class in the united states

[Lazarus]

I would say that people fall into three categories also.

1. Those that don't need help.
2. Those that can't be helped.
3. Those that need help and can be helped. (A very small percentage of people would fit the third catigory.)

Doesn't mean that we should try to help people. Just temper your expectitations.

 

[cute fuzzy bunny]

By the way, before I'm pushed firmly into one "category", I do believe that there are people who need help and can be helped, and belive that those who are fortunate enough to have the time and money to do so (along with the inclination) should do so.

I also believe that it IS harder for some classes/categories of people. I think everyone is entitled to a loving, warm and caring home as a child and a good education. I think part of the reason why those latter two things dont happen isnt because people dont try or money isnt spent, but it isnt spent wisely. I see a lot of disparate, half attempts with no cohesion and no follow through.

 

[laurence]

I too think there are people who can be helped, who need help. But I lack faith in a government solution. I donate to private charities with good expense ratios that I believe in that seem to give the most bang for the buck - children's hospitals and battered women shelters. Those in a critical crisis situation, that can recieve help at a key time in their lives, have a great shot at moving past this crisis and living full, happy lives. Multi-generational welfare families, inner city poverty? I don't have a clue. Perhaps a private scholarship fund? But those with enough upstairs to apply are already probably going to make it. My cousin is a single mom and I've seen how supremely beneficial programs meant to help her with day care and job training have been to her. She's going to be a nurse, works full time at a bank and goes to school. These programs made it possible, and I think we can agree a nurse adds value to society. A hand up instead of a hand out? Too cliche, I know.

 

[Spanky]

... and I think we can agree a nurse adds value to society.

Yes, nurses do add value to society. I am still questioning what value does the government provide given the amount of money they collect (or impose) from tax payers. This is also true for corporate executives who take in millions of dollars, entertainers, professional athletes, money managers, stock brokers, major airline pilots, corporate attorneys, plaintiffs lawyers (personal-injury), specialty surgeons, etc. They, I agree, provide valuable services for their clients, but are they worth that much $$? The simple truth is that they charge what the market will bear (or willing to pay) - marketing 101.

 

[Eagle43]

Another point of view, from the most eloquent Fred....

http://www.fredoneverything.net/FOE_Frame_Column.htm

A snippet: This I submit is goober-brained nonsense. America has precious little poverty, if by poverty you mean lack of something to eat, clothing adequate to keep you warm and cover your private parts, and a dry and comfortable place to sleep. In the “inner cities” or, as we used to call them, slums, there is horrendous cultural emptiness, yes, and the products of the suburban high schools are catching up fast. But poverty? The kind you see in the backs streets of Port au Prince? It barely exists in the United States.

The problem is that the poor do not know how to be poor.

As a police reporter for the better part of a decade, I’ve been in a lot of homes in allegedly poor parts of cities. Physically they weren’t terrible. Some (not many, really) were badly kept up, but that isn’t poverty. The residents could have carried the garbage out to the dumpster in the alley. They just couldn’t be bothered.

Ah, but they were indeed morally deprived, culturally and intellectually impoverished, or what we used to call shiftless. I’ve come into an apartment in mid-afternoon and found a half dozen men sitting torpidly in front of the television, into homes where the daughter of thirteen was pregnant and on drugs. The problem wasn’t poverty. The poor can keep their legs crossed as well as anyone else. If the daughter could afford drugs, she could afford food.

Most of these homes would have been regarded as fine by the graduate students of my day. They would have put in board-and-cinderblock bookshelves and a booze cache and been perfectly content.

The reality is that the wherewithal of a cultivated life of leisure, if only in tee-shirts and jeans, is within the reach of almost all of the “poor.” If I had to live in really cheap welfarish quarters in Washington, DC, which I know well, on food stamps and a bit of cash welfare, what would I do?

I’d have a hell of a good time.

First, I’d get a library card, which is free, for the public libraries of the District. The downtown library, over on 9th Street, is a huge dark half-empty building in which very few people appear and none of the poor. I’d spend time reading, which I enjoy and the poor don’t. They aren’t interested.

A great many of the poor can’t read, and the rest don’t, but in both cases it is by choice, not because of poverty. The poor can go to the public schools. Their parents can encourage them to study. The schools are terrible, but neither is this because of poverty. The per-student expenditure in Washington is high. The city could afford good teachers and good texts. It isn’t interested.

