Poll of the Day > Why is poverty-normalcy such a thing in America?

(+) Yeah! (+)

I'm having a reddit conversation about school lunches and I'm being called rich and privileged because I was able to have food every day.

But I was among the poorest in Canada...

So I asked some more questions (the convo is still ongoing, so no conclusions yet) and it seems to be that in America, being poor and impoverished is so common that it's not an exception, it's the norm.

That's disgusting...

Why don't you guys migrant caravan up to Canada? We NEED people, you will be supported.
---

popcorn.gif

Are you talking about crazy Richard, the homeless guy on the corner? Hes a riot!

Everyone is recently broke millionaires with too much pride to accept responsibility and change it.
I've considered food stamps for myself (and girlfriend) but we're doing fine otherwise. I'd rather use that service once I know my funds aren't growing. Other people definitely need it more.
---

Is it easy to migrate to Canada? I would have thought they had some kind of standards or something
---

Mead posted...

Is it easy to migrate to Canada? I would have thought they had some kind of standards or something

There are some rough standards, but part of our migration bill with the UK includes shortening those standards to allow more immigrants. There's no reason they can't be American immigrants.
---

Seriously, so many working class families are barely getting by. It's a huge problem especially when some major company lays off 15000 people.
---

Another why is/does American topic brought to you by Lokarin.
---

jsb0714 posted...

Another why is/does American topic brought to you by Lokarin.

Don't you guys have foreign curiosities?
---

Its because the US was literally populated by Europes trash and crazies, then they bred. The rich slaveowners then convinced the impoverished white trash that Hey, youre living in shit, but at least youre not black! to give them pride about their impoverished life.

More breeding, slavery ends, slaveowners are the Democrats, Jim Crow laws keep the white trash prideful.

WWII ends, baby boom plus Interstate causes mass expansion of white trash to all parts of America. Television becomes a new fun way to manipulate the public.

Fast forward to the 60s - Martin Luther King Jr. tries to get all poor people to band together so he gets murdered by racists wanting to keep the status quo. Civil Rights happen, Democrats and Republicans switch sides so the racists move to the Republican side, social issues move to the forefront instead of economics for the Democrats.

Pat Buchanan decides to divide the nation in the 70s for political power reasons which sets the Republican agenda in stone, things progress, second baby boom, Democrats make the cities decent while Republicans keep doing their manipulation of poor whites.

Reagan was a feel good puppet who destroyed union power, Clinton decided to play nice with Republicans which allows them to push their agenda in the 90s including work requirements for welfare and removing the divide between investment and commercial banks.

Enter 24 hour new cycle, even more manipulation of the public, W continues things with the now massive support of the religious right (descendants of the crazies), 9/11 happens with W asleep at the wheel, Afghanistan invasion, propaganda changes the focus to Iraq because stupid people, Iraq invasion, hooray for war, boo for war, social media gives idiots a microphone, slight Democratic resurgence.

Economic crash, Obama elected, 24 hour news and social media manipulation go into overdrive, jobless recovery happens so Republicans can make Obama and Democrats look bad, more social manipulation, Trump elected.
---

A good amount of it is people just being dumb with their financial obligations. You don't need a fancy ass car, you don't need a 70 inch TV, and there's a lot of married couples having kids that (CONTROVERSIAL OPINION WARNING) really shouldn't be having children, for financial reasons.
---

Ok, we got a weird anomaly.

in my discussion they were making it sound like 40~50% of Americans are at food scarcity due to being poor... and when he provided statistics he made it sound like it was more like 12%.

So for once I'm going on someone ELSES misinformation.
---

poor people arent as numerous as you might think. theyre just really fucking loud.
---

Troll_Police_ posted...

poor people arent as numerous as you might think. theyre just really fucking loud.

So did I, like, step on a social landmine?
---

GanglyKhan posted...

A good amount of it is people just being dumb with their financial obligations. You don't need a fancy ass car, you don't need a 70 inch TV, and there's a lot of married couples having kids that (CONTROVERSIAL OPINION WARNING) really shouldn't be having children, for financial reasons.

People do buy things they dont need. But I dont think thats the major reason. I think its just people have grown complacent with living paycheck to paycheck. Lots of families do that.

Troll_Police_ posted...

poor people arent as numerous as you might think. theyre just really fucking loud.

I dont think thats exactly it. I think a lot of people are living paycheck to paycheck, though. Which is different from being poor. I believe there was a stat somewhere that showed a huge percentage of the population was living paycheck to paycheck. Which some people see as poor...

