Income Inequality

Tidewater · Jul 30, 2018

crimsonaudio said:
But no one said that. The quote that set some of you off was this (emphasis mine):
"In my, albeit limited, experience the simple truth is that the vast majority of those who remain in poverty do so voluntarily."

The concept of the word "some" continues to baffle and confound many.

crimsonaudio · Jul 30, 2018

There's zero question that upward mobility is far easier for some than others, based on a variety of reasons.

I don't believe that everyone has the ability to become a millionaire, but I know that everyone has the ability to move into the middle class.

RollTide_HTTR · Jul 30, 2018

Tidewater said:
The concept of the word "some" continues to baffle and confound many.

The difference between vast majority and all is slim. And, my original point/stance doesn't change if it goes from all to most of. So, it wasn't a super important difference which is why I wasn't careful about it.

Bamabuzzard · Jul 30, 2018

crimsonaudio said:
Your statement (all) is an absolute. That actually makes a huge difference.

Okay. Buy (or don't buy) whatever you wish.

*shrugs*

Just telling you what I've seen over and over while both living below the poverty level as well as volunteering to help those who are there now. Most people are unwilling to do the hard work necessary to change their economic position. I know very few poor people who are willing to make and live within a tight budget, work multiple jobs (if needed - it generally is for a while), further their training / education instead of spending their time and money on entertainment and comfort, etc. MOST of the poor I work with want to enjoy life but they don't want to invest the considerable time and energy required to get there, so they spend their extra time and money for short term enjoyment rather than investing their time and money for long term gain.

But again, buy (or don't buy) whatever you wish.

My wife and I were a part of an out reach program at our former church that specifically focused on the poor and getting them in positions to better themselves. The man who came up with this program said that he believed the reason many poor people didn't better themselves was because they didn't know how to get into the programs available in this country to begin to help themselves. He also believed that for single mom situations they didn't have the interim support to attend and take advantage of programs while still providing what it took to support their family. So that's what we did. We went into the poor neighborhoods, offered people the opportunity to get plugged into programs that were designed to help them. We did this for several years and what we learned was exactly what you've stated. This guy's hypothesis proved to be wrong. Or at least wrong in the poor neighborhoods in our zip code. The common thing we saw was the majority were simply unwilling to do what it took to make it work. The opportunities and support were available to them. But they didn't want to take the time and energy to do so. Out of literally the hundreds and hundreds of people this program came in contact with, there were maybe a handful of people (like five at the most) who took advantage of it and strangely enough, for them, it worked. Two of those now have middle class jobs, are renting a middle class home in a middles class area of town and attend the church that helped them. It's unfortunate, and flies in the face of what many want to believe, but what you're saying is a very real and common experience when dealing with the poor.

RollTide_HTTR · Jul 30, 2018

Bamabuzzard said:
My wife and I were a part of an out reach program at our former church that specifically focused on the poor and getting them in positions to better themselves. The man who came up with this program said that he believed the reason many poor people didn't better themselves was because they didn't know how to get into the programs available in this country to begin to help themselves. He also believed that for single mom situations they didn't have the interim support to attend and take advantage of programs while still providing what it took to support their family. So that's what we did. We went into the poor neighborhoods, offered people the opportunity to get plugged into programs that were designed to help them. We did this for several years and what we learned was exactly what you've stated. This guy's hypothesis proved to be wrong. Or at least wrong in the poor neighborhoods in our zip code. The common thing we saw was the majority were simply unwilling to do what it took to make it work. The opportunities and support were available to them. But they didn't want to take the time and energy to do so. Out of literally the hundreds and hundreds of people this program came in contact with, there were maybe a handful of people (like five at the most) who took advantage of it and strangely enough, for them, it worked. Two of those now have middle class jobs, are renting a middle class home in a middles class area of town and attend the church that helped them. It's unfortunate, and flies in the face of what many want to believe, but what you're saying is a very real and common experience when dealing with the poor.

