Paul Ryan, Crusader for the Poor

[arkirk]

The only thing Ryan is planning is a run for the presidency in 2016.

You mean that big hearted fellow isn't trying his best to help those he truly cares for...the poor?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

why do you find that curious?

Immigrants are self selected and many come over here with college degrees, and none of them come with the baggage of US history.

To a non-US person that baggage is not so obvious. One of the most surprising things I had when living in the US was that you guys still keep indians in reservations, for example. (And also that everyone believes in ghosts but that's a different thing.)

They can *CHOOSE* to live on the reservations--those are treaty-granted lands--but there is no requirement to do so.

- - - Updated - - -

You just shot yourself in the foot here.

no, I didn't.

If they don't come with the baggage then whatever that baggage is must not affect them.

and if I don't have the flu virus, I don't get the flu.

Therefore it's not anything society is doing to them,

unless society is giving them a benefit of the doubt it doesn't give native born black folk.

But you said they didn't have the baggage. You're contradicting yourself now.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Some remaining poor isn't a counter.

The fact is that an awful lot of immigrants manage to climb out of being poor despite greater barriers than the native-born have is evidence that climbing out is possible.

Loren you can make the argument that I can change my circumstance and can get myself out of poverty, but you can't then extrapolate that into meaning the I or even all the poor people cause poverty. Poverty.comes from an insufficient distribution of resources and poor folk don't control distribution of resources..

Duh.

You're the one causing poverty--by saying it's not what they're doing you ensure they do nothing to fix the problem.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

To a non-US person that baggage is not so obvious. One of the most surprising things I had when living in the US was that you guys still keep indians in reservations, for example. (And also that everyone believes in ghosts but that's a different thing.)

They can *CHOOSE* to live on the reservations--those are treaty-granted lands--but there is no requirement to do so.

- - - Updated - - -

You just shot yourself in the foot here.

no, I didn't.

If they don't come with the baggage then whatever that baggage is must not affect them.

and if I don't have the flu virus, I don't get the flu.

Therefore it's not anything society is doing to them,

unless society is giving them a benefit of the doubt it doesn't give native born black folk.

But you said they didn't have the baggage. You're contradicting yourself now.

go back and read what I typed.

I think you are confused.

 

[DBT]

Nobody should be exploiting anyone in order to gain excessive wealth...a system of fair and reasonable pay for a workers time, skill and labour shouldn't unachievable in well developed society.

 

[J842P]

Some immigrant vs. native poverty statistics:

http://cis.org/node/3876

Curiously, if you are a black immigrant, you are less likely to be poor than a US-born black person.

why do you find that curious?

Immigrants are self selected and many come over here with college degrees, and none of them come with the baggage of US history.

Aye. The only black immigrants I knew were a couple of Africans who were fairly wealthy, a couple of working-class yet fairly well-off Africans, and a a rich family from the UK.

- - - Updated - - -

wrong conclusion, as usual

As for what you see, I see immigrants who come here and live here decades and die poor and struggling

so there.

Some remaining poor isn't a counter.

The fact is that an awful lot of immigrants manage to climb out of being poor despite greater barriers than the native-born have is evidence that climbing out is possible.

It was never in dispute that it is possible to go from being poor to not poor.

 

[J842P]

To a non-US person that baggage is not so obvious. One of the most surprising things I had when living in the US was that you guys still keep indians in reservations, for example. (And also that everyone believes in ghosts but that's a different thing.)

They can *CHOOSE* to live on the reservations--those are treaty-granted lands--but there is no requirement to do so.

- - - Updated - - -

You just shot yourself in the foot here.

no, I didn't.

If they don't come with the baggage then whatever that baggage is must not affect them.

and if I don't have the flu virus, I don't get the flu.

Therefore it's not anything society is doing to them,

unless society is giving them a benefit of the doubt it doesn't give native born black folk.

But you said they didn't have the baggage. You're contradicting yourself now.

I think you are misreading what Athena has to say. What she is describing is exactly on point.

 

[SimpleDon]

Loren you can make the argument that I can change my circumstance and can get myself out of poverty, but you can't then extrapolate that into meaning the I or even all the poor people cause poverty. Poverty.comes from an insufficient distribution of resources and poor folk don't control distribution of resources..

Duh.

You're the one causing poverty--by saying it's not what they're doing you ensure they do nothing to fix the problem.

Mobility in the US is largely a myth, moving in either direction. The most reliable predictor of any person's success in the US is the parents' class and income.

Extraordinary people who are born poor will have bad nutrition and poor schooling and will most likely still die poor. An near idiot born to wealthy parents will have the best of everything, the best schools, tutors, internships and will die rich, but not before they are able to do so much more damage to the economy because they will control so much money and power.

