14 ms·
Why Don’t the Poor Rise Up?
- peacetreefrog 11y agoThis is what discussions like this remind me of: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EmZRLxnXamM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EmZRLxnXamM
- peacetreefrog 11y agoThis is what discussions like this remind me of: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EmZRLxnXamM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EmZRLxnXamM
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- tocf 11y agoWhat? Where is he inciting people to get out onto the streets? He doesn't. He's asking a valid question, that a lot of people including economists are asking. The poor and middle class are getting crushed. It hasn't quite hit the demographics that read HN, but it'll eventually happen.
- mason240 11y ago"Just asking a question" is one the most obvious tactics of intellectual weasels.
- stephengillie 11y agoSocrates started it.
- 0xdeadbeefbabe 11y agoDid he?
- stephengillie 11y agoThe method was named after him for a reason. :)
- mikeash 11y agoJust asking a question is an excellent way to discuss. "Just asking a question," as in actually stating that phrase once somebody takes your question as the discussion it was intended to be, is weaseling. I don't imagine Socrates ever responded to someone who argued back that, "I'm just asking a question."
- cobralibre 11y agoYou're reading more into the question than can be supported by the wording of the question or by the article itself. The assumption is that conditions were once such that popular movements or uprisings of the poorer classes were relatively more frequent in the past than in recent years. The article explores in perfectly sober terms how these conditions may have changed. You may have ideological leanings that predispose you to find the discussion inherently inflammatory, but there are plenty of reasonable people who do not see it that way.
- SandersAK 11y agoAh the poor, yes, I forgot about that monolithic entity. Individualism you say? All these poors want to be individuals? Well that doesn't make them very individual now does it? The ivory tower is a strange place.
- Aardwolf 11y ago"According to the Census Bureau, 64 million Americans currently live in the bottom quintile." Given that there are 320 million Americans and 320/5 is 64, yeah, that statement is mathematically true...
- parfe 11y agoApplause for your cherry picked quote to make yourself seem insightful. The author, in the sentence before, pointed out: "For those in the bottom quintile, household income in inflation-adjusted dollars has dropped sharply, from $13,787 in 2000 to $11,651 in 2013" He then calculates the concrete number to convey to the reader that for 64 million americans life has gotten harder. But hey, you earned some internet points so thanks for the contribution.
- asavadatti 11y agoIn other news half the population lives below the median income.
- pestaa 11y agoOnly if the amounts are unique around the median...
- Chinjut 11y agoPerhaps this should be understood as "You already know, or have been/will be convinced by the rest of this article, that in the current world, life for the bottom quintile of Americans is not great. To give some sense of perspective on just how many people suffer from the problems currently afflicting the bottom quintile, that's a full 64 million people whose lives are not great."?
- bko 11y agoI think focusing on income disparity or income growth over time is missing the point. I personally would rather be making 100k today than 100k in the 1950s. Hell, I think you'd be better off making 50k today than 100k in 1950s. Many people in the lower or lower-middle class don't feel that they are really that bad off, despite what charlatans go on about. Sure, everyone complains that they don't make enough money or they work too hard, but that's not unique to any particular socio-economic class. As Andy Warhol said: "What’s great about this country is that America started the tradition where the richest consumers buy essentially the same things as the poorest. You can be watching TV and see Coca-Cola, and you know that the President drinks Coke, Liz Taylor drinks Coke, and just think, you can drink Coke, too. A Coke is a Coke and no amount of money can get you a better Coke than the one the bum on the corner is drinking. All the Cokes are the same and all the Cokes are good. Liz Taylor knows it, the President knows it, the bum knows it, and you know it. "
- Nadya 11y agoAndy Warhol's quote is misleading by using only a single example. How about luxury cars? Multi-million dollar homes? Lobster and steak at a 5-star restaurant? $200,000 dresses? $14,000 jewelry? Affording a personal makeup artist? Is the average consumer drinking some Henri Jayer or Domaine? No. They aren't drinking $5,000-$15,000 wine. On another note - I had no idea there was a bottle of wine worth more than my car. That's a little depressing.
