. If you were unemployed, you lost your healthcare, if you lost your healthcare getting sick probably means losing your house/rent or getting behind, if you get behind none of those stimulus checks do anything for those that are behind because the system was never designed to support people through a pandemic. You're trying to highlight something that doesn't exist.
- more_corn 5y ago
  "Survival of our species" is a bit extreme. Not to diminish the severity of our pandemic but it kills 1%. If we did nothing and just let everyone get it, 1% of us would die (not in any way advocating for that) our species would survive just fine. Perhaps you could just say "responding to a public health emergency"
- mikem170 5y ago
  > shut down for the survival of your species Do you really believe the survival of our species is at stake? There have been 1754 covid-19 deaths per million people in the USA since the start of the pandemic [0], a seemingly reliable number. That works out to 1 out of 570 people that have died of covid. Mostly older and less healthy folks. Part of the problem may be that not everyone is that scared. Living in democracies we need to respect that. [0] https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/ https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/
  - sangnoir 5y ago
    > That works out to 1 out of 570 people that have died of covid. Mostly older and less healthy folks. Your assumption is that what the USA went through, with the shutdowns is the worst-case scenario. I posit that it is not - things could have been far worse in terms of death, as well as second- and third-order effects on the economy, jobs and food security.
    - mikem170 5y ago
      You said "the survival of the species" was at stake. Are you telling me that you stand by that comment? Do you really think this coronavirus might have killed off our species? There is zero science supporting this. In fact, to the contrary, experts from the beginning expected this to peter out on its own [0]: > 2019-nCoV joins the four coronaviruses now circulating in people. “I can imagine a scenario where this becomes a fifth endemic human coronavirus,” ... “We don’t pay much attention to them because they’re so mundane” > Odds: Moderate. “I think there is a reasonable probability that this becomes the fifth community-acquired coronavirus,” Adalja said, something he expanded on in his blog. Webby agreed: “I have a little bit of hope that, OK, we’ll put up with a couple of years of heightened [2019-nCoV] activity before settling down to something like the other four coronaviruses.” > Odds: Pretty good. What we may be seeing “is the emergence of a new coronavirus … that could very well become another seasonal pathogen that causes pneumonia,” Your statement about "survival of the species" seems outlandish, according the the science I read. Your above reply "things could have been worse" is not an adequate defensse of such an alarmist statement. Do you have any references supporting your position? oit appears so far that you do not. You should keep in mind that not everyone shares your paranoia and want to get on with as much of their lives as possible. We live in democracies and other people will rightfully object to you imposing your views on all of them without better justification. [0] https://www.statnews.com/2020/02/04/two-scenarios-if-new-coronavirus-isnt-contained/ https://www.statnews.com/2020/02/04/two-scenarios-if-new-cor...
selimthegrim 5y ago
Don't you need ration card to access PDS?
- KorematsuFred 5y ago
  The whole thing is a sham. If you don't have ration card you can still buy it by paying a higher price to the 'dealer' who then secretly puts it under the account of someone else who is probably dead.
sombremesa 5y ago
> I was born poor. You can get out of being poor. You cannot get out of being dalit[0]. > While their struggles are real they do not see themselves as losers but rather see themselves as strugglers who will eventually make it some day. Only about 20% of Indians can afford to have even aspirations. About 66% cannot. 18% struggle to even survive. Newspaper? They would eat it. [1] (data from 2016) > They then propose that government must help them. Guess what, other than a small fraction of poor people most DO NOT want that help. The relationship between the government and the people in India is very different from what you are probably used to. It's true that many people in India don't want the government's "help", but that's because this "help" is usually exploitation. They'd be lucky to be left alone. [2] > If people are angry and fed up and willing to risk their lives You have to pass a certain threshold of awareness to be categorized as "willing". Most of these people have no idea what the consequences of their actions are. Almost a third(!) of the women in India cannot even read or write. [3] > What we need is some humility to recognize that just because someone else has less money than we do, that does not reduce their self worth or gives us the right to know "what they need". Should the same litmus test apply to your post about the Indian condition? [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dalit#Discrimination https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dalit#Discrimination [1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/482584/india-households-by-annual-income/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/482584/india-households-... [2] https://www.downtoearth.org.in/blog/governance/why-india-s-poor-laugh-at-anti-corruption-campaigns-59855 https://www.downtoearth.org.in/blog/governance/why-india-s-p... [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literacy_in_India https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literacy_in_India
- KorematsuFred 5y ago
  None of that you have stated is even remotely relevant to the discussion at hand but appears like a bait for some kind of flamewar. I will not take this bait. > Should the same litmus test apply to your post about the Indian condition? Obviously. But my post is about not making assumptions about what poor people want and rather trust that they have an agency.
- spdionis 5y ago
  Now consider what you and the sibling comment say in the context of a representative democracy. How many of the people that truly have no food to eat will go to vote? Or, how easy are they to corrupt?
estaseuropano 5y ago
Not to diminish your experience, but you are an exception. Most poor people stay poor, no matter how hard they work. And most poor people prefer free food over no food. You are right that most would prefer a dignified job and agency over their lives, but to say that people prefer to starve than to accept aid, or that it is just fine as a matter of policy to let people starve (or die of diarrhea as hundreds of indian children do each day as they don't have access to clean water) is just absurd. No one wants to watch their children die. Again, i dont doubt your lived experience, but please do reflect on your views and whether they even remotely reflect reality.
- mensetmanusman 5y ago
  His views reflect reality, they are probably less statistically likely. Any good political solution has to recognize the effects of agency and surroundings.
throwaway823882 5y ago
This is part of the myth of American exceptionalism (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_exceptionalism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_exceptionalism). We're #1, even when we're dead last. Americans love getting free shit, and hate giving anything away. We love getting tax cuts & refunds, stimulus checks, welfare, food stamps. But when we're not eligible to receive it, we hate giving away food stamps, welfare. Everyone thinks we pay too much tax, and doesn't want the state to do anything. But then we complain that the government isn't solving all our problems with all the money we aren't paying in taxes. To avoid all the complaints from directly taxing everyone, we tax alcohol and tobacco (in addition to income), but we don't tax corporate profits or rich people, and have a small sales tax compared to the EU. America actually has a bit of a crisis of food. Tens of millions of families go hungry every year in the US. Yet we export hundreds of billions of dollars worth of (mostly) feed grain and corn. It's not that we're too proud to take hand-outs, we'd just rather let our neighbors starve.
aliswe 5y ago
> ... who will eventually make it some day I believe there is a term for this, "temporarily embarrassed millionaires"