Ok, but if that many people are given an opportunity and refuse shouldn't we wonder about the underlining reason? Or should we just chock it up to "most poor people are lazy" and move on?

Serious, question and not trying to be snarky.

CrimsonForce · Jul 30, 2018

RollTide_HTTR said:
Ok, but if that many people are given an opportunity and refuse shouldn't we wonder about the underlining reason? Or should we just chock it up to "most poor people are lazy" and move on?

Serious, question and not trying to be snarky.

See my post above. It's easier for someone to make minimum wage and get free housing, subsidized utilities, food stamps etc. than to better themselves and have to start paying all those expenses. I have about 10 years of working experience in a very low income community and this pretty much what I witnessed. The mindset is if I get a job making X amount more then I lose X amount in benefits. Or, if I have another child I get X amount more in food stamps and welfare dollars. I'm not saying everyone on welfare or assistance has this mindset but I also strongly doubt this was limited to the area that I witnessed it in..

G-VilleTider · Jul 30, 2018

RollTide_HTTR said:
Ok, but if that many people are given an opportunity and refuse shouldn't we wonder about the underlining reason? Or should we just chock it up to "most poor people are lazy" and move on?

Serious, question and not trying to be snarky.

You seem to be ignoring the possibility that maybe some of these people would simply rather live (comfortably) in poverty than to do the hard work to move up. I know it doesn't make sense to you (or me for that matter), but people value things differently. "Most" of the poor in this country live more luxuriously than 95% of all people on Earth and better than 99.99% of the poor in other countries. So if our poor are doing better than 99.99% of the rest of the world's poor, then seriously, find a different gripe.

Bamabuzzard · Jul 30, 2018

RollTide_HTTR said:
Ok, but if that many people are given an opportunity and refuse shouldn't we wonder about the underlining reason? Or should we just chock it up to "most poor people are lazy" and move on?

Serious, question and not trying to be snarky.

To learn the underlying reason the people that are refusing the help, those refusing the help need to be honest. It's not like when someone didn't show up we just moved onto the next person. We invested a lot of time and resources trying to support and encourage people to press on and make the sacrifices to better themselves. The reasons we heard when we circled back around to follow up were honestly, just crap excuses for the most part. We (the church and their resources) were more times than not lied to, taken advantage of and simply used to continue their current lifestyle. The church offered free daycare so moms could go sign up for programs, show up for mandatory program meeting etc. Even went as far as providing transportation. Only to find out that the majority wouldn't follow through, show up or simply use the church as a nursery to go hang out at someone's house. Rather than actually attending the programs and training they were supposed to be attending. The program lasted for a little over two years or so before finally having the plug pulled on it.

CharminTide · Jul 30, 2018

CrimsonForce said:
See my post above. It's easier for someone to make minimum wage and get free housing, subsidized utilities, food stamps etc. than to better themselves and have to start paying all those expenses. I have about 10 years of working experience in a very low income community and this pretty much what I witnessed. The mindset is if I get a job making X amount more then I lose X amount in benefits. Or, if I have another child I get X amount more in food stamps and welfare dollars. I'm not saying everyone on welfare or assistance has this mindset but I also strongly doubt this was limited to the area that I witnessed it in..

Isn't that just highlighting an income strata of considerable need? There are reasons why economists across the political spectrum feel there is merit to a universal basic income. LINK

CharminTide · Jul 30, 2018

G-VilleTider said:
You seem to be ignoring the possibility that maybe some of these people would simply rather live (comfortably) in poverty than to do the hard work to move up. I know it doesn't make sense to you (or me for that matter), but people value things differently. "Most" of the poor in this country live more luxuriously than 95% of all people on Earth and better than 99.99% of the poor in other countries. So if our poor are doing better than 99.99% of the rest of the world's poor, then seriously, find a different gripe.

I think we, as the most prosperous society on earth, should aim higher than this.