- unethical_ban 11y agoI've had the opportunity to taste from a $500 bottle of wine. It it not substantially better than a $30 bottle. Same with a $150 steak vs. a $50 steak at a good restaurant.
- TwiztidK 11y agoI totally agree with you, but poor people aren't drinking $30 bottles of wine or eating $50 steaks. At least not the poor people I know. They'd drink <$5 bottles of wine and they would eat whatever steak was on sale at the grocery store for a few dollars a pound.
- nyolfen 11y ago"This is a world in which the neoliberal ethic of intense possessive individualism and financial opportunism has become the template for human personality socialisation. This is a world that has become increasingly characterised by a hedonistic culture of consumerist excess. It has destroyed the myth (though not the ideology) that the nuclear family is the solid sociological foundation for capitalism and embraces, however tardily and incompletely, multiculturalism, women’s rights and equality of sexual preference. The impact is increasing individualistic isolation, anxiety, short-termism and neurosis in the midst of one of the greatest material urban achievements ever constructed in human history." --David Harvey
- stephengillie 11y agoLet's rephrase this question: Why do people remain on the roadways during traffic jams? Why don't people drive off the road and use the shoulder to get around stopped traffic? Why don't people with off-road equipped vehicles just drive thru others' yards to get around traffic blockages? Why don't we treat automobile traffic and congested roadways as damage and route around it?
- murbard2 11y agoWay to overlook the glaring, obvious, collective action problem. All political power, even that of a dictator with an army of henchmen is held as the result of a game theoretical equilibrium.
- ashark 11y agoBINGO! We have a winner. "Rising up" individually causes harm to oneself with no benefit to anyone. Rising up with others requires organization. Joining an organization that is planning to rise up when it hasn't already reached a certain size/certainty of actually carrying through with its mission carries many of the same risks as rising up individually, so no-one does that, either. And that's putting aside the efficacy of even a popular and well-attended revolt that's the end goal of this—for the sake of argument let's say it might actually have some meaningful effect, if not actually manage to topple a significant portion of the power structure. Even assuming it's a good idea and all the poor want to revolt, it's still unlikely that they will. Collective action and coordination issues are everywhere. They're fundamentally why we have governments, and why unions aren't usually very effective without mandatory membership.
- wutbrodo 11y agoI'm surprised this is so heavily downvoted, as this was my first thought too upon reading the headline. Hell, that would be my first answer to that question in any society in any time period in history.
- krmmalik 11y agoGenuine question. Can you give me an ELI5 version of your statement? I don't quite follow the point you're making.
- mikeash 11y agoThe short version is: If you stand up and rebel individually, all you accomplish is getting thrown in jail. If a million people stand up and rebel one after another, all they accomplish is getting thrown in jail. If a million people stand up and rebel together, only then do you accomplish anything. Getting a million people to rebel together is really hard, because each one is fearful of running into one of the first two situations instead.
- psaintla 11y agoI've gotten a lot of hell for saying this but the poor don't rise up because the floor in the United States is typically not starvation. Social services are not to help the poor, they are there to make sure the floor in the US is high enough that the poor don't rise up against everyone else.
- humbleMouse 11y agoI think the poor don't rise up because they don't have time. When they aren't working/taking care of children they are probably relaxing. Ironically, poor people value their leisure time much more than rich people I would argue. source: hanging out with broke artists for years
- enraged_camel 11y ago>>Ironically, poor people value their leisure time much more than rich people I would argue. That's because people tend to value things that are scarce and hard to get. Leisure time is something rich people have in abundance, since the vast majority of their wealth comes from land, properties and stocks, and they don't really have to work to maintain any of it (other people do it for them). Whereas if you're poor and are working three different jobs to make ends meet, then you are going to appreciate those 2 hours on Sunday that you get to spend with your family.