supernovae 5y ago

There is a HUGE difference in accepting a dole because you're shut down for the survival of your species and can't work vs how you see yourself functioning in a society where you can work.

KorematsuFred 5y ago
I do acknowledge the difference, what I am trying to highlight that perhaps dole is not what they want. Perhaps the poor people are not interested in staying indoors in return for dole and would rather risk their lives to seek things that value more than dole. It is not the lack of dole that is causing the failure of lockdowns.
- supernovae 5y ago
  It is the lack of dole that caused the failures of lockdowns in combination with a lack of systemic social safety nets to help support people. If you were unemployed, you lost your healthcare, if you lost your healthcare getting sick probably means losing your house/rent or getting behind, if you get behind none of those stimulus checks do anything for those that are behind because the system was never designed to support people through a pandemic. You're trying to highlight something that doesn't exist.
more_corn 5y ago
"Survival of our species" is a bit extreme. Not to diminish the severity of our pandemic but it kills 1%. If we did nothing and just let everyone get it, 1% of us would die (not in any way advocating for that) our species would survive just fine. Perhaps you could just say "responding to a public health emergency"
mikem170 5y ago
> shut down for the survival of your species Do you really believe the survival of our species is at stake? There have been 1754 covid-19 deaths per million people in the USA since the start of the pandemic [0], a seemingly reliable number. That works out to 1 out of 570 people that have died of covid. Mostly older and less healthy folks. Part of the problem may be that not everyone is that scared. Living in democracies we need to respect that. [0] https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/ https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/
- sangnoir 5y ago
  > That works out to 1 out of 570 people that have died of covid. Mostly older and less healthy folks. Your assumption is that what the USA went through, with the shutdowns is the worst-case scenario. I posit that it is not - things could have been far worse in terms of death, as well as second- and third-order effects on the economy, jobs and food security.
  - mikem170 5y ago
    You said "the survival of the species" was at stake. Are you telling me that you stand by that comment? Do you really think this coronavirus might have killed off our species? There is zero science supporting this. In fact, to the contrary, experts from the beginning expected this to peter out on its own [0]: > 2019-nCoV joins the four coronaviruses now circulating in people. “I can imagine a scenario where this becomes a fifth endemic human coronavirus,” ... “We don’t pay much attention to them because they’re so mundane” > Odds: Moderate. “I think there is a reasonable probability that this becomes the fifth community-acquired coronavirus,” Adalja said, something he expanded on in his blog. Webby agreed: “I have a little bit of hope that, OK, we’ll put up with a couple of years of heightened [2019-nCoV] activity before settling down to something like the other four coronaviruses.” > Odds: Pretty good. What we may be seeing “is the emergence of a new coronavirus … that could very well become another seasonal pathogen that causes pneumonia,” Your statement about "survival of the species" seems outlandish, according the the science I read. Your above reply "things could have been worse" is not an adequate defensse of such an alarmist statement. Do you have any references supporting your position? oit appears so far that you do not. You should keep in mind that not everyone shares your paranoia and want to get on with as much of their lives as possible. We live in democracies and other people will rightfully object to you imposing your views on all of them without better justification. [0] https://www.statnews.com/2020/02/04/two-scenarios-if-new-coronavirus-isnt-contained/ https://www.statnews.com/2020/02/04/two-scenarios-if-new-cor...