Both are losses to our country, the poor extraordinary who lacks opportunity and the village idiot who ends up with too much money and power because of the industry of their parents or grandparents. I am thinking of a recent president who seemed to owe everything to who his parents and grandparents were and nothing to his own personal abilities.

Both should be allowed to seek their own levels in society based on their own abilities. But they are prevented by basically the same problem. Our obsession with providing the already rich with ever more money, money that they can leave to their children and grandchildren through many generations undiminished. It concentrates ever increasing amounts of money and the power that comes with money in fewer hands. Often putting it in the hands of incompetent people. It has shifted money away from wages into ever increasing profits, money collected mostly by the already rich.

You asked me in a different thread why Sweden, which has nearly the same level of income inequity as the US, is somehow more successful than the US. Here are two of the reasons. Social mobility in Sweden is more than twice as good as it is in the US. In both directions, promoting the achievers from the middle class and demoting underachievers away from money and power.

And Sweden, unlike the US, has no real poverty. It is at the low end a middle class country. No kids are hungry stunting their development. The society invests heavily in human capital, in education. No qualified students are denied a college education because they can't afford it.

People who are willing to work shouldn't be poor. They shouldn't have to rely on government programs to get by. We would gain so much by moving more people into the middle class. Moving more into the middle class would improve our human capital. Moving more people into the middle class should reduce crime. We would increase our sagging economic demand too, the main thing that is blocking our recovery from the GFC&R.

Increase the minimum wage. Introduce sector wide wage negotiations to level the playing field between companies and their employees without putting anyone's company at a competitive disadvantage because they pay higher wages. You remove wages from competitive pressures.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

Loren you can make the argument that I can change my circumstance and can get myself out of poverty, but you can't then extrapolate that into meaning the I or even all the poor people cause poverty. Poverty.comes from an insufficient distribution of resources and poor folk don't control distribution of resources..

Duh.

You're the one causing poverty--by saying it's not what they're doing you ensure they do nothing to fix the problem.

Loren,

Poverty was here before I was born so no I don't cause it.

what I or any else says on a message board will not cause poverty.

like I said, you can make the argument that what a person does can move move that person in and out of poverty, but that does not make the social condition of poverty that person's fault since if that person had never been born, poverty would still exist.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

They can *CHOOSE* to live on the reservations--those are treaty-granted lands--but there is no requirement to do so.

- - - Updated - - -

You just shot yourself in the foot here.

no, I didn't.

If they don't come with the baggage then whatever that baggage is must not affect them.

and if I don't have the flu virus, I don't get the flu.

Therefore it's not anything society is doing to them,

unless society is giving them a benefit of the doubt it doesn't give native born black folk.

But you said they didn't have the baggage. You're contradicting yourself now.

go back and read what I typed.

I think you are confused.

Show where I'm misunderstanding.

You said they didn't have the baggage then you proceed to assert baggage they have. You can't have it both ways.

 

[J842P]

They can *CHOOSE* to live on the reservations--those are treaty-granted lands--but there is no requirement to do so.

- - - Updated - - -

You just shot yourself in the foot here.

no, I didn't.

If they don't come with the baggage then whatever that baggage is must not affect them.

and if I don't have the flu virus, I don't get the flu.

Therefore it's not anything society is doing to them,

unless society is giving them a benefit of the doubt it doesn't give native born black folk.

But you said they didn't have the baggage. You're contradicting yourself now.

go back and read what I typed.

I think you are confused.

Show where I'm misunderstanding.

You said they didn't have the baggage then you proceed to assert baggage they have. You can't have it both ways.

What? What baggage did she assert they have?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

You're the one causing poverty--by saying it's not what they're doing you ensure they do nothing to fix the problem.

Mobility in the US is largely a myth, moving in either direction. The most reliable predictor of any person's success in the US is the parents' class and income.

A while back someone presented some data, 10% of those in the bottom quintile will eventually reach the top quintile. Sounds pretty good to me.

Extraordinary people who are born poor will have bad nutrition and poor schooling and will most likely still die poor. An near idiot born to wealthy parents will have the best of everything, the best schools, tutors, internships and will die rich, but not before they are able to do so much more damage to the economy because they will control so much money and power.

Bad nutrition is an issue--but blame the parents. You can get adequate nutrition cheap, it just isn't as easy as the crap I always see the food stamp people buying.

Poor schooling--schools are to a very large degree a reflection of the students, not the cause. The inner city schools are crap because they get students whose parents don't care.

Both are losses to our country, the poor extraordinary who lacks opportunity and the village idiot who ends up with too much money and power because of the industry of their parents or grandparents. I am thinking of a recent president who seemed to owe everything to who his parents and grandparents were and nothing to his own personal abilities.