Music? A hundred-dollar boombox these days provides remarkably good sound, and I’d roll in pirate CDs. The poor listen chiefly to grunting animalic rap, but that is by choice, not by necessity. Washington is neck-deep in free concerts by good groups, as for example the regular ones at KenCen. All of these are advertised in the City Paper, which is free. You never see the poor at these performances, though there is no dress code or discrimination. They aren’t interested.
...cut....for brevity...

All of this much reminds me of homosexuals and AIDS. Like illiteracy, AIDS is voluntary. I don’t dislike homosexuals, certainly wish AIDS on no one—but they know how HIV is transmitted. It they choose to indulge, well, so what? People ride motorcycles without helmets. It’s their decision, but don’t expect me to be particularly stunned if they, or I, croak as a result. Don’t want to study? Your decision. I don’t care. We make our choices.

So it is with poverty.

I now encounter charges that culpability for the usually unimpressive health of the purportedly poor rests with McDonald’s, which sells them foods loaded with fat and salt. Indeed McDonald’s does. But eating Big Macs is a choice, isn’t it? The poor could buy better food at the supermarket. Further, they know they could. They tend to watch a lot of television, with its endless health warnings. They eat fat because they want to eat fat.

Is this, in the tiresome phrase, blaming the victim? Absolutely. When the victim is to blame, blame him. If I get drunk and suffer a hangover, is it your fault? Jim Beam’s fault? Why?

Some will object that the (slight) poverty of the American poor somehow forces them to make bad decisions, which they know to be bad decisions. Well, if the poor have no free will, and haplessly do what their environment ordains, can not the management of McDonald’s plead the same?
- - - - -
Any plenty more; I won't post it all, it's there and very good, if you're interested.

 

[laurence]

Eagle, it's an interesting read, but I disagree with it more than I agree. True, we don't have poverty like third world countries have poverty, but telling a 13 year old who is pregnant and on drugs to suck it up is pretty pathetic. It's one thing to go on safari in a crime and drug riddled neighborhood, try living there for a while, have a guy pound on your door screaming, "help, their going to shoot me!" (as I did) and see how long you want to live there. Yes everything is relative, but the message people in this environment have recieved since childhood is "your worthless". It takes a special person to rise above the station they were born into. This website is NOT a good sampling of the average joe/jane, but in general, how many people move up the ladder when compared to their parents? If all you know, all you've experienced is this kind of squalor, how many people can think of a better life without having experienced it? Comparing being born in a crime infested, drug riddled ghetto to engaging in unsafe sex and riding a motorcycle without a helmet is just bogus. Did that 13 year old really "choose to indulge"? Please!

 

[unclemick]

I agree - you have to see a glimpse/get some hope there is a way out. Like one of my Black engineer buddies who did volunteer math tutoring - it's not about the math - it's about hope.

BTY - a certain young lady - sole heir of a large farming op. scarfed him up - he's been a 'gone pecan' - gentleman farmer for a while - a step up from grunt engineer - and he sure as heck ain't going back to Newark.

We had a guy at the plant(15 yrs nobody knew) who could not read or write - but was such an astute observer - he was considered an ace mechanic in his job. He did a good job of hiding the fact.

Then there is The Major - grab every edge you can get, work hard - and then, then you get a spoiled kid (think Fresh Prince of Belair, not Will Smith) - free ride thru Med School with Mom and Pop footing the bill - which apparently no amount of talk about the 'old days' will unspoil.

 

[charlie]

Laurence, it may be age related (71 here) or just my community of
friends, but I can't think of anyone who is not "better off" than
their parents in my little circle.   It is hard for me to relate to the
mind-set of those in abject poverty.

In my heart I know that able bodied persons of average intelligence
can succeed in rising above their circumstances if they want to badly enough, get a decent education and get a little help along the way.  

Of the three, It seems to me that instilling a "want to" spirit is
the toughest nut to crack.  

Cheers,

Charlie

 

[unclemick]

BTY - given where we worked - we basically were exposed to only the succeses - failures were on evening news or when I did my stint on jury duty in Criminal Court.