Lokarin posted...

Troll_Police_ posted...

poor people arent as numerous as you might think. theyre just really fucking loud.

So did I, like, step on a social landmine?

Seems like it... But you should have seen that coming...
---

I'd love to get food stamps, but I'm either working too few hours to qualify, or I am working enough hours but my hourly rate is so high that I make too much money. Food stamp rules don't take into account people who have non-traditional jobs with seasonal/irregular work schedules.

captpackrat posted...

I'd love to get food stamps, but I'm either working too few hours to qualify, or I am working enough hours but my hourly rate is so high that I make too much money. Food stamp rules don't take into account people who have jobs with seasonal/irregular work schedules.

What's your annual? I'm on $19k per year and only recently got subsidized housing.
---

Trump is porky from earthbound and mother 3
---

Its best not to engage with anything schmen posts
---

Mead posted...

Its best not to engage with anything schmen posts

I like to involve myself with everyone - I take everything seriously, or, well, at least on good faith.
---

It's because the over abundance of socialist welfare traps have locked the middle class into a perpetual state of near poverty.
---

Blighboy posted...

It's because the over abundance of socialist welfare traps have locked the middle class into a perpetual state of near poverty.

Near poverty? You mean poverty? Because near poverty doesn't give you social security.

If you're going to talk about shit you don't understand at least try to make sense. The real problem is it doesn't wean people off and instead drops them on their asses when they make a penny too much.

Plus, most of our welfare goes to corporations. You can't honestly sit here and tell me poor people are the problem.
---

The politicians benefit from keeping people poor and voting out of fear. Corporations lack the influence to change that, nor are they responsible for doing so.
---

People talk about it as if the spending isn't there, but look at one program, Social Security Disability. You'd be hard pressed to find a program that spends more money every single year anywhere in the world, and yet they still demand more and more money. One underrated issue when you frame the debate as a "we need more/less social spending" binary is that sometimes the problem isn't the lack of money, it's that it comes far too late to make any difference. Or when it becomes way too expensive for someone who needs help to recover.

My sister works as a 3rd grade teacher at an inner-city elementary school in the LAUSD. The school district requires their teachers to watch their students to make sure they do not take any food out of the cafeteria. If they have any leftovers, they must throw it away. In the past, students were attending school malnourished because their parents encouraged them to smuggle their lunches home so that the family could eat it. Some family members even threatened and abused them if they failed to do so. The policy was put into place to stop that.
---

BB mofo posted...

My sister works as a 3rd grade teacher at an inner-city elementary school in the LAUSD. The school district requires their teachers to watch their students to make sure they do not take any food out of the cafeteria. If they have any leftovers, they must throw it away. In the past, students were attending school malnourished because their parents encouraged them to smuggle their lunches home so that the family could eat it. Some family members even threatened and abused them if they failed to do so. The policy was put into place to stop that.

But wouldnt the kids still get abused because they werent able to bring the food home?
---

People are pretty into the bootstraps mentality in America. That's definitely admirable but it's annoying when you have dudes whose dads owned dealerships peddling that philosophy

LinkPizza posted...

BB mofo posted...

My sister works as a 3rd grade teacher at an inner-city elementary school in the LAUSD. The school district requires their teachers to watch their students to make sure they do not take any food out of the cafeteria. If they have any leftovers, they must throw it away. In the past, students were attending school malnourished because their parents encouraged them to smuggle their lunches home so that the family could eat it. Some family members even threatened and abused them if they failed to do so. The policy was put into place to stop that.

But wouldnt the kids still get abused because they werent able to bring the food home?

If it was a known policy to throw the food out, then there's nothing the kids can do.

wah_wah_wah posted...

If it was a known policy to throw the food out, then there's nothing the kids can do.

It's this in theory. But remember that school policy is usually a way to cover the administration's ass. In this case, they want to prevent criticism about students not being fed at school.
---

wah_wah_wah posted...

LinkPizza posted...

BB mofo posted...

My sister works as a 3rd grade teacher at an inner-city elementary school in the LAUSD. The school district requires their teachers to watch their students to make sure they do not take any food out of the cafeteria. If they have any leftovers, they must throw it away. In the past, students were attending school malnourished because their parents encouraged them to smuggle their lunches home so that the family could eat it. Some family members even threatened and abused them if they failed to do so. The policy was put into place to stop that.

But wouldnt the kids still get abused because they werent able to bring the food home?

If it was a known policy to throw the food out, then there's nothing the kids can do.

