4 ms·

I agree that 'inequality' is too simplistic a concept to adequately describe what the problem is in the US. I believe the real problem is more that the stresses

by benched 13y ago

I agree that 'inequality' is too simplistic a concept to adequately describe what the problem is in the US. I believe the real problem is more that the stresses a poor person must contend with to hold down even the smallest apartment, buy food, and in many cases maintain a car, are extremely high compared with middle-class people. It's that the economy is skewed in such a way that makes the whole game seem unfair to a huge fraction of the population. You're right that the basic standard of infrastructure is higher in the US, and that most people here enjoy those benefits, so there's a relative effect there.

yummyfajitas 13y ago
Could you explain the "stresses" in some detail? And if stresses are the problem, why all the talk of inequality? Will the stresses somehow go up if programmers can create even more wealth?
- chflamplighter 13y ago
  I think the stresses are apparent if you have faced them. The main issue with being poor (speaking from experience) is the unavoidable fact that an unexpected outlay of $$ (car repair or trip to the doctor or parking ticket or broken water heater) can have such a profound effect on your finances, one which you may not recover from. The reality is that when you are poor, living pay check to paycheck, the margins are beyond fine. There is no second chance when life strikes, so the daily stress you feel is intense and surely has an effect on your state of mind. Soon you begin to feel trapped and that is when hope becomes a memory with survival the only concern. I feel fortunate to not have those stresses anymore and can tell you that the stresses I feel now are significantly less stressful in comparison. Stresses now could ruin my day but not my life (barring the most catastrophic events). When you are poor, everything $$ is significant and can have a radical impact on your life.
- fancyketchup 13y ago
  The "stresses" come from trying to maintain a middle-class lifestyle on a lower-class income. As someone who once spent a considerable amount of time (just over a decade) supporting myself on a just-above poverty line income, I notice that a lot of people talking about the impossibility of living on minimum wage are implicitly assuming that everyone must conform to certain cultural norms (living alone, owning and maintaining a car, going out to eat or for entertainment, etc). Many of the financial stresses of low income are moderated by not conforming to those norms. For example, take this story: http://www.forbes.com/sites/laurashin/2013/07/18/why-mcdonalds-employee-budget-has-everyone-up-in-arms/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/laurashin/2013/07/18/why-mcdonal... A major criticism of the McDonald's budget is that it only allocates $600 per month for rent. Ok, well, I'll grant you that it's hard to find a single-bedroom apartment in most major cities for that little. However, it is quite easy (I know, because I have done it) to find a two bedroom apartment in a nice, safe neighborhood in Los Angeles (of all places) for about double that. Living with roommates may not be everyone's ideal (some prefer it), but I find it disingenuous to assume that everyone ought be living in some culturally-defined way. Living with (a) roommate(s) is just one example of a "lifestyle sacrifice" that does not harm your health or safety, and doesn't affect your autonomy as a person (much). But it does significantly reduce living expenses. Another example is car ownership. Even Los Angeles' "famously bad" bus network will take you anywhere in the county (and there is Zip Car for when it's absolutely necessary to drive). Resisting social pressure (from friends and potential mates) to own a car reduces living expenses dramatically. Some people will look down on you for not having one, but who cares what they think?

by benched 13y ago

yummyfajitas 13y ago

Could you explain the "stresses" in some detail? And if stresses are the problem, why all the talk of inequality? Will the stresses somehow go up if programmers can create even more wealth?

chflamplighter 13y ago
I think the stresses are apparent if you have faced them. The main issue with being poor (speaking from experience) is the unavoidable fact that an unexpected outlay of $$ (car repair or trip to the doctor or parking ticket or broken water heater) can have such a profound effect on your finances, one which you may not recover from. The reality is that when you are poor, living pay check to paycheck, the margins are beyond fine. There is no second chance when life strikes, so the daily stress you feel is intense and surely has an effect on your state of mind. Soon you begin to feel trapped and that is when hope becomes a memory with survival the only concern. I feel fortunate to not have those stresses anymore and can tell you that the stresses I feel now are significantly less stressful in comparison. Stresses now could ruin my day but not my life (barring the most catastrophic events). When you are poor, everything $$ is significant and can have a radical impact on your life.
fancyketchup 13y ago
The "stresses" come from trying to maintain a middle-class lifestyle on a lower-class income. As someone who once spent a considerable amount of time (just over a decade) supporting myself on a just-above poverty line income, I notice that a lot of people talking about the impossibility of living on minimum wage are implicitly assuming that everyone must conform to certain cultural norms (living alone, owning and maintaining a car, going out to eat or for entertainment, etc). Many of the financial stresses of low income are moderated by not conforming to those norms. For example, take this story: http://www.forbes.com/sites/laurashin/2013/07/18/why-mcdonalds-employee-budget-has-everyone-up-in-arms/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/laurashin/2013/07/18/why-mcdonal... A major criticism of the McDonald's budget is that it only allocates $600 per month for rent. Ok, well, I'll grant you that it's hard to find a single-bedroom apartment in most major cities for that little. However, it is quite easy (I know, because I have done it) to find a two bedroom apartment in a nice, safe neighborhood in Los Angeles (of all places) for about double that. Living with roommates may not be everyone's ideal (some prefer it), but I find it disingenuous to assume that everyone ought be living in some culturally-defined way. Living with (a) roommate(s) is just one example of a "lifestyle sacrifice" that does not harm your health or safety, and doesn't affect your autonomy as a person (much). But it does significantly reduce living expenses. Another example is car ownership. Even Los Angeles' "famously bad" bus network will take you anywhere in the county (and there is Zip Car for when it's absolutely necessary to drive). Resisting social pressure (from friends and potential mates) to own a car reduces living expenses dramatically. Some people will look down on you for not having one, but who cares what they think?