 

[Martha]

A couple of sociologists recently wrote a book about poor single mothers. A review in the WSJ says:

. . . If anything can revive interest in this vexing subject, it is "Promises I Can Keep" by Kathryn Edin and Maria Kefalas. The book is the product of five years of interviews with black, white and Latino women in the poorest neighborhoods of Camden, N.J., and Philadelphia, where the authors are professors of sociology. Ms. Edin and Ms. Kefalas decisively rescue the young welfare mother from the policy wonks and feminist professors who have held her hostage until recently, and in so doing overthrow decades of conventional wisdom.

That wisdom had it that unmarried poor women got pregnant either because they were unable to get hold of birth control or ignorant of its use or because they viewed a welfare check as a substitute for an in-house father. Not so, find Ms. Edin and Ms. Kefalas: Young women, even those pregnant as young as 14, simply want to have babies. True, many wish that they had waited. But by and large these young women speak in hidebound terms about the "joys of motherhood," as do their young boyfriends, who often whisper "I want to have a baby by you" as part of courtship. Far more than their middle-class counterparts, low-income women are likely to see abortion as wrong and childlessness as a tragedy. It's not a fabulous career or sexual and romantic adventure that endows life with purpose; it's having a baby.

 

[playaman]

Last night I happened to attend a dinner for honorees of the local Beat the Odds Foundation for which I had been on the "winner" selection committee.  Some of them (all in or just out of high school) came from financially poor families.  

One young man from a genuinely poor home particularly impressed me.  His single mother has had eight "heart attacks" and he (aged 14 or so) has been her sole caregiver since the age of 8 -- while living in a homeless shelter (where he and his mother still live).  His guidance counselor saw him walking 4 miles to school some months ago and began investigating the background (and getting some public assistance).  The kid, meanwhile, is a first-stringer on the baseball team and makes almost straight A's.  Says he wants to be a lawyer, and I believe it.

I also believe people can pull themselves from poverty.   Most don't for a myriad of reasons, and I suspect it may be getting harder to do so now than in previous decades.

 

[Martha]

As far as the "eloquent Fred" goes, he reminds me of some of the conspiracy theorists you run into once in a while. Like the guys who believe the moon landing was staged because the US flag is waving. Can be fascinating to listen to, but really.

Fred described himself as a reporter. But he doesn't bother with the facts, concluding with the claim that welfare, subsidized housing, and free medical care are given to todays poor. In fact, these benefits are very limited and if you have no children and you are not disabled, you probably won't get a thing.

 

[Free_at_49]

Very educational thread, it reveals the spectrum of American attitudes. By reading your posts, one learns a lot about American values. After 12 years of living here, I'm still learning. I must tell you though that people from Germany, France or Canada would find all this rather bizarre.

I grew up in Canada and lived in Western Europe for 10+ years, so I have a different perspective on all this. In Canada, equal access to education and healthcare is the cornerstone of a civilized society. It creates the foundation for a mobile middle class, and gives every child an equal opportunity to advance based on their abilities.

I'm appalled at what passes for healthcare in this country and people's apparent willingness to be exploited by insurance companies. A good college costs $30,000/year, that's education for the rich only. I drove through the campus of one of the elite universities in Massachusetts and couldn't help but notice the Mercedes and Lexus that rich students drive. Just outside the campus you see the usual trucks and beaters.

Martha hit the nail on the head in her original post, about the cost of tuition. I have a degree form a fine Canadian university, and back in the 70s my annual tuition was about $600. I could never have afforded a good education in this country, and even if I did, I would have to spend the rest of my life paying back college loans, while the rich kids are busy networking their way to the top. And I couldn't have retired early so I can chat with you all -- the Early Retired elite.

 

[REWahoo]

Very educational thread, it reveals the spectrum of American attitudes. By reading your posts, one learns a lot about American values. After 12 years of living here, I'm still learning. I must tell you though that people from Germany, France or Canada would find all this rather bizarre.

I grew up in Canada and lived in Western Europe for 10+ years, so I have a different perspective on all this. In Canada, equal access to education and healthcare is the cornerstone of a civilized society. It creates the foundation for a mobile middle class, and gives every child an equal opportunity to advance based on their abilities.

Darn! Another Canuk has discovered the dirty secret of the uncivilized rabble living south of the border.

