3 ms·

The US has one of the highest child poverty rates of any "first world" nation, minimum wage is lower than it has ever been, we pay more for healthcare than any

The US has one of the highest child poverty rates of any "first world" nation, minimum wage is lower than it has ever been, we pay more for healthcare than any of these same nations and have worse healthcare outcomes than Cuba, housing is an impossible dream for most... Wealth inequality is just one indicator of a larger problem, not the problem in it's entirety, and poverty is still one of the biggest problems of the modern era. Saying that we are slightly better than the 1800s isn't the win people seem to think it is.

cryptonector 2y ago
> Saying that we are slightly better than the 1800s isn't the win people seem to think it is. We're not "slightly" better than in the 1800s. We are way way way better than in the 1800s. World-wide.
- sweeter 2y ago
  Sure, that's still not the win you think it is when the material conditions of the average person is pretty awful all around. I laid out a small percent of that in my original comment. and that's not even considering the poverty "first world" countries rely upon from the heavy exploitation of the "3rd world" from slavery conditions, to coups and death squads funded by US corporations, to stealing their resources.
  - cryptonector 2y ago
    > that's still not the win you think it is when the material conditions of the average person is pretty awful all around. What? This is nonsense. > and that's not even considering [...] This is changing the subject, which one should probably take as conceding the previous point. Even granting all of this I'm pretty sure that life today almost everywhere on this planet is much less brutish for humans than it was 200 years ago, let alone 400, 2,000, 10,000, or 100,000 years ago.
  - lkbm 2y ago
    The thing is, the US has clearly gotten way better in the past 50+ years, while the past 30 years is maybe debatable. But if we're looking at past 30 years globally, there's no sane way to argue it hasn't gotten way. It's been an absolutely amazing past few decades in terms of reducing global poverty. We've seen something like a billion people lifted out of poverty—child mortality, clean drinking water, education, basic nutrition. We've a long ways to go, but if you're argument rests on ignoring over a billion people having their lives transformed in this way, I'm not sure you're on the side of the poor.
    - sweeter 2y ago
      That's nice, you should fly down to the global South and tell them how good they have it.
      - lkbm 2y ago
        Dude, chill. They're not merely some abstract rhetoric device for arguing about American policy. They're real people, and you can ask them how they feel about infant mortality dropping, starvation rates dropping, clean water access shooting up, education access increasing. You don't even have to fly down--loads of them now have internet access (and electricity!) Yes, the US has done a bunch of really bad stuff, but a higher percentage of people having food and water and medicine is actually good. And yes, those real human beings tend to agree.
lkbm 2y ago
> The US has one of the highest child poverty rates of any "first world" nation Yeah, we should do way better, but this article isn't about the US today vs. western Europe today. It's about the world today vs. the world in the past. Child poverty in the US is way better right now than it was pretty much anywhere a hundred years ago, and poverty across the globe is way better than in the past. > minimum wage is lower than it has ever been, Good news: ~98.7% of workers earn more than the minimum wage. Wage growth for the lowest quartile has been especially good these past few years, handily outpacing inflation for the poorest among us. > Saying that we are slightly better than the 1800s isn't the win people seem to think it is. Slightly better? Child mortality in rich countries in the 1800s was 20%. What's it today, 0.5%? "Oh, but in some countries it's less than that, so this isn't actually better than before"? Calling these changes "slightly better" is just an incredibly dishonest take. It's a massive improvement, and that shows just how much we're able to improve if we honestly look at what works and implement it. This isn't a pro-complacency article. It's an argument against doomerism.
- sweeter 2y ago
  Of the 74 million children in the US, 11 million live in poverty. The average American makes 40,000 a year and healthcare and housing are more expensive than ever. Yes, the things that are problems have changed, medical advanced have been made, but most of that is out of reach for the majority of people unless they are willing to take on millions in medical debt for things like cancer and diseases that have preventable measures. just the fact that we have to reel back that far to paint a good picture of the present, says a lot. Let's be real, this audience is generally wealthy and are not necessarily going to be in touch with how the average person lives.
  - lkbm 2y ago
    We don't have to reel back 200 years. We can reel back 80, 50, 30 and look at: Who has electricity? Who has indoor plumbing? Who has air conditioning? Who has internet access at home? https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/technology-adoption-by-households-in-the-united-states https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/technology-adoption-by-ho... The things that today would be considered poverty were considered the norm when my neighbor was a kid. I've worked with many and been close friends with many poor people. I'm under no illusions that their lives are all hunky dory. I just don't feel the need to pretend things weren't significantly worse in many important ways in the recent past.
WalterBright 2y ago
> housing is an impossible dream for most Most of the population lives on the street? There's a homeless population in Seattle, but as a percentage it is pretty low. They also mostly consist of drug addicts and alcoholics who reject attempts to put them in housing.
- sweeter 2y ago
  What's renting, right? lol. The next generation has absolutely zero hope that they will ever own a home, and a large percent, simply won't.
  - WalterBright 2y ago
    Renting is still housing. Besides, you never actually own a home. You rent it from the city, and the zoning/code rules greatly restrict what you can do with it. Besides, the statement was "housing", not "owning a home". The government does a lot to restrict the supply of housing, too. Don't forget all the expenses one has owning a home. My rent to the city went up 10% this year.
gadders 2y ago
Is that relative or absolute poverty?