- humbleMouse 11y agoAgreed. I would also add to your analysis by talking more about what I have witnessed firsthand hanging out places like development projects with subsidized rent. I have found that if you are a low income worker, you likely don't have the time/energy to build skills necessary for getting a "real" job. Furthermore, many low income jobs are during evening hours/don't let you interact with people that you could leverage to get a real job. As a result of this everybody you know and are friends with work low income jobs, leaving little hope for personal networking into a higher-paying "real" job. Considering all of this, I have witnessed many situations in which people are dishwashers working just enough hours to qualify for subsidized housing/foodstamps/other gov cash. These people oftentimes smoke pot/hang out all the time and their life is actually pretty nice, save fancy vacations and other frivolous luxuries. I am not saying this is good or bad, but I just wanted to shed light on the fact that there are many poor people with plenty of highly-valued leisure time. These people have no intention of getting a higher paying job because it is much easier having 15k of w2 income washing dishes 30 hours a week with some cash-labor work on the side + gov benefits. MANY of these "poor" people bring in 1-2k/month selling pot and other things on the side as well. It is EXTREMELY common. Kind of rambling but I find "poor" people economics very interesting.
- code_reuse 11y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brainwashing:_The_Science_of_Thought_Control https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brainwashing:_The_Science_of_T... an epic science book which attempts to grapple with some of these questions. from the Wikipedia page: "Taylor asserts that the techniques used by cults to influence others are similar to those used by other social groups, and compares similar totalitarian aspects of cults and communist societies. These techniques include isolating the individual and controlling their access to information, challenging their belief structure and creating doubt, and repeating messages in a pressurized environment." It's my view that ^ is generally what is at play with regard to the lower and middle classes in the United States.
- kstenerud 11y agoBecause the poor never lead the charge; the middle class do, once their status is sufficiently threatened.
- 0xdeadbeefbabe 11y agoWhy don't the rich rise up? It's not like they can't notice injustice too. Unless they are all evil. Is that the tl;dr? Man that's really stupid, because its really poor thinking, poor thinking that encourages more poverty. Edit: For example Paul Fussell, a rich kid with anglophilia, rose up and fought in WWII.
- cobralibre 11y agoIt's almost as if the rich have other means at their disposal of effecting change in their interests, whether those interests be in the pursuit of justice or otherwise.
- dreamfactory2 11y agoLike this maniac? http://money.cnn.com/2014/02/14/investing/tom-perkins-vote/ http://money.cnn.com/2014/02/14/investing/tom-perkins-vote/
- o_nate 11y agoI think the more pertinent question is: Why don't the poor vote? Voting rates in the US are highly correlated with income levels. Apart from blocking obvious attempts to disenfranchise the poor (such as unnecessary voter ID requirements), one solution might be to make the election day a national holiday.
- c22 11y agoBut many of the places the poor work (retail, restaurants, etc) are open all year round. It's mostly office workers who get a three day weekend to celebrate George Washington's birth.
- Shivetya 11y agoBecause those who fret over the poor never likely were that poor themselves. You would be surprised at the contentment you can have when you make very little as long as the basics are there, a roof, water, food, and TV. Been there done that. Seen it too in my professional life when I was doing work for a rent a cop place. I remember the amazement at the low pay that we paid a good many guards; being responsible for payroll programming it was a never ending struggle to make sure you had it all correct. Still the majority of them I met in my working career there were just fine, some thought it funny they could get paid to sit in a booth all day let alone be given a uniform. The media needs truly mad people, politicians need them, and regardless of how well both segments try to create them they cannot even make people mad or storming the walls even with calls of racism. Some of this has to do with the fact that people want to fix things and not burn it all down to do so. We have matured past that point, namely because even the poor have a lot to lose now. Old days if you were poor you might not have much more than what you were wearing so where was the value in that, today you might have a home, a nice phone, even a ratty car, but they are yours! As for OWS, the reason it died out so fast DESPITE the "intense" media interest was because it was fake, unlike the Tea Party which in many areas is still as active as day one, OWS was manufactured, made for media, and not some ground swell of people who truly wanted to change things and put effort towards that.