Is Poverty Even Breakable In The US?

[RVonse]

You solve poverty by providing education.

Wrong. If education worked, the millennials would be the richest and most prosperous generation in the history of mankind. The mellennnials have more education and more debt from said education than has ever occurred in the history of schooling. Yet many of those same people make less than most blue collar jobs.

 

[DBT]

Meaningful reform appears to face a whole lot of resistance from the right wing and business sector.

 

[RVonse]

Yes, capitalism doesn't work very well when large numbers of people are excluded from sharing in the rewards from the surplus produced by the system. This is what has happened in the US since the founding of the nation, but due to the industrial revolution and the continuous improvements to the efficiency of production since industrialization appeared, the surplus above what is needed for substance keeps growing as well as our ability to eliminate the growing income and wealth inequality.

Capitalism worked very well for the unskilled population of Detroit when auto manufacturing was popular there. It was only when those auto plants died that poverty income disparity quickly followed.

You are confusing the effects of capitalism vs manufacturing.

 

[RVonse]

Yes, right-wingers seem to think that everybody should get a MBA, that everybody will be capable of getting into a MBA program, that everybody will then graduate with a MBA degree if they try hard enough, and that everybody will then get a job as a CEO of a big business.

Isaac Asimov has a good answer to that.

Or consider the person who said to me once, "How pleasant it would be if only we lived a hundred years ago when it was easy to get servants."

"It would be horrible," I said at once.

"Why?" came the astonished answer.

And I said, quite matter-of-factly, "We'd be the servants."

From "Best Food Backwards" in "The Planet that Wasn't".

Everyone should have a worthwhile job skill, though.

If an employer really values a particular skill he should and will train the employee in an apprentice program. The employer is in a much better position to take risk as far as education goes anyway.

 

[RVonse]

I'm not saying everyone would get a degree.

Everyone should have a worthwhile job skill, though.

We offshored a lot of job skill jobs overseas. And computers are being used to unemploy millions that had skills, even technical ones.

Most of the jobs that went offshore are pretty low skill.

All the more reason they should not have gone offshore if we are looking for the elimination of poverty in East Cleveland!

 

[RVonse]

Poverty, however, is extremely difficult to overcome because the people in poverty don't act in their long term interests.

Then it should be up to the government to teach them to act in their long term interests!

I grew up in the public school system and never took ONE course on personal financial solvency. We are teaching our first graders sex education how to masturbate but nothing at all how to stay out of financial ruin!

 

[RVonse]

Most of the jobs that went offshore are pretty low skill.

This is the thing about cognitive inequality. Some people are just not going to get beyond the low skill set, for whatever reason. This should be recognized and policies in place to promote reshoring of low skill work and limits on the immigration of low skill labor.

Agree 100%

But what you just said is so obvious and spot on it will surely fly over everyone's head. And not just the people on this forum but our federal government as well.

 

[DBT]

If working productively, those with limited cognitive ability should not be exploited. Not in any other sense. Being employed full time in low skilled but essential work should not put or keep someone in poverty.

 

[DrZoidberg]

'Unskilled work' is often essential work. Somebody has to do the cleaning and hauling. Which doesn't mean that those doing 'menial' work should be underpaid.

If the market sets the labour value then there's no wage so low that is underpaid. Whatever the job pays is what it's worth.

Leftists often use words all wrongly to make arguments. I'm a socialist and every time one of us does it I feel shame. It happens a lot.

My opinion is that the government should stay the fuck away from messing with the market and instead focus on helping those who, for whatever reason struggle to have a decent life in the market. Focus on welfare and education. Instead of trying to tell the market what to do.

In Denmark anybody can quit their jobs and live off welfare. Perpetually if they like. It means that menial labour jobs wages are pushed up. Because if a shit jobs wage is so low that they might as well live off welfare, they'll live off welfare. It's a great system.

Denmark has no minimum wage laws.

 

[RVonse]

In Denmark anybody can quit their jobs and live off welfare. Perpetually if they like. It means that menial labour jobs wages are pushed up. Because if a shit jobs wage is so low that they might as well live off welfare, they'll live off welfare. It's a great system.

Denmark has no minimum wage laws.

I would think the pushing up of menial wages would be the least of the factors to worry about.

What I hear much more often is the complaining from conservatives about a government welfare state that will eventually disenfranchise all work (and I think they are probably correct). Why does this not happen in Denmark? Especially if you can live a middle class lifestyle with no work? Most people living in the US would love to be retired early if there were sufficient means to do so. But if everyone in the world did exactly that, who would make the goods and services? We do not have enough robots and AI to take their place yet do we? Some people still need to work don't they?

 

[Gospel]

In Denmark anybody can quit their jobs and live off welfare. Perpetually if they like. It means that menial labour jobs wages are pushed up. Because if a shit jobs wage is so low that they might as well live off welfare, they'll live off welfare. It's a great system.

Denmark has no minimum wage laws.

I would think the pushing up of menial wages would be the least of the factors to worry about.

What I hear much more often is the complaining from conservatives about a government welfare state that will eventually disenfranchise all work (and I think they are probably correct). Why does this not happen in Denmark? Especially if you can live a middle class lifestyle with no work? Most people living in the US would love to be retired early if there were sufficient means to do so. But if everyone in the world did exactly that, who would make the goods and services? We do not have enough robots and AI to take their place yet do we? Some people still need to work don't they?

