• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Census shows 1 in 2 people are poor or low-income

Not necessarily a lie. Not at all.
 
muciti said:
I call bullsh*t
Click to expand...

Just because you can't imagine yourself doing it doesn't mean that others wouldn't do it. How is walking 25 miles to work, working an 8hr shift and then walking home any different than someone working 3 jobs to get along in life?

People do what they have to do in order to get along in life.
 
To magnify how much respect I have for that (Kal'Stang's work ethic):

A few years ago I attained a job as a mover from a family friend. I made it for 6 months, and for that I am actually proud. Generally I'd get to work at about 5:30-7 (7 being the latest and rarest), and I would get home at about 6-9 (6 being the earliest and the rarest). Holy ****, I almost did nothing but work because I was so tired from working that I had no motivation to do anything else on my days off or when I was home. I did make ok money from working 60-80 hours a week, but we got no overtime due to clauses that allow them not pay overtime for interstate work (even though all my work was instate). Not only was it manual labor, but it was manual labor in North Carolina during the summer, but I handled it as best as I could. I am proud that I made it 6 months, actually, because I am far too white collar for that ****.

So to walk 20+ miles to work every day? **** that, but to anyone willing to do it, a tip of the cap to you.
 
Last edited:
muciti said:
I have put in 12 hour shifts and seen plenty of people work longer. I have no problem believing that. That guy is getting paid. Thats not quite the same as walking (unpaid) for 8-10 hours a day to work an 8 hour shift.
Click to expand...

Walking 25 miles to get to a job where you do get paid is better than staying at home with the folks and not getting paid period.
 
whysoserious said:
To magnify how much respect I have for that (Kal'Stang's work ethic):

A few years ago I attained a job as a mover from a family friend. I made it for 6 months, and for that I am actually proud. Generally I'd get to work at about 5:30-7 (7 being the latest and rarest), and I would get home at about 6-9 (6 being the earliest and the latest). Holy ****, I almost did nothing but work because I was so tired from working that I had no motivation to do anything else on my days off or when I was home. I did make ok money from working 60-80 hours a week, but we got no overtime due to clauses that allow them not pay overtime for interstate work (even though all my work was instate). Not only was it manual labor, but it was manual labor in North Carolina during the summer, but I handled it as best as I could. I am proud that I made it 6 months, actually, because I am far too white collar for that ****.

So to walk 20+ miles to work every day? **** that, but to anyone willing to do it, a tip of the cap to you.
Click to expand...

:lol:

When I bought my house this year, the mover I used turned out to be the father of a friend I had back in high school.
He offered me some extra weekend work, if I wanted.
I entertained that thought for a few minutes, then remembered why I hired them in the first place.

Moving blows, whether it's your stuff or someone else.
 
whysoserious said:
You walked 25 miles to work each day? That's like 4 hours each way! Jesus man.
Click to expand...

No, it's actually like 7 hours even walking at a fast pace. I'll have to throw my BS flag, too.
 
AdamT said:
No, it's actually like 7 hours even walking at a fast pace. I'll have to throw my BS flag, too.
Click to expand...

Tell ya what, both you and muciti can come visit me and talk to my folks. Ask them about it. Or if you wish we can walk the distance ourselves. It would actually prolly do me some good...i've gotten spoiled and lazy since I got a car.
 
Kal'Stang said:
Walking 25 miles to get to a job where you do get paid is better than staying at home with the folks and not getting paid period.
Click to expand...

While I don't doubt you walked to work I think 25 miles is a exaggeration at best on your part. You said your work was 25 miles a way. The average person walks around 3 mph. That's 25/3 = 8.33 hours one way. At that pace there isn't enough hours in the day for you to work 8 hours and then walk for 16.66 hours.

Even if you did 5 mph, which is a running pace, that's 5 hours. At the running pace, that would mean you jogged to work for 5 hours, worked for 8, then jogged back for 5 and then slept 6 hours. While it's possible (time wise) I don't think you jogged to work. Not even taking into consideration of having to take a shower, eat, etc, it's just not possible.

So that leaves us to either assume you are lying purposely (I don't know you well enough to say that) or you are exaggerating your miles you had to walk.
 
People really are free to do nothing and be poor.

That takes some acceptance that Americans may not be able to stomach. The solution to that is typically one of two government responses.
1. welfare state
2. national planning for education, safety net, job training, etc. (basically welfare state+national agenda that ties it all together)

Liberals hate the nationalistic one.
Republicans hate welfare state ( and to a degree nationalistic but neocons know the score)
Libertarians hate both.