I know that. I figured they tell everyone about it. But that doesnt mean that they wouldnt still get abused. I mean, they were already being abused if they didnt bring home some of their lunch. Now that they bring home none (rule or not), it could be bad. Especially if the parent was trying to tell them how to sneak stuff out...
---

No it's not really that common. And for whatever reason people like to pretend like they were much worse off as a child than they actually were.
---

Kigalas posted...

Democrats make the cities decent while Republicans keep doing their manipulation of poor whites...push their agenda in the 90s including work requirements for welfare...jobless recovery happens so Republicans can make Obama and Democrats look bad, more social manipulation, Trump elected.

Why is it that the majority-Democrat cities, with Democrat mayors, city councils, judges, and police chiefs, are typically crime-plagued hellholes with strong anti-gun legislation to further exacerbate the problem?
Work requirements for welfare keep people from living 100% on the dole. Welfare exists to help people stay on their feet, not stay on their butt.
No matter who is responsible for the increase in jobs that aren't "operate this drill press for 85 days and then go back to waiting for another temp job to be available in your skillset", it's good for everyone. Working service jobs is bad for the soul, as well as the body. Low pay + high stress = early death.
What really screwed everything in the first place was NAFTA, and the lack of tariffs on imports. Funny how when all of the car manufacturers flew the the four corners of the Earth, and the steel plants went under, people stopped being able to afford new houses, cars, and other things that kept entire industries running. How often do you see a freight train anymore? When I was a kid, it was every few hours, every day. Now I see them about once a year, and I live a block from an "active" rail line.
---

The switch from a manufacturing economy to a service economy certainly contributed as well, but so did the lack of increases in wages around the country after Reagan disbanded the ATC union which was a bellwether for all unions after that.

The greed of the Boomers and the whole taxes = bad bs led to much more money going to CEOs instead of reinvestment back into companies. NAFTA gave companies license to ship jobs overseas in the name of profits, because screw their loyal workers and their country. Couple that with weakening of antitrust laws, a decrease in apprenticeships and a focus on college degrees as a measure of success as well as people in dying industries refusal to get new skills and you get what we have today. A bunch of people with useless skills and a bunch of companies with nobody skilled enough to do the work. But hey, we have 3% unemployment, so everything looks all rosy.
---

There are a lot of poor Americans? But the economy is strong, right? The population could be 98% poor, but as long as the economy is strong... we good.
---

MisterXiado posted...

How often do you see a freight train anymore? When I was a kid, it was every few hours, every day. Now I see them about once a year, and I live a block from an "active" rail line.

Trains are less efficient than planes, they were usurped by technology.
---

GanglyKhan posted...

A good amount of it is people just being dumb with their financial obligations. You don't need a fancy ass car, you don't need a 70 inch TV, and there's a lot of married couples having kids that (CONTROVERSIAL OPINION WARNING) really shouldn't be having children, for financial reasons.

This I knew a guy who supported himself and 2 other adults off I wanna say a 8 dollar an hour job. He had no internet, no cell phones no cable/satellite. His car was a old piece of shit but he knew how to work on it himself. But the bills got paid and nobody was starving.
---

MisterXiado pisted...

How often do you see a freight train anymore? When I was a kid, it was every few hours, every day. Now I see them about once a year, and I live a block from an "active" rail line.

I see freight trains everyday... and I hear them, too...
---

mooreandrew58 posted...

GanglyKhan posted...

A good amount of it is people just being dumb with their financial obligations. You don't need a fancy ass car, you don't need a 70 inch TV, and there's a lot of married couples having kids that (CONTROVERSIAL OPINION WARNING) really shouldn't be having children, for financial reasons.

This I knew a guy who supported himself and 2 other adults off I wanna say a 8 dollar an hour job. He had no internet, no cell phones no cable/satellite. His car was a old piece of shit but he knew how to work on it himself. But the bills got paid and nobody was starving.

Tbf, I think having a cell phone and access to internet would be considered a requirement for employment by a lot of businesses today...
And some companies have made it difficult to make payments offline or without a phone.

Xfma100 posted...

mooreandrew58 posted...

GanglyKhan posted...

A good amount of it is people just being dumb with their financial obligations. You don't need a fancy ass car, you don't need a 70 inch TV, and there's a lot of married couples having kids that (CONTROVERSIAL OPINION WARNING) really shouldn't be having children, for financial reasons.