G-VilleTider · Jul 30, 2018

CharminTide said:
I think we, as the most prosperous society on earth, should aim higher than this.

99.99% isn't good enough? Seriously?

CrimsonForce · Jul 30, 2018

CharminTide said:
Isn't that just highlighting an income strata of considerable need? There are reasons why economists across the political spectrum feel there is merit to a universal basic income. LINK

No, because, from my experience, the folks who were on welfare were abusing the system. They basically had their entire minimum wage paycheck as disposable income because all their other expenses were covered by the government and several different men who fathered their children. It isn't like they were barely making it living on welfare. Most of the employees drove new(er) cars, always got the newest iPhone when it was released, etc. So, their choice in passing up a promotion wasn't because it wouldn't be enough money to live on but because they would no longer have their entire paycheck to spend as disposable income. In their mind it's an easier route to stay on assistance programs than to pull themselves out of it because they wouldn't be able to afford new cars, iPhones etc as their assistance decreased. They could most certainly make it and would eventually be better off by taking a promotion but the mindset is why put in all that work when I have it so good now..

Bamabuzzard · Jul 30, 2018

CrimsonForce said:
No, because, from my experience, the folks who were on welfare were abusing the system. They basically had their entire minimum wage paycheck as disposable income because all their other expenses were covered by the government and several different men who fathered their children. It isn't like they were barely making it living on welfare. Most of the employees drove new(er) cars, always got the newest iPhone when it was released, etc. So, their choice in passing up a promotion wasn't because it wouldn't be enough money to live on but because they would no longer have their entire paycheck to spend as disposable income. In their mind it's an easier route to stay on assistance programs than to pull themselves out of it because they wouldn't be able to afford new cars, iPhones etc as their assistance decreased. They could most certainly make it and would eventually be better off by taking a promotion but the mindset is why put in all that work when I have it so good now..

Also, do not forget the income threshold to keep within to get the earned income credit per child. It is very common for a single mom to receive in excess of $6,000 in refund dollars. There's a lot of incentives built into our government assisted programs to not become independent.

The maximum amount of credit for Tax Year 2018 is:

$6,431 with three or more qualifying children
$5,716 with two qualifying children
$3,461 with one qualifying child
$519 with no qualifying children

crimsonaudio · Jul 30, 2018

RollTide_HTTR said:
Ok, but if that many people are given an opportunity and refuse shouldn't we wonder about the underlining reason?

Roughly 35% of adults living in the US are obese - this comes to about 90 million obese adults. While I've not talked to all of them, I'd venture that a vast majority of them know of the negative affect their obesity has on their health and would prefer being a healthy weight. I'd further suggest that most of them have tried to lose the excess weight, likely multiple times, and have failed.

The equation to lose weight is quite simple - burn more calories than you take in. Live at a 500 kcal/day deficit and you lose one pound per week. There are complexities associated with this, but that's the basic equation.

Are these obese people lazy? No, not all of them. Many of them get out and work physical jobs every day that you or I likely couldn't, at least without some time to acclimate to the work load.

Is there something genetically wrong with them where it's not their choice? In some cases, yes, but a vast majority of obese people are overweight due to lifestyle choices - even if those choices were their parents' choices and they never knew any different.

The issue is that losing weight is difficult - it takes a long time and one has to be disciplined in multiple areas of their life if they wish to see long-term success. These people have every reason to lose this weight - none of them want to die in the mid-50s from heart failure, like many do, but it's hard to do the work daily and see little success, because losing weight is a long game and that doughnut tastes really good RIGHT NOW!

It's no different from the poor, in my experience. It generally takes a lot of work and long time to climb out of poverty into the middle class. Many behaviors have to be changed, lifestyles almost always have to change, expectations have to change, and short-term goals must be ignored while working for the long term goal of rising above poverty.