As such, I don't think you'll see any changes to our current arrangement where people are indeed free to do the bare minimum, and still have a TV, AC, cell phone/internet, and relatively enjoy their life...classified as poor, but I wonder where on the happiness scale.

People are poor primarily because they don't do anything about it. Unfortunately. Yet I suspect they aren't on the bottom in terms of happiness.
 
Last edited:
TheNextEra said:
While I don't doubt you walked to work I think 25 miles is a exaggeration at best on your part. You said your work was 25 miles a way. The average person walks around 3 mph. That's 25/3 = 8.33 hours one way. At that pace there isn't enough hours in the day for you to work 8 hours and then walk for 16.66 hours.

Even if you did 5 mph, which is a running pace, that's 5 hours. At the running pace, that would mean you jogged to work for 5 hours, worked for 8, then jogged back for 5 and then slept 6 hours. While it's possible (time wise) I don't think you jogged to work. Not even taking into consideration of having to take a shower, eat, etc, it's just not possible.

So that leaves us to either assume you are lying purposely (I don't know you well enough to say that) or you are exaggerating your miles you had to walk.
Click to expand...

Did no one note the part in my post that said I also thumbed a ride? At night time it was rare that I got a ride, but not as rare during the day.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Depends.
If those programs encourage changes in behavior, so that more people benefit from "living in poverty" than otherwise.
Not saying that is happening, but it's not necessarily illogical.
Click to expand...

Ever hear of the term: "path of least resistance".. It's human nature (Genrally) to gain the most by doing the least. Welfare entitlements corrupt human nature! There's an axiom in modern economics about markets. That is, generally speaking, nacro economics says that people are always rational when spending their own money. It's been proven over and over time and again. The term rational economy is a common understanding in market economics. Now, enter entitlements, food stamps, welfare, etc.. We the charitable tax payer infuse the system with a great deal of irrationality. Look at procurment, or material managment (Buyers for short) in any company. Mostly, buyers don't care about where and from whom they purchase equipment, and supplies. Now there's a caveat to this. There was a study done many years ago now that showed that buyers for private sector companies were incentivised to save their respective compnaies money, and did so. Whereas buyers for government and public companies were rarely incentivised and as a result these entities geenrally paid in excess (Forget the actual numbers) of 20% more for the same equipment and supplies. In the mid 2000's most states, and local governments instituted contract purchasing, which gave temporary relief to the tax payer, but this too now has evolved into a sort of monopolizing of the materials procurment industry. Usually state contracts afford the buying entity a certain percentage off list price carried over for one of 3 or even 5 years. The discount is static, however in fast moving and highly constrained markets, a flat-rate discount is often times the least attractive way to approach buying. I understand why government did this. It is because they understood that people in charge of the money didn't care about where and from whom they purchased. Only that their deadliine was met. Afterall, how do you quantify actual and realized savings? So they instituted (As governments often do) a one size fits all policy. It doesn't work, trust me, and governments, and you the tax payer are getting shafted by limiting your buying potential and resources.

Anyway rant off, but your point is a good one. And so is mine! :)

Tim-
 
Kal'Stang said:
Did no one note the part in my post that said I also thumbed a ride? At night time it was rare that I got a ride, but not as rare during the day.
Click to expand...

Just curious.......So you would have to leave 8 hours early in case you didn't get a ride. What did you do on the days where you were picked up in the first 15 minutes and got to work within 45 minutes. Sit around for 7 hours?
 
1Perry said:
Just curious.......So you would have to leave 8 hours early in case you didn't get a ride. What did you do on the days where you were picked up in the first 15 minutes and got to work within 45 minutes. Sit around for 7 hours?
Click to expand...

Whenever I ever got into town early I would either find a place to nap at or read a book at the library. So yes, basically sit around. I saw no point in getting another job when I lived so far from where the jobs were. At the time my folks lived out in the boondocks.
 