This I knew a guy who supported himself and 2 other adults off I wanna say a 8 dollar an hour job. He had no internet, no cell phones no cable/satellite. His car was a old piece of shit but he knew how to work on it himself. But the bills got paid and nobody was starving.

Tbf, I think having a cell phone and access to internet would be considered a requirement for employment by a lot of businesses today...
And some companies have made it difficult to make payments offline or without a phone.

Local libraries have computers. And lack of cell phone in the past hasn't stopped me from getting a job. I just straight up tell employers in the interview if I don't have a job I can't afford one. It's a solid point and they understand.
---

mooreandrew58 posted...

GanglyKhan posted...

A good amount of it is people just being dumb with their financial obligations. You don't need a fancy ass car, you don't need a 70 inch TV, and there's a lot of married couples having kids that (CONTROVERSIAL OPINION WARNING) really shouldn't be having children, for financial reasons.

This I knew a guy who supported himself and 2 other adults off I wanna say a 8 dollar an hour job. He had no internet, no cell phones no cable/satellite. His car was a old piece of shit but he knew how to work on it himself. But the bills got paid and nobody was starving.

Where did they live, though? Different areas have different cost of living. In the military, depending on where you lived, you got more money for certain things. For example, Id get more money back in my home state. But currently, I live in a cheap town. I literally couldn't live on my paycheck back home. But here its fine. If I made what normal jobs back then make, I could live like a king down here...
---

LinkPizza posted...

mooreandrew58 posted...

GanglyKhan posted...

A good amount of it is people just being dumb with their financial obligations. You don't need a fancy ass car, you don't need a 70 inch TV, and there's a lot of married couples having kids that (CONTROVERSIAL OPINION WARNING) really shouldn't be having children, for financial reasons.

This I knew a guy who supported himself and 2 other adults off I wanna say a 8 dollar an hour job. He had no internet, no cell phones no cable/satellite. His car was a old piece of shit but he knew how to work on it himself. But the bills got paid and nobody was starving.

Where did they live, though? Different areas have different cost of living. In the military, depending on where you lived, you got more money for certain things. For example, Id get more money back in my home state. But currently, I live in a cheap town. I literally couldn't live on my paycheck back home. But here its fine. If I made what normal jobs back then make, I could live like a king down here...

I know cost of living changes depending on where you are. And it wasn't high there but most people in similar situations in the same area lived in pay by income apartments he didn't.

So what he was payed is neither here nor there just agreeing with guy that a lot of people could cut unneeded things out of their costs in order to get by if needed.

My brother lives closer to a city (literally walking distance I believe) so cost of living is higher he gets paid more I wanna say 30k yearly and he supports himself his gf and kid. He can't afford a home phone or tv though. (He has a cell phone and so does his gf) she has a job too but it's literally just enough to pay her car bill.

Edit. Come to think of it he does live in city limits just his immediate area doesn't look like a city
---

mooreandrew58 posted...

LinkPizza posted...

mooreandrew58 posted...

GanglyKhan posted...

A good amount of it is people just being dumb with their financial obligations. You don't need a fancy ass car, you don't need a 70 inch TV, and there's a lot of married couples having kids that (CONTROVERSIAL OPINION WARNING) really shouldn't be having children, for financial reasons.

This I knew a guy who supported himself and 2 other adults off I wanna say a 8 dollar an hour job. He had no internet, no cell phones no cable/satellite. His car was a old piece of shit but he knew how to work on it himself. But the bills got paid and nobody was starving.

Where did they live, though? Different areas have different cost of living. In the military, depending on where you lived, you got more money for certain things. For example, Id get more money back in my home state. But currently, I live in a cheap town. I literally couldn't live on my paycheck back home. But here its fine. If I made what normal jobs back then make, I could live like a king down here...

I know cost of living changes depending on where you are. And it wasn't high there but most people in similar situations in the same area lived in pay by income apartments he didn't.

So what he was payed is neither here nor there just agreeing with guy that a lot of people could cut unneeded things out of their costs in order to get by if needed.

My brother lives closer to a city (literally walking distance I believe) so cost of living is higher he gets paid more I wanna say 30k yearly and he supports himself his gf and kid. He can't afford a home phone or tv though. (He has a cell phone and so does his gf) she has a job too but it's literally just enough to pay her car bill.

Edit. Come to think of it he does live in city limits just his immediate area doesn't look like a city

Yeah. It works for some people. I do agree that there are a good amount of people that buy stuff that they dont need. Though, I guess needs for people depend on their lifestyle and stuff. But I dont think thats the biggest reason for people not having enough, tbh...
---

LinkPizza posted...

mooreandrew58 posted...