Both should be allowed to seek their own levels in society based on their own abilities. But they are prevented by basically the same problem. Our obsession with providing the already rich with ever more money, money that they can leave to their children and grandchildren through many generations undiminished. It concentrates ever increasing amounts of money and the power that comes with money in fewer hands. Often putting it in the hands of incompetent people. It has shifted money away from wages into ever increasing profits, money collected mostly by the already rich.

The cost to society to implement this would be too great. There are two issues:

1) You have to say that hard work doesn't bring rewards of a form that can be given to one's children.

2) In practice you end up chopping down the successful while providing basically no help to those on the bottom.

And Sweden, unlike the US, has no real poverty. It is at the low end a middle class country. No kids are hungry stunting their development. The society invests heavily in human capital, in education. No qualified students are denied a college education because they can't afford it.

No qualified students in the US are denied college, either. It might be loans instead but they can go.

What Sweden doesn't have is the culture of poverty that we have.

People who are willing to work shouldn't be poor. They shouldn't have to rely on government programs to get by. We would gain so much by moving more people into the middle class. Moving more into the middle class would improve our human capital. Moving more people into the middle class should reduce crime. We would increase our sagging economic demand too, the main thing that is blocking our recovery from the GFC&R.

The problem is that they aren't willing to work.

Increase the minimum wage. Introduce sector wide wage negotiations to level the playing field between companies and their employees without putting anyone's company at a competitive disadvantage because they pay higher wages. You remove wages from competitive pressures.

Minimum wage: Drive unemployment even higher.

Sector wide negotiations: About as level as cliff! And you'll outsource even more jobs as everything that can possibly be moved will be because no company can make a profit in such a realm.

No competition means basically certain incompetence.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

You're the one causing poverty--by saying it's not what they're doing you ensure they do nothing to fix the problem.

Loren,

Poverty was here before I was born so no I don't cause it.

what I or any else says on a message board will not cause poverty.

like I said, you can make the argument that what a person does can move move that person in and out of poverty, but that does not make the social condition of poverty that person's fault since if that person had never been born, poverty would still exist.

Ok, replace cause with perpetuate.

The social conditions are coming from the families and there's no hope of fixing them until this is addressed.

You sound like a tobacco executive.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

Loren,

Poverty was here before I was born so no I don't cause it.

what I or any else says on a message board will not cause poverty.

like I said, you can make the argument that what a person does can move move that person in and out of poverty, but that does not make the social condition of poverty that person's fault since if that person had never been born, poverty would still exist.

Ok, replace cause with perpetuate.

The social conditions are coming from the families and there's no hope of fixing them until this is addressed.

You sound like a tobacco executive.

No, I don't.

Are you ok?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Ok, replace cause with perpetuate.

The social conditions are coming from the families and there's no hope of fixing them until this is addressed.

You sound like a tobacco executive.

No, I don't.

Are you ok?

I'm referring to the denials of the addictiveness of cigarettes. You're doing the same thing with the main cause of poverty.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

No, I don't.

Are you ok?

I'm referring to the denials of the addictiveness of cigarettes. You're doing the same thing with the main cause of poverty.

no, I'm not.

where in the world did you get that?

You know, its ok to just say I misread that. To keep going makes you look confused.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I'm referring to the denials of the addictiveness of cigarettes. You're doing the same thing with the main cause of poverty.

no, I'm not.

where in the world did you get that?

You know, its ok to just say I misread that. To keep going makes you look confused.

You keep trying to deny that poverty is self-caused and your justifications sound about as good as the tobacco executives denying that cigarettes are addictive.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

no, I'm not.

where in the world did you get that?

You know, its ok to just say I misread that. To keep going makes you look confused.

You keep trying to deny that poverty is self-caused and your justifications sound about as good as the tobacco executives denying that cigarettes are addictive.

You can argue that an individual is in poverty because he put himself there, but not that he caused poverty.

Do you think people living in developing.nations working of pennies a hour self created the poverty in which they live?

Do you think sharrecroppers in the 1920s created the poverty in which they lived?

 

[Axulus]

Athena,

Do you believe that there are any individual behaviors that contribute to poverty and/or make it more likely for one to enter poverty and fail to escape it?

If so, how much of a factor do you believe these behaviors are to poverty in the US (i.e., if none of the behaviors existed, how much of a difference would it make on poverty)? Are you basing this on gut feeling or data?

 

[DBT]

It's a complex issue, the nature and character of an individual is shaped by genes and environment: opportunity, social conditions, work availability, natural talents, business opportunities, the aptitude to utilize the available options....