3 ms·

> People aren't working in factories to put bread on the table, people are working in offices to pay for their next new car or big screen TV. People are still

> People aren't working in factories to put bread on the table, people are working in offices to pay for their next new car or big screen TV. People are still working in factories to put bread on their tables. There is a huge amount of poverty in the world. https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/fields/2046.html https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty

Casseres 13y ago
You're right, but I'm referring to the United States. I'm sorry I didn't make that clear.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- PavlovsCat 13y ago
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_in_the_United_States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_in_the_United_States I still don't see the rosy picture you're painting. edit: Poverty in the US is hovering at the same rate since the 60's from what I can tell, while absolute numbers obviously are rising. So.. what am I missing? Something like People aren't working in factories to put bread on the table, people are working in offices to pay for their next new car or big screen TV. just sounds nuts in the face of this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunger_in_the_United_States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunger_in_the_United_States In the later half the of twentieth century, other advanced economies in Europe and Asia began to overtake the U.S. in terms of reducing hunger among their own populations. By 2011, a survey found that among 20 economies recognized as advanced by the International Monetary Fund and for which comparative rankings for food security were available, the U.S. was joint worst. [..] In comparison to other advanced economies, the U.S. had high levels of hunger even during the first few years of the 21st century, due in part to greater inequality and relatively less spending on welfare. Maybe I'm dealing with this? In the 1980s and 90s, advocates of small government were largely successful in de-politicizing hunger, making it hard to launch effective efforts to address the root causes, such as changing government policy to reduce poverty among low earners. and I can only say, if only getting rid of poverty was as easy as ignoring the poor, or downvoting a post instead of responding to it. Corporate profits are soaring, people for the most part are still struggling, and they even seem to have lost their voice. So now we're free to just dream? Why actually make progress when you can just imagine it?
  - Casseres 13y ago
    I recently spent 2 months in a shipyard. IMO, working in a shipyard is comparable to working in a factory. Yes, a lot of the workers seemed poor, but they were nowhere near living in the same conditions as the poor 50 or 100 years ago. If you keep the definition of poverty a percentage, then by definition you will always have poverty. If you decide if someone is in poverty based off of living conditions, than it's gone down drastically in my opinion. My opinion is limited, to get a better one, you'll have to ask someone who's been alive for 150+ years.
    - PavlovsCat 13y ago
      Sure, but people 100 years ago all lived like kings compared to kings 100.000 years ago. Poverty is a relative thing, IMHO. Yes, a lot of the workers seemed poor, but they were nowhere near living in the same conditions as the poor 50 or 100 years ago. Were they working for "a big flat screen TV and a new car"?

Casseres 13y ago

You're right, but I'm referring to the United States. I'm sorry I didn't make that clear.

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
PavlovsCat 13y ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_in_the_United_States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_in_the_United_States I still don't see the rosy picture you're painting. edit: Poverty in the US is hovering at the same rate since the 60's from what I can tell, while absolute numbers obviously are rising. So.. what am I missing? Something like People aren't working in factories to put bread on the table, people are working in offices to pay for their next new car or big screen TV. just sounds nuts in the face of this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunger_in_the_United_States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunger_in_the_United_States In the later half the of twentieth century, other advanced economies in Europe and Asia began to overtake the U.S. in terms of reducing hunger among their own populations. By 2011, a survey found that among 20 economies recognized as advanced by the International Monetary Fund and for which comparative rankings for food security were available, the U.S. was joint worst. [..] In comparison to other advanced economies, the U.S. had high levels of hunger even during the first few years of the 21st century, due in part to greater inequality and relatively less spending on welfare. Maybe I'm dealing with this? In the 1980s and 90s, advocates of small government were largely successful in de-politicizing hunger, making it hard to launch effective efforts to address the root causes, such as changing government policy to reduce poverty among low earners. and I can only say, if only getting rid of poverty was as easy as ignoring the poor, or downvoting a post instead of responding to it. Corporate profits are soaring, people for the most part are still struggling, and they even seem to have lost their voice. So now we're free to just dream? Why actually make progress when you can just imagine it?
- Casseres 13y ago
  I recently spent 2 months in a shipyard. IMO, working in a shipyard is comparable to working in a factory. Yes, a lot of the workers seemed poor, but they were nowhere near living in the same conditions as the poor 50 or 100 years ago. If you keep the definition of poverty a percentage, then by definition you will always have poverty. If you decide if someone is in poverty based off of living conditions, than it's gone down drastically in my opinion. My opinion is limited, to get a better one, you'll have to ask someone who's been alive for 150+ years.
  - PavlovsCat 13y ago
    Sure, but people 100 years ago all lived like kings compared to kings 100.000 years ago. Poverty is a relative thing, IMHO. Yes, a lot of the workers seemed poor, but they were nowhere near living in the same conditions as the poor 50 or 100 years ago. Were they working for "a big flat screen TV and a new car"?