Just as few have the self discipline to lose extra weight, few are willing to choose to do the long, hard work to improve their economic station in life. The avenues are there, as are resources, but it doesn't happen overnight, and that shiny car / big screen / latest iPhone is right there, within their grasp.

Being poor is really hard and very expensive - we've discussed that at length here before. But with tenacity and self-discipline virtually everyone can choose to climb out of it in the US. It's why people continue to climb walls and risk crossing dangerous deserts to try to get here. (Let's please not turn this into an immigration or Trump discussion - this was added to highlight the reality that the US remains a land of opportunity...)

CrimsonForce · Jul 30, 2018

Bamabuzzard said:
Also, do not forget the income threshold to keep within to get the earned income credit per child. It is very common for a single mom to receive in excess of $6,000 in refund dollars. There's a lot of incentives built into our government assisted programs to not become independent.

Yep. Tax season was almost akin to the lottery. Most people would get between $4K-$8K back and would be spent on lavish vacations or other luxurious items. There was one person who put her tax money towards bettering herself and she ended up with a masters degree and got out of that system. She was ridiculed for it also..

CharminTide · Jul 30, 2018

G-VilleTider said:
99.99% isn't good enough? Seriously?

Those percentages are meaningless and incorrect -- compare the poor in America to Western Europe, for instance. But more broadly, you seem to be arguing that since the poor in America have better lives than the poor in Somalia, we're good. I disagree with that benchmark.

uafan4life · Jul 30, 2018

CharminTide said:
I think we, as the most prosperous society on earth, should aim higher than this.

And yet we, as a society, seem to have settled on a series of governmental programs and policies that, functionally, incentivize the poor to stay poor while punishing those who bring themselves out of poverty.

CrimsonForce · Jul 30, 2018

CharminTide said:
Those percentages are meaningless and incorrect -- compare the poor in America to Western Europe, for instance. But more broadly, you seem to be arguing that since the poor in America have better lives than the poor in Somalia, we're good. I disagree with that benchmark.

Wait, you think that we should do more for those in poverty than what we currently do which is subsidize (or outright pay) for all of their expenses in life? What should be the benchmark for those who choose to stay on government assistance programs?

CharminTide · Jul 30, 2018

CrimsonForce said:
No, because, from my experience, the folks who were on welfare were abusing the system. They basically had their entire minimum wage paycheck as disposable income because all their other expenses were covered by the government and several different men who fathered their children. It isn't like they were barely making it living on welfare. Most of the employees drove new(er) cars, always got the newest iPhone when it was released, etc. So, their choice in passing up a promotion wasn't because it wouldn't be enough money to live on but because they would no longer have their entire paycheck to spend as disposable income. In their mind it's an easier route to stay on assistance programs than to pull themselves out of it because they wouldn't be able to afford new cars, iPhones etc as their assistance decreased. They could most certainly make it and would eventually be better off by taking a promotion but the mindset is why put in all that work when I have it so good now..

But that's precisely my point. I should have been clearer (see the previous link), but most UBI proposals replace existing social services that are rendered to those below a certain income threshold. The simplified idea is that a baseline income can replace most of the needs that government programs currently provide to the very poor, which eliminates the disincentive to seek additional work or pay raises that may render someone ineligible for certain benefits under the current system.

uafan4life · Jul 30, 2018

CharminTide said:
But that's precisely my point. I should have been clearer (see the previous link), but most UBI proposals replace existing social services that are rendered to those below a certain income threshold. The simplified idea is that a baseline income can replace most of the needs that government programs currently provide to the very poor, which eliminates the disincentive to seek additional work or pay raises that may render someone ineligible for certain benefits under the current system.

Honest question... Do you have faith in our Federal Government to properly institute and run such a system?

Income Inequality

Hall of Fame

Administrator

Hall of Fame

FB Moderator

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Suspended

FB Moderator

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Suspended

Hall of Fame

FB Moderator

Administrator

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

TideFans.shop - NEW Stuff!