More than what you offer – unbridled bigotry, blind judgement, broad-brushed stereotyping and an unreasonable, pompous feeling of superiority and self importance.
When you are born into a poverty stricken neighborhood with gangs and bad schools it is difficult for an ordinary person to succeed. Ignoring the problem will just create more of the same. Society should figure out ways to change conditions to foster success. Ignoring the problem and expecting to solve itself will not work.
You make very good points, and I applaud your ability to rise from poverty.
I don’t know your particular circumstances, other than those you’re willing to share.
I think two of the biggest obstacles to overcoming poverty are a family/neighborhood that does not emphasize the value of education, and the proliferation of guns and the violence they cause.
How do gangs get to be so feared? Guns. Please spare me the arguments about Chicago having such tough gun laws, when we all know that tough gun laws mean nothing when surrounding municipalities have none, and turn a blind eye to straw purchasers.
Watch a show called “48 Hours”. The premise is that if a criminal is not caught within that time, likelihood of solving the crime goes quickly to close to nil.
The crime is almost always murder. And the reasons are absurd: a $10 debt not repaid, being seen with the wrong woman in public, saying something disrespectful. But we have a large number of citizens who think that a gun is the best way to solve an argument, and that adds to desperation and loss of hope for the future. Many a promising child has seemed to rise above the cesspool he/she was born in, only to be stopped by a bullet that often was not even meant for them.
And what do desperate people do? Arm themselves, and the spiral continues.
When someone is shot at the local drug store, people avoid the drug store. Same with the convenience store, the library, and on and on. Soon the drug store closes for lack of business and fears for safety of employees; same with the convenience store and the library
Now there’s nothing left in the neighborhood but poor people, desperation, and guns. Public transportation and cops stop coming to those neighborhoods. No one will deliver food. So now we can add isolation, as well. This should be a national embarrassment in a country so very wealthy.
I don’t believe I have all the answers, but I do know that you won’t get the right answers unless you’re willing to ask the right questions.
The War on Poverty has been a war on the very values and morals that lead to success.
Every other week, it seems, somebody is trying to suggest a new program to help the poor help themselves but they ALWAYS want more money and they are never willing to acknowledge that a program was a failure and cancel it.
If Progressives really want to get us Conservatives on board with programs to help the poor then they first need to do an accounting of which programs work and which programs don’t.
Lifting 1 person out of poverty at a cost of $1 Million is not a successful program. Yes it is a success from the perspective of the person helped but it is poor stewardship of the public’s money.
We need to take a good hard look at all the programs that help the poor and disadvantaged and eliminate those that don’t work (along with their extravagant costs) and augment the ones that do.
Nobody likes to see people live in poverty and squalor but we also don’t like to see Billions of dollars spent on a group that never stops putting their hand out for more. That isn’t a race issue, that is a cultural issue.
The Federal government has demonstrated an inability to police and manage the money that pours into some poor communities so we get unequal results. That needs to change.
It’s amazing how few people there are that recognize the difference between poverty and merely being poor. If you live in poverty, you accept it. If you are merely poor, you take personal responsibility to change your life for the better. There isn’t a lot that can be done for people who live in poverty. They’ve accepted their lot and the dependent lifestyle that goes with it. The thing you should be looking at is the meaning of “moral hazard” and how it relates to poverty differently from how it relates to merely being poor. Like an earlier poster, I was poor; poor in a way that most of you can’t understand. But, I never lived in poverty.
@opednance – Seniors were supported by Social Security long before the war on poverty.
I think you are right – any successful person probably got some good luck along the way. But that in no way entitles their neighbor to cash in on that good fortune.
You focus too much on the part of the success equation that depends on the luck factor and far too little on the part of the success equation that depends on hard work, self discipline, making good choices and avoiding activities that seem to lead to bad luck.
rnrnetmails over 9 years ago
More than what you offer – unbridled bigotry, blind judgement, broad-brushed stereotyping and an unreasonable, pompous feeling of superiority and self importance.
