3 ms·

> What about overwhelming bills and other liabilities, lack of marketable skills, illnesses (including addictions), lack of opportunities, lack of parenting and

> What about overwhelming bills and other liabilities, lack of marketable skills, illnesses (including addictions), lack of opportunities, lack of parenting and education, of food, etc. These are all issues that can be overcome with an absurd amount of effort, but are often exacerbated by the psychology of the individual and their surroundings/family/support. Removing all agency from the person gives them a reason to stay in poverty as it is far more comfortable to know that "i am poor" and not be responsible for it, compared to facing discomfort and climbing out of the pit. The basis of this is my own experience (as you quoted yours) as I grew up homeless along with my mother and sister. I have lived this life, and I'd be very surprised if you had any real, (non-phoney) experience with what you're talking about. My mother is now dead, I escaped first and am now well off; I am bringing my sister out of poverty by trying to combat those very issues (addiction, lack of skills, education). In this day and age it is VERY easy to give an abundance of support for addiction, Education is free (via youtube and the like), learning to do things, bill support, financial services. -- The number one blocker is getting her to get up, keep calm, carry on, and get through to complete any single item on that list. I can send her all the money in the world and it doesn't mean jack shit. I bought her a $1500 computer so she can learn about emails, and she hocked it for $300 because she was short for cash one day. I find "pre-existing wealth and opportunities" a much lazier answer then you'd find everybody would generally trend upwards; which we have to a small margin. But it's most often that rich families meet inter-generational demise. It is much easier for us all to be poor, than for us to all be rich; we can take comfort that "we just got dealt a bad hand, it's not our fault".

thfuran 3y ago
>These are all issues that can be overcome with an absurd amount of effort [...] >I find "pre-existing wealth and opportunities" a much lazier answer How is this consistent? It seems self-evident that if one person faces issues that the other didn't and those issues require "an absurd amount of effort" to overcome, the first person was at a significant disadvantage.
- sokoloff 3y ago
  There’s little doubt that becoming an adult with little educational preparation and scarce financial resources is very much harder than being well-equipped with both. I don’t think GP is disagreeing with that, but rather with the premise that poor people in 2027 are poor because there was nothing they could do in 2024, but rather that with an amount of devoted and concerted effort, some can lift themselves out in 2027 well above where they entered 2024. You’re making a “b” argument. GP is making an “m” argument, while acknowledging the effect of “b”.
  - thfuran 3y ago
    >but rather with the premise that poor people in 2027 are poor because there was nothing they could do in 2024 That is an argument that no one in this thread has made. Poverty is obviously not inescapable.
    - wolverine876 3y ago
      > Poverty is obviously not inescapable. It may depend on what you mean. It's not inescapable to some - they escape it. It maybe inescapable to others; most don't escape it.
      - thfuran 3y ago
        That I didn't win the lottery last time I bought a ticket doesn't mean I couldn't have.
        wolverine876 3y ago
        It doesn't mean you could. Also, if your chance of something is 1 in a billion, does that meet any meaningful definition of 'possible'?
wolverine876 3y ago
> Removing all agency Could you point to someone who has advocated that? IME it's a strawperson. > is VERY easy to give an abundance of support for addiction My understanding from people who work in that field is that it's very hard. The evidence seems pretty overwhelming: Lots of addicted people and despite efforts around the country, over decades (centuries?), in communities desperate to solve the problem, nobody has found a way to do it. If you have the answer, you should share it. YouTube is laughable as support for addiction. > it's most often that rich families meet inter-generational demise. Are you saying that children in wealthy families "most often" end up poor? > It is much easier for us all to be poor, than for us to all be rich; we can take comfort that "we just got dealt a bad hand, it's not our fault". Who has said that?
wharvle 3y ago
> I bought her a $1500 computer so she can learn about emails, and she hocked it for $300 because she was short for cash one day. You are so concerned about respecting agency, but then this also? Like this is so at-odds I’m not entirely sure whether you’re presenting it as an example of how aid to the poor doesn’t help, or an example of how if you’d respected this person’s agency your $1500 spent could have been $1500 in aid instead of $300.
- drekipus 3y ago
  Yearly I give about $8000 to my sister, straight cash,. sometimes lump sums, other times, weekly amounts. Money doesn't mean anything if you don't know how to use it, neither does a computer for that matter, evidently. If you're so sure that just giving them money would help, go give your money to someone who needs it.
  - wharvle 3y ago
    I apologize for that post. You brought a personal thing into the thread, but that doesn’t mean it was ok for me to dig at it the way I did. Sorry. [edit] to clarify my phrasing, I mean that just because you brought that into the thread, doesn’t make it fair game for the kind of post I made, which was too harsh by a long shot even if it hadn’t been about something personal.
globalnode 3y ago
try being born into a family of psychological or physical abusers, or perhaps into a poor family with no tradition of education and tell me you didnt get dealt a bad hand.
- peterfirefly 3y ago
  drekipus WAS born into such a family.
- drekipus 3y ago
  The argument isn't whether or not it's a bad hand, it's whether someone should play the hand they got. Saying "the game is rigged, don't bother playing, wait until xyz happens" is, in my estimation, the issue, because it gives apathy. Poverty and whatever flavour of government benefits are constantly changing: the only way out is through themselves, as hard as it may be. And like the sibling comment said, I'm coming exactly from this background. I've seen people both get out, and stay in, poverty. This is the only discerning factor that seperates the two.
  - wolverine876 3y ago
    > Saying "the game is rigged, don't bother playing, wait until xyz happens" Nobody said that.