REW

 

[laurence]

Free_at_49, there is a distict cultural difference, without a doubt. But you left out the flip side - taxes. The Marginal tax rate in Canada/Europe is significantly higher to pay for those benefits. The prevailing attitude in this country is "let us keep what we earn, we'll find our own way". Most people are motivated by the dream of wealth. I've got friends who are low income earners but read the get rich quick books and dream of starting their own business. They (and their children) would benefit greatly from things like health care and access to cheap education. But they are hard core conservatives, because they are sure they will be rich someday, and would be affected by things like the "death" tax (estate tax), despite the fact they have a negative net worth and rent an apartment. It's the dream....sorta manifest lotto ticket destiny.

I'm painting a cynical picture, just because that's how I feel right now. But seriously, the overwhelming theme in the U.S., to me anyway, is dream big, no limit to how far you can go, shoot for the stars. The idea of sacrificing on that to provide additional safety nets, to sell out the dream for the sake of homeostasis, just doesn't sell here. The stories of the destitute getting enough help to have a decent small home for their family doesn't sell here, but run a t.v. show about someone who started a business in his "tiny one bedroom apartment" and is now a mulimillionaire, Americans tune in!

 

[Nords]

I must tell you though that people from Germany, France or Canada would find all this rather bizarre.

That's OK, I find many things in those countries bizarre too, but I don't feel compelled to live in them.

Some (not all) of those things have to do with socialism's involuntary separation of me from my money to support govt bureaucracy & waste.

In Canada, equal access to education and healthcare is the cornerstone of a civilized society. It creates the foundation for a mobile middle class, and gives every child an equal opportunity to advance based on their abilities.

I'm appalled at what passes for healthcare in this country and people's apparent willingness to be exploited by insurance companies.

Can't argue with that. I just don't think the govt should be responsible for meeting all aspects of it, especially when it's "using" my money. And if the system is so successful, does it account for the relative number of technological advances in Canadian & European health care fields (like medications & diagnostic) vs American or Asian? Who's paying for those advances? Who was it that claims Canada has a 21st century healthcare system with 1960s technology & appointment scheduling? I'd judge the effectiveness of a healthcare system by the number of non-citizens attempting to access it. I'd also apply the same standards to an educational system-- how many student visas did the U.S. hand out last year?

A good college costs $30,000/year, that's education for the rich only. I drove through the campus of one of the elite universities in Massachusetts and couldn't help but notice the Mercedes and Lexus that rich students drive. Just outside the campus you see the usual trucks and beaters.

Martha hit the nail on the head in her original post, about the cost of tuition. I have a degree form a fine Canadian university, and back in the 70s my annual tuition was about $600. I could never have afforded a good education in this country, and even if I did, I would have to spend the rest of my life paying back college loans, while the rich kids are busy networking their way to the top. And I couldn't have retired early so I can chat with you all -- the Early Retired elite.

I hope that a $30K college would be good, but that's not always the case! Nor is it true that good colleges cost $30K. (If that's education for the rich only, then let 'em pay it.) We've had plenty of other threads here on the value of local/state colleges and scholarships. If you think a good U.S. education is unaffordable then you're definitely in need of one. You and I seem to have achieved ER without it, so perhaps a $30K education isn't as necessary as people think.

You also seem to equate a quality education with $600 tuition, although I don't want to put words in your mouth. Yet at 2% of the cost of a "good" college, $600 would seem rather limited in quality. (Hmm, does quality have a price?) I wonder how a 30-year-old number compares to U.S. college costs (back then or adjusted to today's dollars) and if it reflects any govt subsidies.

I think it's ludicrous to attempt an assessment of demographics, students or otherwise, by cruising parking lots. My family's vehicles reflect our values, not our net worth (or our credit-card debt)...

 

[Lazarus]

I would be happy if health care costs were deductible from Federal Income tax. Very little additional bureaucracy. It would be better over all than the housing deduction which mainly benefits people with large debt or two houses. As far as Canada goes, well there is more than one way to run a country. I think I will just stay here in the U.S. though.