I'd think young folks would have more access to those open positions once stagnated by dinosaurs and the jobs (like flipping burgers) young folks usually fill up would be replaced with machines or said dinosaurs who didn't prepare for retirement. However, the market has a way of surprising us all so it's highly likely we're both wrong.

 

[DrZoidberg]

In Denmark anybody can quit their jobs and live off welfare. Perpetually if they like. It means that menial labour jobs wages are pushed up. Because if a shit jobs wage is so low that they might as well live off welfare, they'll live off welfare. It's a great system.

Denmark has no minimum wage laws.

I would think the pushing up of menial wages would be the least of the factors to worry about.

What I hear much more often is the complaining from conservatives about a government welfare state that will eventually disenfranchise all work (and I think they are probably correct). Why does this not happen in Denmark? Especially if you can live a middle class lifestyle with no work? Most people living in the US would love to be retired early if there were sufficient means to do so. But if everyone in the world did exactly that, who would make the goods and services? We do not have enough robots and AI to take their place yet do we? Some people still need to work don't they?

Because people actually enjoy work? It's a system that actually works.

People aren't lazy if they have a possibility to do something with their lives.

And hot women prefer guys with a job. That's never going to change. It's a great motivator in life

 

[ZiprHead]

Because people actually enjoy work? It's a system that actually works.

People aren't lazy if they have a possibility to do something with their lives.

People in America can be poor and not work or they can work and still be poor. Which would you choose?

 

[Gospel]

Because people actually enjoy work? It's a system that actually works.

People aren't lazy if they have a possibility to do something with their lives.

People in America can be poor and not work or they can work and still be poor. Which would you choose?

Clearly whichever one gets him pussy.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

You need to really stop strawman'ing every damn post. I even underlined "proving themselves".

Yeah, you pretended someone less prepared could do just as well as someone more prepared. Why have admissions criteria at all, then?

Either there's a standard or there isn't, the idea that different people should have different standards crazy. (Beware of cases where the standard isn't really the objective, though--for example, differing exercise standards for men and women. It's not about having a certain level of ability, but the true objective is to measure physical fitness. How many pull-ups is a proxy, not what they actually care about.)

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Manufacturing. US poverty can be fixed the same way China fixed it. Union manufacturing jobs are the only job that pay enough to support a family with 4. Even more important is that manufacturing jobs are the high paying industry that the indigenous population of East Cleveland can do right NOW. Poor people that do not have to be educated, do not have to sell, and do not even have to wear good clothing. All they have to do is show up to work and they are out of poverty and solidly in the middle class.

And yes the robots and automation are taking away these jobs. But the automated plants that are left need to be located where the poor people live in right now.

That is how government can eliminate poverty if it wants to. But the real question to be asked is whether our government really wants to eliminate poverty? I'm not sure the Democrats want the poverty to be completely gone.

You're forgetting about the quality of the workforce. Those manufacturing plants are going to want people who follow the directions and come to work neither drunk, high or hung over. And the automated plants require more general competence--I would say that 100% of our workers (one of those automated plants you are talking about) than we would be likely to get in a place like East Cleveland. You actually have to be able to read what's on your screen and interact with it in a meaningful way, not just memorize steps by rote.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Poverty, however, is extremely difficult to overcome because the people in poverty don't act in their long term interests.

Then it should be up to the government to teach them to act in their long term interests!

Horse, water.

I grew up in the public school system and never took ONE course on personal financial solvency. We are teaching our first graders sex education how to masturbate but nothing at all how to stay out of financial ruin!

I do agree we should have some financial education. But nobody's teaching kids how to masturbate, simply telling them it's normal.

 

[Swammerdami]

Poverty caused by systemic racism is hard to defeat. Programs like affirmative action are a step in the right direction.

A recent news story claims that the estimated price of a black-owned home doubled when the owner's race was concealed! Meanwhile tax officials assess black homes as though they were in white neighborhoods. Is this blacks' fault?

Recently we observed the centennial anniversary of what happened in Tulsa when blacks succeeded. Can America move past such racism?

No one is saying give this black kid a scalpel because he is black. What is being done is providing people that had fewer resources that managed to get pretty far in high school and college an OPPORTUNITY (you really need to look that word up) at proving themselves in medical school. This is the stuff that helps lead people out of poverty. OPPORTUNITY.

In other words, making inferior doctors and giving them a scalpel. And make more of them flunk out with huge loans they won't be able to repay without the education.

As Mr. Higgins points out, he even underlined a key phrase which Mr. Pechtel quoted but seems not to have read. I'm going to award this round to Jimmy.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Because people actually enjoy work? It's a system that actually works.

People aren't lazy if they have a possibility to do something with their lives.

People in America can be poor and not work or they can work and still be poor. Which would you choose?

Systems create incentives. If all your choices are bad that's evidence of a broken system

 

[Swammerdami]

... But if everyone in the world did exactly that, who would make the goods and services? We do not have enough robots and AI to take their place yet do we? Some people still need to work don't they?

Wouldn't this problem be self-correcting? If nobody's producing goods or services, then these happily unemployed people would be unable to buy goods or services, no matter how many "dollars" they were given. People would have to go back to work, at least at the margins.

But Denmark et al seem to be examples that this problem does not arise anyway.