selimthegrim 5y ago

Don't you need ration card to access PDS?

KorematsuFred 5y ago
The whole thing is a sham. If you don't have ration card you can still buy it by paying a higher price to the 'dealer' who then secretly puts it under the account of someone else who is probably dead.

sombremesa 5y ago

> I was born poor. You can get out of being poor. You cannot get out of being dalit[0]. > While their struggles are real they do not see themselves as losers but rather see themselves as strugglers who will eventually make it some day. Only about 20% of Indians can afford to have even aspirations. About 66% cannot. 18% struggle to even survive. Newspaper? They would eat it. [1] (data from 2016) > They then propose that government must help them. Guess what, other than a small fraction of poor people most DO NOT want that help. The relationship between the government and the people in India is very different from what you are probably used to. It's true that many people in India don't want the government's "help", but that's because this "help" is usually exploitation. They'd be lucky to be left alone. [2] > If people are angry and fed up and willing to risk their lives You have to pass a certain threshold of awareness to be categorized as "willing". Most of these people have no idea what the consequences of their actions are. Almost a third(!) of the women in India cannot even read or write. [3] > What we need is some humility to recognize that just because someone else has less money than we do, that does not reduce their self worth or gives us the right to know "what they need". Should the same litmus test apply to your post about the Indian condition? [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dalit#Discrimination https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dalit#Discrimination [1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/482584/india-households-by-annual-income/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/482584/india-households-... [2] https://www.downtoearth.org.in/blog/governance/why-india-s-poor-laugh-at-anti-corruption-campaigns-59855 https://www.downtoearth.org.in/blog/governance/why-india-s-p... [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literacy_in_India https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literacy_in_India

KorematsuFred 5y ago
None of that you have stated is even remotely relevant to the discussion at hand but appears like a bait for some kind of flamewar. I will not take this bait. > Should the same litmus test apply to your post about the Indian condition? Obviously. But my post is about not making assumptions about what poor people want and rather trust that they have an agency.
spdionis 5y ago
Now consider what you and the sibling comment say in the context of a representative democracy. How many of the people that truly have no food to eat will go to vote? Or, how easy are they to corrupt?

estaseuropano 5y ago

Not to diminish your experience, but you are an exception. Most poor people stay poor, no matter how hard they work. And most poor people prefer free food over no food. You are right that most would prefer a dignified job and agency over their lives, but to say that people prefer to starve than to accept aid, or that it is just fine as a matter of policy to let people starve (or die of diarrhea as hundreds of indian children do each day as they don't have access to clean water) is just absurd. No one wants to watch their children die. Again, i dont doubt your lived experience, but please do reflect on your views and whether they even remotely reflect reality.

mensetmanusman 5y ago
His views reflect reality, they are probably less statistically likely. Any good political solution has to recognize the effects of agency and surroundings.

throwaway823882 5y ago

This is part of the myth of American exceptionalism (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_exceptionalism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_exceptionalism). We're #1, even when we're dead last. Americans love getting free shit, and hate giving anything away. We love getting tax cuts & refunds, stimulus checks, welfare, food stamps. But when we're not eligible to receive it, we hate giving away food stamps, welfare. Everyone thinks we pay too much tax, and doesn't want the state to do anything. But then we complain that the government isn't solving all our problems with all the money we aren't paying in taxes. To avoid all the complaints from directly taxing everyone, we tax alcohol and tobacco (in addition to income), but we don't tax corporate profits or rich people, and have a small sales tax compared to the EU. America actually has a bit of a crisis of food. Tens of millions of families go hungry every year in the US. Yet we export hundreds of billions of dollars worth of (mostly) feed grain and corn. It's not that we're too proud to take hand-outs, we'd just rather let our neighbors starve.

aliswe 5y ago

> ... who will eventually make it some day I believe there is a term for this, "temporarily embarrassed millionaires"