cryptonector 2y ago

> Saying that we are slightly better than the 1800s isn't the win people seem to think it is. We're not "slightly" better than in the 1800s. We are way way way better than in the 1800s. World-wide.

sweeter 2y ago
Sure, that's still not the win you think it is when the material conditions of the average person is pretty awful all around. I laid out a small percent of that in my original comment. and that's not even considering the poverty "first world" countries rely upon from the heavy exploitation of the "3rd world" from slavery conditions, to coups and death squads funded by US corporations, to stealing their resources.
- cryptonector 2y ago
  > that's still not the win you think it is when the material conditions of the average person is pretty awful all around. What? This is nonsense. > and that's not even considering [...] This is changing the subject, which one should probably take as conceding the previous point. Even granting all of this I'm pretty sure that life today almost everywhere on this planet is much less brutish for humans than it was 200 years ago, let alone 400, 2,000, 10,000, or 100,000 years ago.
- lkbm 2y ago
  The thing is, the US has clearly gotten way better in the past 50+ years, while the past 30 years is maybe debatable. But if we're looking at past 30 years globally, there's no sane way to argue it hasn't gotten way. It's been an absolutely amazing past few decades in terms of reducing global poverty. We've seen something like a billion people lifted out of poverty—child mortality, clean drinking water, education, basic nutrition. We've a long ways to go, but if you're argument rests on ignoring over a billion people having their lives transformed in this way, I'm not sure you're on the side of the poor.
  - sweeter 2y ago
    That's nice, you should fly down to the global South and tell them how good they have it.
    - lkbm 2y ago
      Dude, chill. They're not merely some abstract rhetoric device for arguing about American policy. They're real people, and you can ask them how they feel about infant mortality dropping, starvation rates dropping, clean water access shooting up, education access increasing. You don't even have to fly down--loads of them now have internet access (and electricity!) Yes, the US has done a bunch of really bad stuff, but a higher percentage of people having food and water and medicine is actually good. And yes, those real human beings tend to agree.

lkbm 2y ago

> The US has one of the highest child poverty rates of any "first world" nation Yeah, we should do way better, but this article isn't about the US today vs. western Europe today. It's about the world today vs. the world in the past. Child poverty in the US is way better right now than it was pretty much anywhere a hundred years ago, and poverty across the globe is way better than in the past. > minimum wage is lower than it has ever been, Good news: ~98.7% of workers earn more than the minimum wage. Wage growth for the lowest quartile has been especially good these past few years, handily outpacing inflation for the poorest among us. > Saying that we are slightly better than the 1800s isn't the win people seem to think it is. Slightly better? Child mortality in rich countries in the 1800s was 20%. What's it today, 0.5%? "Oh, but in some countries it's less than that, so this isn't actually better than before"? Calling these changes "slightly better" is just an incredibly dishonest take. It's a massive improvement, and that shows just how much we're able to improve if we honestly look at what works and implement it. This isn't a pro-complacency article. It's an argument against doomerism.

sweeter 2y ago
Of the 74 million children in the US, 11 million live in poverty. The average American makes 40,000 a year and healthcare and housing are more expensive than ever. Yes, the things that are problems have changed, medical advanced have been made, but most of that is out of reach for the majority of people unless they are willing to take on millions in medical debt for things like cancer and diseases that have preventable measures. just the fact that we have to reel back that far to paint a good picture of the present, says a lot. Let's be real, this audience is generally wealthy and are not necessarily going to be in touch with how the average person lives.
- lkbm 2y ago
  We don't have to reel back 200 years. We can reel back 80, 50, 30 and look at: Who has electricity? Who has indoor plumbing? Who has air conditioning? Who has internet access at home? https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/technology-adoption-by-households-in-the-united-states https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/technology-adoption-by-ho... The things that today would be considered poverty were considered the norm when my neighbor was a kid. I've worked with many and been close friends with many poor people. I'm under no illusions that their lives are all hunky dory. I just don't feel the need to pretend things weren't significantly worse in many important ways in the recent past.

WalterBright 2y ago

> housing is an impossible dream for most Most of the population lives on the street? There's a homeless population in Seattle, but as a percentage it is pretty low. They also mostly consist of drug addicts and alcoholics who reject attempts to put them in housing.

sweeter 2y ago
What's renting, right? lol. The next generation has absolutely zero hope that they will ever own a home, and a large percent, simply won't.
- WalterBright 2y ago
  Renting is still housing. Besides, you never actually own a home. You rent it from the city, and the zoning/code rules greatly restrict what you can do with it. Besides, the statement was "housing", not "owning a home". The government does a lot to restrict the supply of housing, too. Don't forget all the expenses one has owning a home. My rent to the city went up 10% this year.

gadders 2y ago

Is that relative or absolute poverty?