 

[laurence]

I would be happy if health care costs were deductible from Federal Income tax. Very little additional bureaucracy. It would be better over all than the housing deduction which mainly benefits people with large debt or two houses. As far as Canada goes, well there is more than one way to run a country. I think I will just stay here in the U.S. though.

hmmm, well, mine already is via flex spending account at work, are you referring to something for the unemployed? They're usually not paying too much in income tax anyway....

 

[Lazarus]

I was just thinking simply deduct all medical expenses directly from the Federal Income Tax. I have a flex plan at work but don't use it. I felt it wasen't worth my time to fight them over getting my own money back. (They only pay approved expenses.)

 

[cute fuzzy bunny]

Before I got married, when I was living off my own portfolio and managing my tax profile was fairly easy, I did manage to deduct most of my healthcare costs including my monthly HMO payments.

 

[MJ]

I have a flex plan at work but don't use it. I felt it wasen't worth my time to fight them over getting my own money back. (They only pay approved expenses.)

I took advantage of the med flex plan when I was employed. It makes sense when you're in a 33% (fed and state) tax bracket. I always got my money back on all medical expenses. My biggest problem was to try to figure out how much money to allocate since this plan requires you to either use the money or lose it.

MJ

 

[cute fuzzy bunny]

As far as the 13 year old pregnant and on drugs...yeah, you cant ask them to suck it up...but thats not the point. You have to wind it back up about 14 years and point out the 10-20 choices made that ended up with an unparented, unmonitored 13 year old that got pregnant and on drugs.

While my buddy 'freddy' has some points, both good and bad, his observation regarding choices and their inevitable implications is well taken.

The parents made a choice to have the child, then not keep an eye on her and/or teach her about the implications of sex and drug use. Of course the kid isnt going to figure that out for herself. I'm still quite impressed with the short-sighted stupidity of people who dont want to tell their children about sex/drugs/whatever and to not even have it brought up in school, on the assumption that they wont know about it if nobody tells them.

They'll know, and they'll experiment...with the usual results.

People in generations of "poverty" make choices. Have children you cant feed and have no intention of parenting. Sit around watching tv instead of going out looking for a job. Take the handout instead of the hand up or helping your own damn self. Hang with the gang instead of going to school. Teenage sex and drug use. Illegal activities they know can land them in jail. Propogation of violence in the neighborhood...those guys trying to kill someone or rob them are somebodies kids.

Theres an interesting book out called "Freakonomics". I havent read it, but I've seen the author interviewed and read some bits and pieces of his web site. By the way, I dont believe many of his conclusions and see several alternative explanations to what he sees "in the data". However, he has one very interesting piece of long term statistics.

In areas of the country where abortion has been the highest, 15-20 years later the crime rate in that area starts dropping. In areas where abortion has been lowest, crime rates remain the same or rise 15-20 years later. The implication being that unwanted children grow up to become criminals at a higher rate than wanted children.

I've wondered at times if the 'poverty' isnt a result rather than a cause.

Then the government makes it all better by removing information on contraceptives from the government information web site, citing an interest in increasing abstinence and promoting virginity. Thats caused an upshoot in 'alternative' non-vaginal intercourse. Swell, just the effect I'm sure everyone wanted. Billions spent arresting, prosecuting and jailing relatively harmless drug users, the incarceration of which places them next to real criminals and breaks down their lives to the point where their next prison stop wont be for something harmless.

The bad choices made or decisions left unmade, are similar to the way the govt "handles" the problem. An ounce of prevention IS worth a pound of cure.

 

[laurence]

In areas of the country where abortion has been the highest, 15-20 years later the crime rate in that area starts dropping. In areas where abortion has been lowest, crime rates remain the same or rise 15-20 years later. The implication being that unwanted children grow up to become criminals at a higher rate than wanted children.

I am VERY sceptical that a causal relationship can be bourne out here. Who are people willing to get an abortion, who has knowlege of their options re abortion? What kind of neighborhoods have access to good medical care? Obviously, the wealthier neighborhoods. It smells of data mining to me. I bet I can find a direct correlation between percentage of households in a neighborhood with country club memberships and low crime rates.

 

[haha]

I bet I can find a direct correlation between percentage of households in a neighborhood with country club memberships and low crime rates. 

? Golf makes people peaceful?

 

[laurence]

Actually, I've heard some pretty harsh language on the course! Maybe I should have chosen a better avatar for wealth/poverty crime relations.