Poverty levels.

C

Carthoris

Well-Known Member
The biggest thing doing the post did for me was simply to let me plot out my thoughts on something and fill in the gaps of what I wasn't 100% sure on. I definitely didn't know that the poverty level was made in the 60s by taking 50s food prices and multiplying them by 3 and then applying another manipulated number(inflation) to it to come up with our current number.

I am not a spring chicken anymore, so I don't get to sit in a classroom and write papers and get feedback. Sometimes we miss obvious things simply due to looking at them from the wrong perspective.

I wasn't trying to get a fight going, I was simply taking you all along somewhat as I muddled through it. I know some of you appreciated it simply for a new conversation to have if nothing else.:)
 
C

Carthoris

Well-Known Member
Samwell Seed Well said:
id say percentage of population unable for whatever reason to make a wage that allows them to progress is important, and in no way trivial

the two values being used together measn notta as teh outcome is the same . . . . under poverty level
Click to expand...
The unemployment and poverty numbers have nothing to do with 'percentage of population unable for whatever reason to make a wage that allows them to progress'. If you won the lottery, bought a giant house and a vault to fill with gold and decided to never work again, you would still be considered to be unemployed and in poverty simply due to not having an income.

The numbers that our government gives us are trivial and unimportant, not the issue itself. I wouldn't mind conversation on what the level of poverty really is.
 
Samwell Seed Well

Samwell Seed Well

Well-Known Member
Carthoris said:
The unemployment and poverty numbers have nothing to do with 'percentage of population unable for whatever reason to make a wage that allows them to progress'. If you won the lottery, bought a giant house and a vault to fill with gold and decided to never work again, you would still be considered to be unemployed and in poverty simply due to not having an income.

The numbers that our government gives us are trivial and unimportant, not the issue itself. I wouldn't mind conversation on what the level of poverty really is.
Click to expand...
poverty is just a word to classify us into different groups so political campaigns can use hype words to create an atmosphere of trust and understanding through mutual outlooks

i disagree that that the numbers have nothing to do with 'percentage of population unable for whatever reason to make a wage that allows them to progress' on principle you re correct, but the fact that these numbers are used as political ploys dont make them any less serious . . a large population has never and will never be able to be self sufficient do to the system that does not enable the impoverished . . go to local DSHS at 7 find me a home owner with no job, and mortgage/ is not owning , if you do get a job even a shitty one that still keeps you under poverty level, they cut your benifts . . . . . one step forward and then the same step back . . .and the lack of reeducation for the work force is appalling . .

income is income, assets are assets . . . .without income you cant pay for all the nice things not being impoverish lays for, BILLS property taxes, luxuory taxes . . . electricity, heat, food drink, tons of shit if you have assets then you have income or you are a dependent and you contributions and or lack there of are still being taken into account under tax code of someone else
 
C

Carthoris

Well-Known Member
Samwell Seed Well said:
id say percentage of population unable for whatever reason to make a wage that allows them to progress is important, and in no way trivial

the two values being used together means notta as the outcome is the same . . . . under poverty level. the important information in those values is that they represent people and in no way even if used by slimy political PC thugs , should be considered irrelevant to what is wrong with this country

why the lowest income range of people cant get ahead or in this case or not getting ahead is pretty important, having been at poverty level income and getting out of it to just above poverty level i see very little contrast, now i have animals and internet and phone accounts . . but am i really living any better . . nope

costs of living rising and falling should be what is discussed in this thread, cost of basic necessities . . . in other words corporations taking advantage of rising costs of business then when they subside they keep ther prices high, raising the cost of living but avg income for largest percentage of population still doesn't go up . . .
Click to expand...
Since you edited and changed your post after I replied to it:

Who in the country doesn't have the ability to make minimum wage for 40 hours a week? Just having kids and working at McDonalds gives you a fat EIC return, so you are above poverty level regardless if you are single and have kids per the government.

The only people who legitimately cannot rise from where they are are people who are completely crippled. If a person can reason, they can overcome their station in life.

If you moved out of poverty and immediately got a pet and internet then that tells you why you don't live better. You could of used that internet and pet money to better yourself. Just like the people who struggle through the year and then get 5 or 6k back at the end of the year, do they take what they have been given and really try to do anything with it? Poverty is a state of mind in the United States, not something that someone else is forcing you to. You do not live in poverty is you have a place to live, AC/Heat, electricity, and Food. There are few people who couldn't get a second job if they chose to. They just lack the will.

I was discussing the cost of living and the prices of things. Look at my opening post and see how many times 'cost of living' is in it. I was discussing it in a scholarly way instead of an emotional rant.
 
Samwell Seed Well

Samwell Seed Well

Well-Known Member
Carthoris said:
Since you edited and changed your post after I replied to it:

Who in the country doesn't have the ability to make minimum wage for 40 hours a week? Just having kids and working at McDonalds gives you a fat EIC return, so you are above poverty level regardless if you are single and have kids per the government.

The only people who legitimately cannot rise from where they are are people who are completely crippled. If a person can reason, they can overcome their station in life.

If you moved out of poverty and immediately got a pet and internet then that tells you why you don't live better. You could of used that internet and pet money to better yourself. Just like the people who struggle through the year and then get 5 or 6k back at the end of the year, do they take what they have been given and really try to do anything with it? Poverty is a state of mind in the United States, not something that someone else is forcing you to. You do not live in poverty is you have a place to live, AC/Heat, electricity, and Food. There are few people who couldn't get a second job if they chose to. They just lack the will.

I was discussing the cost of living and the prices of things. Look at my opening post and see how many times 'cost of living' is in it. I was discussing it in a scholarly way instead of an emotional rant.
Click to expand...

how is your first post scholary, not trying to be a douche(but i am) but how is one aspect of poverty valid and another not . . . the sociological reason for what is defined as poverty and what is poverty are not limited to terms and keywords from OP

if you want a discusssion we can have it, if you want to invalidate what i say then there is no hope
 
nontheist

nontheist

Well-Known Member
Samwell Seed Well said:
how is your first post scholary, not trying to be a douche(but i am) but how is one aspect of poverty valid and another not . . . the sociological reason for what is defined as poverty and what is poverty are not limited to terms and keywords from OP

if you want a discusssion we can have it, if you want to invalidate what i say then there is no hope
Click to expand...
Samwell you're too passionate and it's blinding you. Nothing he said is partisanship or deserved rage posts.
 
NLXSK1

NLXSK1

Well-Known Member
nontheist said:
Samwell you're too passionate and it's blinding you. Nothing he said is partisanship or deserved rage posts.
Click to expand...
I swear to god that he is reading shit Carthoris and I simply did not write.

Somehow he thinks we are attacking poverty when we are not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top