6 ms·

"...inherit little but discrimination..." And also mistrust and apathy towards learning. Our societal problems transcend race because we have cultural problems

by delinka 12y ago

"...inherit little but discrimination..." And also mistrust and apathy towards learning. Our societal problems transcend race because we have cultural problems at the lower end of income. Those cultural problems are self-perpetuating regardless of one's genetic make-up. When you're poor, it's easy to be resentful of those who aren't; it's easy to pass resentment and mistrust on to your children; it's easy to just do whatever might make life a little less miserable at the moment (instead of thinking of long term consequences.) And any of us are susceptible to behaving this way if we become poor. For those of us fortunate enough to leave that all behind and become successful, it's easy for us to forget how hard life once was and how to relate to those who are less fortunate.

ef4 12y ago
> And any of us are susceptible to behaving this way if we become poor. Any of us would behave the same way if we were born and raised poor. But becoming poor is different. It doesn't strip away all the culture and education your family already possesses. This happens all the time for immigrants. Plenty of families come to the US with almost zero assets. But the ones who have the benefit of education and a culture of aspiration don't stay poor, and their children vastly outperform the intergenerational poor.
smtddr 12y ago
>>When you're poor, it's easy to be resentful of those who aren't; it's easy to pass resentment and mistrust on to your children To clarify, there can be legit reasons for that resentfulness they hold. I'd argue the current construct of society definitely gives the appearance(or just out-right, _is the fact_) of well-to-do people benefiting from the poor. The War on Drugs is at least one of those systems.
- yummyfajitas 12y ago
  How does taxing the wealthy to pay for the war on drugs allow the well-to-do to benefit from the poor? This idea makes little sense. It may hurt the rich less, but it hardly benefits them. "For one thing, most of our very poor don't work, which makes it hard to exploit them." - Paul Krugman
  - judk 12y ago
    Drug warriors and arms dealers get paid well to put poor drug users in jail or coffins.
  - innguest 12y ago
    The private prison complex (the "well-to-do") benefit from jailing the poor who don't work. That's how the ward on drugs allows the well-to-do to benefit from the poor. The poor can still be exploited even if they don't work, as you can see.
  - harry8 12y ago
    How do you think the existence of the very poor who don't work affects the poor who do? Useful dimensions to consider are wage expectations, bargaining power with employers, the rational fear of being fired or branded a troublemaker and its consequences and so on... It probably doesn't benefit "the rich" but it sure benefits those specific businesses relying on cheap labour with an interest in driving its cost down. It also benefits those getting very rich indeed from the illegal drug trade, like JFK's Father did when alcohol was an illegal drug (which is what bootlegging is after all, drug running/pushing where the illegal drug was alcohol). Such people care little for the social consequences of gaining their wealth. The illegal drug trade also entrenches corruption in politics and legal system. Such corruption and the acceptance of it does not work in favour of those without resources. Those with resources and flexible morals it does benefit.
    - yummyfajitas 12y ago
      How do you think the existence of the very poor who don't work affects the poor who do? Reduced supply raises prices. If more of the poor were in the labor force, employers would more easily find replacement workers. I suppose you (and the other two commenters) are right that the war on drugs benefits a small number of wealthy people at the expense of the rest of them. But overall it's a negative sum game - bad for the rich and poor alike.
      - harry8 12y ago
- aptwebapps 12y ago
  The legitimacy of the complaint isn't as pertinent as the effect of living with resentment.

by delinka 12y ago

ef4 12y ago

> And any of us are susceptible to behaving this way if we become poor. Any of us would behave the same way if we were born and raised poor. But becoming poor is different. It doesn't strip away all the culture and education your family already possesses. This happens all the time for immigrants. Plenty of families come to the US with almost zero assets. But the ones who have the benefit of education and a culture of aspiration don't stay poor, and their children vastly outperform the intergenerational poor.

smtddr 12y ago

>>When you're poor, it's easy to be resentful of those who aren't; it's easy to pass resentment and mistrust on to your children To clarify, there can be legit reasons for that resentfulness they hold. I'd argue the current construct of society definitely gives the appearance(or just out-right, _is the fact_) of well-to-do people benefiting from the poor. The War on Drugs is at least one of those systems.

yummyfajitas 12y ago
How does taxing the wealthy to pay for the war on drugs allow the well-to-do to benefit from the poor? This idea makes little sense. It may hurt the rich less, but it hardly benefits them. "For one thing, most of our very poor don't work, which makes it hard to exploit them." - Paul Krugman
- judk 12y ago
  Drug warriors and arms dealers get paid well to put poor drug users in jail or coffins.
- innguest 12y ago
  The private prison complex (the "well-to-do") benefit from jailing the poor who don't work. That's how the ward on drugs allows the well-to-do to benefit from the poor. The poor can still be exploited even if they don't work, as you can see.
- harry8 12y ago
  How do you think the existence of the very poor who don't work affects the poor who do? Useful dimensions to consider are wage expectations, bargaining power with employers, the rational fear of being fired or branded a troublemaker and its consequences and so on... It probably doesn't benefit "the rich" but it sure benefits those specific businesses relying on cheap labour with an interest in driving its cost down. It also benefits those getting very rich indeed from the illegal drug trade, like JFK's Father did when alcohol was an illegal drug (which is what bootlegging is after all, drug running/pushing where the illegal drug was alcohol). Such people care little for the social consequences of gaining their wealth. The illegal drug trade also entrenches corruption in politics and legal system. Such corruption and the acceptance of it does not work in favour of those without resources. Those with resources and flexible morals it does benefit.
  - yummyfajitas 12y ago
    How do you think the existence of the very poor who don't work affects the poor who do? Reduced supply raises prices. If more of the poor were in the labor force, employers would more easily find replacement workers. I suppose you (and the other two commenters) are right that the war on drugs benefits a small number of wealthy people at the expense of the rest of them. But overall it's a negative sum game - bad for the rich and poor alike.
    - harry8 12y ago
aptwebapps 12y ago
The legitimacy of the complaint isn't as pertinent as the effect of living with resentment.