Quote:
|
Originally Posted by daswig
Who knows...maybe they should have studied in school instead of spending their time smoking pot and reading "Teen Beat".
|
So the working poor - of who pan is speaking - spent their time in high school smoking pot and reading
Teen Beat?
I chuckled whilst reading this. The notion that those working poor have within their homes a stash of old bongs and pipes and stacks of back issues of
Teen Beat seems a little archaic - does anyone actually read
Teen Beat anymore? Do we really believe that the working poor were lazy, pot-smoking do-nothings who are now receving their karmic reward while those who are not poor were the hard-working, nose-to-the-grindstone studious types who are also now reaping the rewards of their toils?
I suppose when we carry those attitudes within us, it's easy to pretend that people are really that simple and the complexities of life are just part of the socialist manifesto designed to separate good,
true Americans from their hard-earned money.
Black and white makes for good photographs and moody films, but it's lousy for real life analogies.
Quote:
|
If you're stupid, no matter how much you make, you can indeed live below the poverty line. And the poverty line, BTW, is generally a statistical critter.
|
Hmm, calling the poverty line a statistical critter....I've never heard a statistic called a critter before. I may be wrong, but I take this statement as a trivialization of the idea of a poverty line. Taking away from its factual basis as a number that describes the ability of people who work 40 hours a week - the basis of pan's thread - to earn a decent living is disingenuous. Your statement that the stupid can still be poor even though they make a lot of money does not address the issue of this thread. A stupid person may be intellectually poor, but if they're making $75,000 a year, they are not living below the poverty line.
Quote:
|
If you're born poor and WANT to get out of poverty, you can do it. It may not be fun, it may entail a lot of hard work, but it certainly can be done. Even in Ohio.
|
The working poor are not looking for a fun and easy way out. They're already working a full-time job. Some of them are even working 2 jobs. We're talking about people who cannot afford college but are willing to work as hard as they must to make ends meet. Don't they deserve a wage that allows them the means and the time to raise their families?
I'm not making this argument to ask for pity, but illustrate a point. My wife and I have a combined yearly income of nearly $100,000. This would ideally seem like a lot of money to live on, yet we are unable to afford a house. The reason is simple: based on our careers, we signed a contract requiring us to live within the city limits of Chicago. Housing in Chicago is not exactly cheap. While we do not live in poverty, we are unable to afford a mortgage. We did this willingly and are very happy with where we are, but that is us. If we are unable to afford a home at our income, what makes you think that a family of four with a household income of $50,000 can even begin to make it in places like Chicago, New York, or San Francisco? As much as we may like to be dismissive of places like this as not reflecting a true picture of affordability in our nation, it doesn't detract from the fact that well over 20 million people inhabit these cities and many of them must deal with the reality of not having a livable wage.
The reality is that there are many people in our nation unable to afford a lifestyle that is comfortable or even livable. That someone who works an honest day is not able to afford the basic necessities in life is dispicable.