thfuran 3y ago

>These are all issues that can be overcome with an absurd amount of effort [...] >I find "pre-existing wealth and opportunities" a much lazier answer How is this consistent? It seems self-evident that if one person faces issues that the other didn't and those issues require "an absurd amount of effort" to overcome, the first person was at a significant disadvantage.

sokoloff 3y ago
There’s little doubt that becoming an adult with little educational preparation and scarce financial resources is very much harder than being well-equipped with both. I don’t think GP is disagreeing with that, but rather with the premise that poor people in 2027 are poor because there was nothing they could do in 2024, but rather that with an amount of devoted and concerted effort, some can lift themselves out in 2027 well above where they entered 2024. You’re making a “b” argument. GP is making an “m” argument, while acknowledging the effect of “b”.
- thfuran 3y ago
  >but rather with the premise that poor people in 2027 are poor because there was nothing they could do in 2024 That is an argument that no one in this thread has made. Poverty is obviously not inescapable.
  - wolverine876 3y ago
    > Poverty is obviously not inescapable. It may depend on what you mean. It's not inescapable to some - they escape it. It maybe inescapable to others; most don't escape it.
    - thfuran 3y ago
      That I didn't win the lottery last time I bought a ticket doesn't mean I couldn't have.
      - wolverine876 3y ago
        It doesn't mean you could. Also, if your chance of something is 1 in a billion, does that meet any meaningful definition of 'possible'?

wolverine876 3y ago

> Removing all agency Could you point to someone who has advocated that? IME it's a strawperson. > is VERY easy to give an abundance of support for addiction My understanding from people who work in that field is that it's very hard. The evidence seems pretty overwhelming: Lots of addicted people and despite efforts around the country, over decades (centuries?), in communities desperate to solve the problem, nobody has found a way to do it. If you have the answer, you should share it. YouTube is laughable as support for addiction. > it's most often that rich families meet inter-generational demise. Are you saying that children in wealthy families "most often" end up poor? > It is much easier for us all to be poor, than for us to all be rich; we can take comfort that "we just got dealt a bad hand, it's not our fault". Who has said that?

wharvle 3y ago

> I bought her a $1500 computer so she can learn about emails, and she hocked it for $300 because she was short for cash one day. You are so concerned about respecting agency, but then this also? Like this is so at-odds I’m not entirely sure whether you’re presenting it as an example of how aid to the poor doesn’t help, or an example of how if you’d respected this person’s agency your $1500 spent could have been $1500 in aid instead of $300.

drekipus 3y ago
Yearly I give about $8000 to my sister, straight cash,. sometimes lump sums, other times, weekly amounts. Money doesn't mean anything if you don't know how to use it, neither does a computer for that matter, evidently. If you're so sure that just giving them money would help, go give your money to someone who needs it.
- wharvle 3y ago
  I apologize for that post. You brought a personal thing into the thread, but that doesn’t mean it was ok for me to dig at it the way I did. Sorry. [edit] to clarify my phrasing, I mean that just because you brought that into the thread, doesn’t make it fair game for the kind of post I made, which was too harsh by a long shot even if it hadn’t been about something personal.

globalnode 3y ago

try being born into a family of psychological or physical abusers, or perhaps into a poor family with no tradition of education and tell me you didnt get dealt a bad hand.

peterfirefly 3y ago
drekipus WAS born into such a family.
drekipus 3y ago
The argument isn't whether or not it's a bad hand, it's whether someone should play the hand they got. Saying "the game is rigged, don't bother playing, wait until xyz happens" is, in my estimation, the issue, because it gives apathy. Poverty and whatever flavour of government benefits are constantly changing: the only way out is through themselves, as hard as it may be. And like the sibling comment said, I'm coming exactly from this background. I've seen people both get out, and stay in, poverty. This is the only discerning factor that seperates the two.
- wolverine876 3y ago
  > Saying "the game is rigged, don't bother playing, wait until xyz happens" Nobody said that.