LinkPizza posted...

mooreandrew58 posted...

GanglyKhan posted...

A good amount of it is people just being dumb with their financial obligations. You don't need a fancy ass car, you don't need a 70 inch TV, and there's a lot of married couples having kids that (CONTROVERSIAL OPINION WARNING) really shouldn't be having children, for financial reasons.

This I knew a guy who supported himself and 2 other adults off I wanna say a 8 dollar an hour job. He had no internet, no cell phones no cable/satellite. His car was a old piece of shit but he knew how to work on it himself. But the bills got paid and nobody was starving.

Where did they live, though? Different areas have different cost of living. In the military, depending on where you lived, you got more money for certain things. For example, Id get more money back in my home state. But currently, I live in a cheap town. I literally couldn't live on my paycheck back home. But here its fine. If I made what normal jobs back then make, I could live like a king down here...

I know cost of living changes depending on where you are. And it wasn't high there but most people in similar situations in the same area lived in pay by income apartments he didn't.

So what he was payed is neither here nor there just agreeing with guy that a lot of people could cut unneeded things out of their costs in order to get by if needed.

My brother lives closer to a city (literally walking distance I believe) so cost of living is higher he gets paid more I wanna say 30k yearly and he supports himself his gf and kid. He can't afford a home phone or tv though. (He has a cell phone and so does his gf) she has a job too but it's literally just enough to pay her car bill.

Edit. Come to think of it he does live in city limits just his immediate area doesn't look like a city

Yeah. It works for some people. I do agree that there are a good amount of people that buy stuff that they dont need. Though, I guess needs for people depend on their lifestyle and stuff. But I dont think thats the biggest reason for people not having enough, tbh...

Maybe you are right but I'm just saying when your luck goes sour there are ways to tighten your belt. Being poor sucks I know there was a period in my life all I got was one meal a day.
---

mooreandrew58 posted...

all I got was one meal a day.

A meal?! Luxury! Why, we used to huddle around the exhaust vent at the beat canning factory just to have half of a smell of a bean, and we were happy!
---

Kyuubi4269 posted...

MisterXiado posted...

How often do you see a freight train anymore? When I was a kid, it was every few hours, every day. Now I see them about once a year, and I live a block from an "active" rail line.

Trains are less efficient than planes, they were usurped by technology.

I literally am a freight train conductor.

Theyre by far more efficient than planes. Planes are the costliest form of freight transportation.

One of the reason you see them less is because the smaller lines are/were bought up by the class 1 railroads. Now the freight is consolidated into fewer and longer trains than more frequent smaller ones. Except generally in the winter, due to the temperature.
---

MisterXiado posted...

How often do you see a freight train anymore?

I hear a train go along a small rural spur line a few miles from my house almost daily. The spur services a quarry, a cement plant, a phosphate processor, and several farmer's co-ops.

The rail line in town usually has a train go by every 20 to 30 minutes, it's a Class I line (BNSF).

Most people think their own problems are the worst and other people are better off.

The grass is always greener on the other side.


---

captpackrat posted...

MisterXiado posted...

How often do you see a freight train anymore?

I hear a train go along a small rural spur line a few miles from my house almost daily. The spur services a quarry, a cement plant, a phosphate processor, and several farmer's co-ops.

The rail line in town usually has a train go by every 20 to 30 minutes, it's a Class I line (BNSF).

I used to live in a place even where a train came through almost daily. Always like 3 in the fucking morning too. I lived close to the tracks so it was annoying.
---

mooreandrew58 posted...

captpackrat posted...

MisterXiado posted...

How often do you see a freight train anymore?

I hear a train go along a small rural spur line a few miles from my house almost daily. The spur services a quarry, a cement plant, a phosphate processor, and several farmer's co-ops.

The rail line in town usually has a train go by every 20 to 30 minutes, it's a Class I line (BNSF).

I used to live in a place even where a train came through almost daily. Always like 3 in the fucking morning too. I lived close to the tracks so it was annoying.

Same here, I think the freight train goes through at least 3 times a day but that 5 am one is the worse when you live next to the tracks.
---

1) How to deal with money is not in our school system
2) You can be 100% broke but comfortable.
3) It was the way their parents lived
4) To expand on 2 you eat well, have a roof over your head and have most of your daily needs
5) Drugs. So many people live just for their next high.
6) News, it normalizes everything it can even if it is bad for us
7) The most important, parents don't teach their kids any better.
---