Theodore E. Lind Premium Member over 9 years ago
When you are born into a poverty stricken neighborhood with gangs and bad schools it is difficult for an ordinary person to succeed. Ignoring the problem will just create more of the same. Society should figure out ways to change conditions to foster success. Ignoring the problem and expecting to solve itself will not work.
I Play One On TV over 9 years ago
You make very good points, and I applaud your ability to rise from poverty.
I don’t know your particular circumstances, other than those you’re willing to share.
I think two of the biggest obstacles to overcoming poverty are a family/neighborhood that does not emphasize the value of education, and the proliferation of guns and the violence they cause.
How do gangs get to be so feared? Guns. Please spare me the arguments about Chicago having such tough gun laws, when we all know that tough gun laws mean nothing when surrounding municipalities have none, and turn a blind eye to straw purchasers.
Watch a show called “48 Hours”. The premise is that if a criminal is not caught within that time, likelihood of solving the crime goes quickly to close to nil.
The crime is almost always murder. And the reasons are absurd: a $10 debt not repaid, being seen with the wrong woman in public, saying something disrespectful. But we have a large number of citizens who think that a gun is the best way to solve an argument, and that adds to desperation and loss of hope for the future. Many a promising child has seemed to rise above the cesspool he/she was born in, only to be stopped by a bullet that often was not even meant for them.
And what do desperate people do? Arm themselves, and the spiral continues.
When someone is shot at the local drug store, people avoid the drug store. Same with the convenience store, the library, and on and on. Soon the drug store closes for lack of business and fears for safety of employees; same with the convenience store and the library
Now there’s nothing left in the neighborhood but poor people, desperation, and guns. Public transportation and cops stop coming to those neighborhoods. No one will deliver food. So now we can add isolation, as well. This should be a national embarrassment in a country so very wealthy.
I don’t believe I have all the answers, but I do know that you won’t get the right answers unless you’re willing to ask the right questions.
Mephistopheles over 9 years ago
@DaSharkie – WELL Said!!!!
The War on Poverty has been a war on the very values and morals that lead to success.
Every other week, it seems, somebody is trying to suggest a new program to help the poor help themselves but they ALWAYS want more money and they are never willing to acknowledge that a program was a failure and cancel it.
If Progressives really want to get us Conservatives on board with programs to help the poor then they first need to do an accounting of which programs work and which programs don’t.
Lifting 1 person out of poverty at a cost of $1 Million is not a successful program. Yes it is a success from the perspective of the person helped but it is poor stewardship of the public’s money.
We need to take a good hard look at all the programs that help the poor and disadvantaged and eliminate those that don’t work (along with their extravagant costs) and augment the ones that do.
Nobody likes to see people live in poverty and squalor but we also don’t like to see Billions of dollars spent on a group that never stops putting their hand out for more. That isn’t a race issue, that is a cultural issue.
The Federal government has demonstrated an inability to police and manage the money that pours into some poor communities so we get unequal results. That needs to change.
Lyndon Johnson was a villain.
I Quit over 9 years ago
It’s amazing how few people there are that recognize the difference between poverty and merely being poor. If you live in poverty, you accept it. If you are merely poor, you take personal responsibility to change your life for the better. There isn’t a lot that can be done for people who live in poverty. They’ve accepted their lot and the dependent lifestyle that goes with it. The thing you should be looking at is the meaning of “moral hazard” and how it relates to poverty differently from how it relates to merely being poor. Like an earlier poster, I was poor; poor in a way that most of you can’t understand. But, I never lived in poverty.
Mephistopheles over 9 years ago
@opednance – Seniors were supported by Social Security long before the war on poverty.
I think you are right – any successful person probably got some good luck along the way. But that in no way entitles their neighbor to cash in on that good fortune.
You focus too much on the part of the success equation that depends on the luck factor and far too little on the part of the success equation that depends on hard work, self discipline, making good choices and avoiding activities that seem to lead to bad luck.