Get Brooklynian.com by Email! 
Grab the Feed (RSS)
Interesting read....
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2011/07/what-is-poverty
Of course, the source of the article is questionable, but the data all seems to come from gov't sources...
[
Mamacita said:
I <3 CTK
Brooklynian » Forum » Brooklyn Politics »
-
yes, the Heritage Foundation is among to foremost think tanks on the right.
To me, their article brings up the fact that poverty is a relative concept, is always changing as a country's wealth changes ...or as a few billionaires skew the mean. This paper by the World Bank seems to do a pretty good job explaining poverty's relative nature, and will save me loads of typing. http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTPGI/Resources/342674-1206111890151/15185_ICRIER_paper-final.pdf
I like how the paper stimulated some thought in my head re:
--What should be the goal of development efforts (aka anti-poverty programs) given our fiscal and political constraints?"
--Should we just focus on eliminating absolute poverty so that they are self sufficient and off public assistance, or should we attempt to get people to the level where they can create wealth for themselves and their family members?
I'm not sure where folks put the Brookings Institute on the left-right continuum these days, but the folks at Brookings seem to argue that the poor are able accumulate all of the amenities described by the Heritage Foundation in a large part because they don't save any of their money for a rainy day, or even maintain a "transactional account" (aka bank account). Lots of stats and graphs:
http://www.brookings.edu/views/papers/gale/19991130.pdf
If the folks at Brookings are right, we may need to some how get folks to value and define Wealth differently. If we were successful, Wealth would be defined as a savings account, a network of friends and family, an education, and a skill set that is valued by the labor market. These things serve as a buffer between something bad happening and a stint on TANF or in a shelter.
If we weren't successful, Wealth would be defined as a high definition TV, new shoes, nice clothes, going to clubs and a nice car. Relative to the above items, these things don't do much good when something bad happens and you can't pay your rent.
It is no newsflash to state that people with lousy spending habits don't tend to garner much sympathy. I think most of us has such a person in our extended friend set or family, and we avoid them like the plague.
Of course, all of this rambling is moot when your name is Joe and you are only skilled enough to earn $9 an hour. Let's assume Joe has best of spending habits, but just doesn't have a brain (or circumstances) that will allow him to get enough skills to get a better paying job.
I think there are a lot of Joe's, and that the folks at Brookings, Heritage and the World Bank always seem to somehow miss him. I have no idea how to improve his lot in life. Some are willing to provide him with affordable housing, others simply say "I can't help all of the Joes in the world, and decide that they will only help him if not helping him is more expensive"
For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor. -
on a less academic front, one can also trust the Magic 8 Ball to answer "yes" or "no" questions like:
"Are people poor in the US largely due to behavioral problems?"
Likewise, it can answer questions like:
"Are people poor in the US largely due to problems of the economy and racism?"
The Magic 8 Ball is great.
For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor. -
Ha, I think you pretty much covered it with those posts whynot. I'm struggling to think of anything to add.
But I do think the view of the poor being hapless victims of the system is counterproductive. There are mechanisms at work... many of which are borne out of the values and habits within the communities of the poor... that are not helping to pull them out of their slump.
And of course, as the Heritage Found. article shows, while being poor still doesn't beat being rich, in America it's not as bad as it's made out to be, at least materially. And when you factor in some of the mechanisms at work (i.e., bad financial habits, predatory credit institutions like check cashing places, pawn shops, payday loan lenders), to me at least it seems like there is a lot of incentive in starting programs that can just educate poor people on how to deal with money. Obviously if one can afford luxuries like premium cable TV or an Xbox they have some form of discretionary income... so I agree that the country, especially those leaning left, need to get a more realistic view of poverty in the US before we can make any headway in "solving" it.
Then again even "normal" folks are struggling now... but much of that too is borne out of fiscal irresponsibility. And it goes all the way to the top (see: Federal Debt Ceiling + Deficit Showdown). As a country we collectively need to recalibrate how we deal with money and wealth... the cycle of poverty is really an extension of that more than an isolated mechanism...
[Mamacita said:
I <3 CTK
-
Is this the awesome "article" that says that the poor own xboxes therefore how poor can they really be?
Spend a buck, light a number for one the 400,000 victims in Darfur: darfurwall.org -
BG- I wish you would join the conversation and help us figure out how to make the poor wealthy.
For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor. -
^^^ Turn them in to professional video game players, obviously.
...not that there's anything wrong with that. -
whynot_31 said:
BG- I wish you would join the conversation and help us figure out how to make the poor wealthy.I feel the same way about the Heritage Foundation.
Spend a buck, light a number for one the 400,000 victims in Darfur: darfurwall.org -
Boygabriel said:
I feel the same way about the Heritage Foundation.I feel it best if I ignore both extremes.
For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor. -
WhyFi said:
^^^ Turn them in to professional video game players, obviously.is there still money in that?
For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor. -
whynot_31 said:
I feel it best if I ignore both extremes.Yes, you've hinted at that in the past.
Spend a buck, light a number for one the 400,000 victims in Darfur: darfurwall.org -
Cool The Kid said:
Ha, I think you pretty much covered it with those posts whynot. I'm struggling to think of anything to add.But I do think the view of the poor being hapless victims of the system is counterproductive. There are mechanisms at work... many of which are borne out of the values and habits within the communities of the poor... that are not helping to pull them out of their slump.
And of course, as the Heritage Found. article shows, while being poor still doesn't beat being rich, in America it's not as bad as it's made out to be, at least materially. And when you factor in some of the mechanisms at work (i.e., bad financial habits, predatory credit institutions like check cashing places, pawn shops, payday loan lenders), to me at least it seems like there is a lot of incentive in starting programs that can just educate poor people on how to deal with money. Obviously if one can afford luxuries like premium cable TV or an Xbox they have some form of discretionary income... so I agree that the country, especially those leaning left, need to get a more realistic view of poverty in the US before we can make any headway in "solving" it.
Then again even "normal" folks are struggling now... but much of that too is borne out of fiscal irresponsibility. And it goes all the way to the top (see: Federal Debt Ceiling + Deficit Showdown). As a country we collectively need to recalibrate how we deal with money and wealth... the cycle of poverty is really an extension of that more than an isolated mechanism...
I'm glad most people in this country do not subscribe to the eugenic theories of Charles Murray . His book, the Bell Curve, basically argued that the vast majority of people who are poor deserve to be poor.
Same unproven eugenic arguments, different day.
For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor. -
Boygabriel said:
Is this the awesome "article" that says that the poor own xboxes therefore how poor can they really be?What does this post mean?
I think it is a worthwhile study, as I myself has a much more bleak picture of poverty in the US than what was portrayed here.
Obviously there is more to defining poverty than tallying up one's material possessions, but like I've said in the past you can't genuinely discuss the issue of poverty solely from the angle that it is the doings of the rich. Eventually you have to look at what poor people do, how they live, what choices they make and how their own actions + values factor into it. It seems to me like you write off anything that doesn't portray poor people as victims who are only able to be saved by higher taxes on everyone else.
[Mamacita said:
I <3 CTK
-
Obviously there is more to defining poverty than tallying up one's material possessions, but like I've said in the past you can't genuinely discuss the issue of poverty solely from the angle that it is the doings of the rich.
And as I've said in the past: I agree.
Eventually you have to look at what poor people do, how they live, what choices they make and how their own actions + values factor into it.
Agree.
It seems to me like you write off anything that doesn't portray poor people as victims who are only able to be saved by higher taxes on everyone else.
I write off anything that assigns most of the blame to what you wrote, or anything who's first answer is always, "bootstraps" "work ethic" "reverse racism" or the like.
That is not you and I know that, but that is the view point I am generally trying to tear down.
Spend a buck, light a number for one the 400,000 victims in Darfur: darfurwall.org -
great.
Now can we have a conversation that includes assigning the poor in this country some responsibility for their own fate?
For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor. -
We've actually had that conversation before.
And I agreed with it.
If you can't find it by searching, let me know.
Spend a buck, light a number for one the 400,000 victims in Darfur: darfurwall.org -
So, you are not far left after all?
For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor. -
I don't know what 'far left' refers to, and I especially don't know what the point of labels like that are.
Spend a buck, light a number for one the 400,000 victims in Darfur: darfurwall.org -
You recently stated you we a member of the far left, and that moderates were merely confused sell outs.
it was precious.
Are you changing?
For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor. -
Given the hundreds of books and thousands of articles published on poverty over the last 50 years, it's doubtful the Heritage Foundation has suddenly discovered what it really means to be poor in America.
What's curious is that right-wingers continue to harp on welfare programs that have already been slashed. They seem to believe AFDC still exists (it doesn't). What they are finding out is that targeting government programs that serve the middle class (Soc Sec and Medicare) is a political disaster. There's rough sledding ahead for small government types.
your anger is delicious. - dieter -
Boygabriel said:
And as I've said in the past: I agree.Agree.
I write off anything that assigns most of the blame to what you wrote, or anything who's first answer is always, "bootstraps" "work ethic" "reverse racism" or the like.
That is not you and I know that, but that is the view point I am generally trying to tear down.
I think you have to give non-progressives more credit than that. There are definitely people who universally write off the poor as lazy & dumb. I have rich oblivious friends who I argue about that with regularly. But there's a difference between doing that, and actually looking at what goes on in poor neighborhoods and saying 'shit is fucked up, but poor people doing x, y, and z isn't helping'. That's been my stance from day 1, and you previously wrote me off as a 'bootstrapper'.
Poverty is complex. I think the three of us all realize this. But I think you focus too heavily on "prioritization". I don't know what % of poverty is caused by systematic failures. I don't know what % is caused by inaction or poor decision making of poor people themselves. In the end it doesn't really matter, as to solve the problem of poverty we have to attack all its causes. But if we can't even identify the causes honestly, how the hell can we talk about them?
Not to mention, you yourself do what you dismiss others for. Your belief is that the main onus & blame lies with the gov't to end poverty. Someone else might think otherwise. Neither of you are really "right". Fighting one cause of poverty and ignoring the rest does nothing. We have to look at the big picture and see everything.
[Mamacita said:
I <3 CTK
-
witch-king said:
Given the hundreds of books and thousands of articles published on poverty over the last 50 years, it's doubtful the Heritage Foundation has suddenly discovered what it really means to be poor in America.What's curious is that right-wingers continue to harp on welfare programs that have already been slashed. They seem to believe AFDC still exists (it doesn't). What they are finding out is that targeting government programs that serve the middle class (Soc Sec and Medicare) is a political disaster. There's rough sledding ahead for small government types.
yes, people who have paid into the the SS system and medicare, and participate in the workforce (aka the middle class) are genuinely going to be much harder to defeat than the public assistance folks and the disorganized far left.
This is a good thing.
For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor. -
Boygabriel said:
I don't know what 'far left' refers to, and I especially don't know what the point of labels like that are.You've identified with "subscribing to progressive ideals". Your beliefs are that the US would be better served with higher taxes on the rich and a higher prioritization of social programs- maybe above anything else, unless I'm mistaken. You do not like the right or even moderates; both of which you have quickly (but in many cases wrongly) identified. If we're gonna talk let's be open and not play that goofy MHA-style "who, me?" BS. You lean left. Nothing wrong with that, but it's important to keep in mind when talking to others who have different beliefs.
[Mamacita said:
I <3 CTK
-
I suspect BG is so far left that he is unable to be friends with Republicans.
...he seems to view them as immoral.
For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor. -
CTK: Not to mention, you yourself do what you dismiss others for.
I try not to dismiss people, I dismiss ideas.
If someone says terrible things enough, then I will automatically dismiss them on said topic (For example: Rush Limbaugh & marriage; or Eric Cantor & debt)
Cool The Kid said:
You've identified with "subscribing to progressive ideals". Your beliefs are that the US would be better served with higher taxes on the rich and a higher prioritization of social programs- maybe above anything else, unless I'm mistaken. You do not like the right or even moderates; both of which you have quickly (but in many cases wrongly) identified. If we're gonna talk let's be open and not play that goofy MHA-style "who, me?" BS. You lean left. Nothing wrong with that, but it's important to keep in mind when talking to others who have different beliefs.I happily wear my philosophies on my sleeve.
I couldn't care less what you or WN or anyone wants to label them as.
I have lots of debates with lots of friends who disagree with me, and I've found that usually they start off by substituting labels for actual arguments.
So I try to get people to move beyond labels and into actual discussions.
FWIW: I don't like when blogs I read refer to the "far-right" either.
whynot_31 said:
I suspect BG is so far left that he is unable to be friends with Republicans....he seems to view them as immoral.
I suspect you have no idea what you're talking about.
In fact, I actually know this to be true.
Your assumptions about me are as worthless as they are inaccurate.
Cool The Kid said:
You do not like the right or even moderates; both of which you have quickly (but in many cases wrongly) identified. If we're gonna talk let's be open and not play that goofy MHA-style "who, me?" BS. You lean left. Nothing wrong with that, but it's important to keep in mind when talking to others who have different beliefs.Lo and behold! Here was have pointless labeling!
I am openly and unapologetically left-leaning progressive.
I'm not against labels b/c they're inaccurate, I'm against them b/c they're usually pointless.
You're spending time telling me what camp I'm from, which doesn't actually further the debate in any meaningful way.
Shall we discuss ideas or keep talking about me?
Spend a buck, light a number for one the 400,000 victims in Darfur: darfurwall.org -
whynot_31 said:
You recently stated you we a member of the far left, and that moderates were merely confused sell outs.it was precious.
Are you changing?
what?
Spend a buck, light a number for one the 400,000 victims in Darfur: darfurwall.org -
Boygabriel said:
what?you don't like the paraphrase?
You not feel Obama has sold out the country in trying to find a compromise, in the Go6?
For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor. -
I think the Go6 plan sucks.
Obama is a centrist and it doesn't surprise me at all that he embraces it. If he could write the policy himself, that's probably pretty close to what he'd want.
What are you asking, now?
Spend a buck, light a number for one the 400,000 victims in Darfur: darfurwall.org -
Why should we take you or blind rhetoric of the left seriously?
Why should we take you or blind rhetoric of the right seriously?
For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor. -
Wait, are you really pretending I don't support my arguments?
What counts as NOT blind rhetoric?
Spend a buck, light a number for one the 400,000 victims in Darfur: darfurwall.org -
a. inability to see the other side = blind rhetoric
b. inability to give the other side any weight what-so-ever.= blind rhetoric
c. Sounding like Mother Jones magazine.= blind rhetoric
d. thinking any compromise sucks = blind rhetoric
Dude, we are spending 40% more than we take in each year. Until we figure out a way to tax someone (anyone?), everything is on the table for cuts.
For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor. -
Instead of discussing actual points I argue, you're generalizing my position and then forming a judgement of it.
Carry on.
Spend a buck, light a number for one the 400,000 victims in Darfur: darfurwall.org -
Boygabriel said:
Lo and behold! Here was have pointless labeling!I am openly and unapologetically left-leaning progressive.
I'm not against labels b/c they're inaccurate, I'm against them b/c they're usually pointless.
You're spending time telling me what camp I'm from, which doesn't actually further the debate in any meaningful way.
Shall we discuss ideas or keep talking about me?
I'm not labeling you, just recalling what you have said and drawing a conclusion about your POV.
And understanding where someone is coming from is important. Again, you seem to have a short memory- I distinctly remember you dismissing points I made in another thread as I was speaking from a "position of privilege" that disabled me from seeing things your way. But now labels and perspective don't matter, lol.
I don't think one's background is of much consequence. Rich white kids grow up to be both doe eyed liberals and xenophobic conservatives. I know from experience. "Privilege" is of much less consequence than the ideological framework one has subscribed to. So when someone states the fact that we can't afford our outlays, which include entitlement programs, and that we should look at everything, including entitlement programs, to see where we can cut... the logical person says, 'alright that sounds fair'. The warhawks, bankers, progressives and other special interest folks go lightheaded. How dare they! The programs I champion are the backbone of the country! And we come to the gridlock we have now, as the debt continues to balloon.
So yes, perspective matters. Logic, not ideology, is what should prevail. We should all be Lebowskian Nihilists, as both sides have shown that believing in anything gov't related is generally a fool's game.
[Mamacita said:
I <3 CTK
-
well stated CTK.
and with that point made, we now return to our scheduled programming:
witch-king said:
Given the hundreds of books and thousands of articles published on poverty over the last 50 years, it's doubtful the Heritage Foundation has suddenly discovered what it really means to be poor in America.What's curious is that right-wingers continue to harp on welfare programs that have already been slashed. They seem to believe AFDC still exists (it doesn't). What they are finding out is that targeting government programs that serve the middle class (Soc Sec and Medicare) is a political disaster. There's rough sledding ahead for small government types.
whynot_31 said:
yes, people who have paid into the the SS system and medicare, and participate in the workforce (aka the middle class) are genuinely going to be much harder to defeat than the public assistance folks and the disorganized far left.This is a good thing.
For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor. -
Cool The Kid said:
And we come to the gridlock we have now, as the debt continues to balloon.On what issues have progressives created gridlock?
On what issue has Obama bowed to the progressive wing, creating complications?
Complaining in the media or at press conferences and actually creating effect are two very different things.
Spend a buck, light a number for one the 400,000 victims in Darfur: darfurwall.org -
Boygabriel said:
On what issues have progressives created gridlock?On what issue has Obama bowed to the progressive wing, creating complications?
Complaining in the media or at press conferences and actually creating effect are two very different things.
Does Obama have to have bowed to a demand for it to count?
Obama is under pressure from the left to stand firm on left friendly programs. That was definitely one of many factors as to why the 4 trillion dollar plan didn't go through.
Ultimately, AGAIN, both the left AND right have been instrumental in bolstering the lack of progress beyond this impasse. Isn't the Go6 made up of equal parts left and right? Or do those lefts not count?
[Mamacita said:
I <3 CTK
-
Cool The Kid said:
Does Obama have to have bowed to a demand for it to count?for it to count, there has to have been identifiable roadblocks thrown up by progressives, that were heeded by Obama or anyone else in power.
cite examples please.
Obama is under pressure from the left to stand firm on left friendly programs.
But the deals Obama has offered do not come close to standing firm on social programs. So how exactly is pressure from progressives influencing that?
That was definitely one of many factors as to why the 4 trillion dollar plan didn't go through.
No it's not. The Republicans walked away from the table, repeatedly. Usually by making a new last minute demand. Like saying,
Repub: $4,000,000,000,000 in cuts please
Obama: Ok, deal
Repub: No wait, not good enoughor last week when at the last second they wanted a provision to repeal the Health Care law.
Ultimately, AGAIN, both the left AND right have been instrumental in bolstering the lack of progress beyond this impasse.
I do not see any evidence progressives have thrown up any roadblocks. I am open to it if you can provide any.
Mostly Obama, Reid and Co are compromising with Repubs left and right, and none of it is good enough.
The current deal being considered has $4T in cuts, is only a 1-time ceiling raise for 2 years or something, and doesn't address revenue or taxes in any way. That is a complete victory for Repubs.
Why aren't they agreeing to the deal then? you got me. But it sure as shit has nothing to do with progressives.
Isn't the Go6 made up of equal parts left and right? Or do those lefts not count?
The G06 is creating the gridlock now? I'm confused.
Spend a buck, light a number for one the 400,000 victims in Darfur: darfurwall.org -
I think the far left fantasizes of a situation when it could once again roadblock, and now tries to use its powerlessness as evidence of being a the victim of the oppressors.
It is especially funny when the people they are "oppressed by" are the struggling middle class.
um, maybe the left needs to look around.
For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor. -
So who do I believe?
WN says the far left dreams of being roadblock
CTK says progressives are a reason for roadblocks already
WN:
Can you show me what progressive stuff you're reading or watching where they claim they're oppressed by the struggling middle class?
Or this is one of those infamous "they" observations?
Spend a buck, light a number for one the 400,000 victims in Darfur: darfurwall.org -
You can believe who you wish.
...what may be most important is for you to realize is that very few people find people who can not compromise as being credible.
I look forward to hearing "which side are you on" sung again in 2012, and being cast as someone who shifts with the wind.
For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor. -
I take that as a no? You don't can't tell me who this 'far left they' is?
Spend a buck, light a number for one the 400,000 victims in Darfur: darfurwall.org -
I will admit, the far left is hard to find in this country.
Sociology departments, the silly blogs, and Move On have taken a big hits lately.
This doesn't mean what they say is always wrong, it is just that they see the world as far more black and white than I.
For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor. -
the 'they'
I hate those 'they' guys. They're so out of it.
...what may be most important is for you to realize is that very few people find people who can not compromise as being credible.
But then you also argue that Tea Party is just going to gain influence when their stated policy is no compromise whatsoever.
I don't see how both of these things can be true.
Spend a buck, light a number for one the 400,000 victims in Darfur: darfurwall.org -
Are you distancing yourself from the left? Would you prefer that I say that I think that YOU are out of touch with how out of control our debt and spending is?
Are you claiming you have the ability to see the other side?
Although I am not a fan of the Tea Party, I think it may be the best thing to happen to this country in ages. So far, the ends have justified the means....
Yes, if they get the Go6 plan implemented, I suspect they will become hugely popular.
Yes, I will smile.
Yes, it might happen
For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor. -
Are you distancing yourself from the left? Would you prefer that I say that I think that YOU are out of touch with how out of control our debt and spending is?
No, I'm making fun of your generalized statements about the mythical 'them'.
I find them entertaining.
The Go6 plan has nothing to do with the Tea Party.
You're saying the public would somehow
1. give them credit for it
2. give them credit for compromiseEven though:
1. the Go6 plan has nothing to do with them
2. The Tea Party doesn't want to compromise on anythingSpend a buck, light a number for one the 400,000 victims in Darfur: darfurwall.org -
Much my dismay (as they frequently help Democrats win elections), I predict the Tea Party will be a non-entity sooner rather than later.
It will be co-opted by the Republicans, and it will go the way of all the other rightwing populist uprisings we see when a Democrat gets elected president.
We'll see which of us is correct.
Spend a buck, light a number for one the 400,000 victims in Darfur: darfurwall.org -
If it wasn't for the Tea Party, we would have never heard from the Go6.
...both parties would have simply raised the debt limit, the one you feel should be raise without any debate.
I've come to believe that change in the Democrats and the Republican will only come via force.
Politics make strange bed fellows. Yup, I'm rooting for the crazy, angry white guys
For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor. -
The Tea Party sounds a lot like "the poor": blaming other people for their own economic and cultural misery. TP members could use a dose of "personal responsibility".
your anger is delicious. - dieter -
witch-king said:
The Tea Party sounds a lot like "the poor": blaming other people for their own economic and cultural misery. TP members could use a dose of "personal responsibility".I totally agree. I wish they would accept the realities of NAFTA and the post-globalization world.
For better or worse, the change on Nostrand is going to make the change on Franklin look minor. -
And you think the public is going to give the Tea Party credit for their intransigence that led to the G6 proposal, rather than, to you know the G6 and Obama, who will get the headlines?
Walk me through that logic.
The Tea Party flies in direct contradiction to your statement that, "very few people find people who can not compromise as being credible."
The Tea Party's brand identity is the absence of compromise.
This is an inherent contradiction in your argument.
Spend a buck, light a number for one the 400,000 victims in Darfur: darfurwall.org
Welcome! Please log in to post, or register a new account!