On a different note. I used to walk 25 miles to work in the morning ( i did it in less than an hour ) then i walked another 25 miles to another job after working 14 hours at the first job then walked another 25 miles to volunteer at a childrens hospital for another 14 hours a day. I am also a multitrillionaire because of it. I donate over 500 billion to every charity every year. Hooray for E identities!
 
whysoserious said:
You walked 25 miles to work each day? That's like 4 hours each way! Jesus man.
Click to expand...
That would be the equivalent of running a marathon speed wise.
Whats a average time for an amateur to run a marathon and a half marathon? - Yahoo! Answers
Walking is closer to 3 mph. So that mean about 12-14 hours walking--6 to 7 hours each way. Add an eight hours shift with a half hour break, we're talking 20 - 23 hours a day just in work and transport back and forth from work. That's a pretty rough schedule.
 
Hicup said:
Ever hear of the term: "path of least resistance".. It's human nature (Genrally) to gain the most by doing the least. Welfare entitlements corrupt human nature! There's an axiom in modern economics about markets. That is, generally speaking, nacro economics says that people are always rational when spending their own money. It's been proven over and over time and again. The term rational economy is a common understanding in market economics. Now, enter entitlements, food stamps, welfare, etc.. We the charitable tax payer infuse the system with a great deal of irrationality. Look at procurment, or material managment (Buyers for short) in any company. Mostly, buyers don't care about where and from whom they purchase equipment, and supplies. Now there's a caveat to this. There was a study done many years ago now that showed that buyers for private sector companies were incentivised to save their respective compnaies money, and did so. Whereas buyers for government and public companies were rarely incentivised and as a result these entities geenrally paid in excess (Forget the actual numbers) of 20% more for the same equipment and supplies. In the mid 2000's most states, and local governments instituted contract purchasing, which gave temporary relief to the tax payer, but this too now has evolved into a sort of monopolizing of the materials procurment industry. Usually state contracts afford the buying entity a certain percentage off list price carried over for one of 3 or even 5 years. The discount is static, however in fast moving and highly constrained markets, a flat-rate discount is often times the least attractive way to approach buying. I understand why government did this. It is because they understood that people in charge of the money didn't care about where and from whom they purchased. Only that their deadliine was met. Afterall, how do you quantify actual and realized savings? So they instituted (As governments often do) a one size fits all policy. It doesn't work, trust me, and governments, and you the tax payer are getting shafted by limiting your buying potential and resources.

Anyway rant off, but your point is a good one. And so is mine! :)

Tim-
Click to expand...

So, can we assume that you're on welfare, since it's so great? If not, why not?
 
Wake said:
What do you mean? I saw you were talking about this earlier, and then when I was checking my emails I saw this story and was like, "what the heck, 1 in 2?"

There is no "real" Wake. People's ideologies change over time.
Click to expand...

I think you are to be commended for standing up for the poor and the working poor Wake!
 
Hicup said:
Ever hear of the term: "path of least resistance".. It's human nature (Genrally) to gain the most by doing the least.
Click to expand...
That's certainly one of the assumptions of rationality, idk if it's necessarily human nature.
Something to consider is that humans value multiple things. Money isn't the only thing that we value. Nor is free time, nor affection, nor a number of things. We balance any number of things. One of the factors involved in balancing these things can be described by the concept called marginal value. That's why as essential as water is to life it's not really valued until the well runs dry and it's hard to get.
We value, all sorts of intangible things like social approval, a sense of fulfillment, feelings of self-worth, etc.
 
Wake said:
Census shows 1 in 2 people are poor or low-income - Yahoo! News

To me I find this to be shocking. In my opinion, I would think the right is primarily to blame, for catering to the wealthy.

As they say, "the rich get richer and the poor get poorer."
Click to expand...

The "Great Society Program" has transferred trillions from the rich to the poor, and yet we still have problems. I'd say these programs are long term, to blame, not "the right catering to the wealthy".
 
1Perry said:
Obama promised to address the jobs going overseas. He's done absolutely nothing about it.
Click to expand...

Democrats try to lure jobs back to U.S.
Senate bill offers payroll-tax breaks, cut in subsidies for outsourcing

“We’re going to take away the incentives corporations have to send our jobs overseas, and give them powerful new incentives to keep American jobs in America,” said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid in remarks on the Senate floor.

Introduced last week by Sen. Dick Durbin, an Illinois Democrat, the bill also would end subsidies for firms that move facilities abroad."

Senate Democrats target job outsourcing - MarketWatch
 
Census shows 1 in 2 people are poor or low-income
Click to expand...
Wow, 50-50 -- just my luck a close friend of mine is doing well. :doh

He also thinks everything's politically just great .. again, I guess it's just my luck that I don't. :(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom