• 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!

Could people with cars be poor?

Could people with cars be poor?

  • Yes

    Votes: 45 93.8%
  • No

    Votes: 3 6.3%
  • Idk

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Other

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    48
QUOTE=Andalublue;1062792354]It all entirely depends on whether you are talking about relative poverty or absolute poverty. I don't think absolute poverty exists very much in the western world, but relative poverty certainly does. The bottom 5% of earners in a western country may have access to goods and services that are simply unavailable to almost everyone in a less developed nation. Working in rural Cambodia just 10 years ago, the wealthiest people in a village had none of the things a poor family in Europe or NA would think were essentials, such as a phone line, a car (roads virtually unusable except by 4x4 in the dry season), air conditioning, and yet were still considered rich.

I think ideas of poverty (i.e. relative poverty) are incredibly culturally specific. For example, here in rural Spain, people will not judge a neighbour's wealth by the things they have so much as by how they display their wealth during collective occasions. The wealthiest farmer will drive around in a battered furgoneta (the ubiquitous mini-vans that are to southern Europe what the pick-up is to NA), and wear tatty old clothes that make him indistinguishable from his band of day workers, but when his son or daughter takes their first communion, or gets married, there will be 500 guests entertained entirely at the family's expense for a day or two. That's the family showing and having their wealth assessed by the rest of the community.

Many, many poor people here will have some form of transport, often a dumper truck, a 20-year-old mini-van or moped, but without any motorised transport you're pretty much stuck in your village, most of which will have one or two service buses per day, usually departing for Granada at daybreak and returning at nightfall.

So, of course you can own a car and still be relatively poor by the standards of your neighbours and compatriots. I just don't think you can be poor in an absolute sense (i.e. the inability to secure food, water, shelter and basic services) and own a car.[/QUOTE]

I agree. Our poor make the poor in Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam and even Thailand look very wealthy indeed.

1East-Side-Tonle-Sap.JPG2-not-so-nice-house.jpgSamlor-Stand-1965.jpg
 
That food one really gets to me.

If only capitalism didn't get in the way of feeding people. :(

I'm sure the socialists will fly plane-loads of food in any day now.
 
Sorry? I don't understand this comment.

This is a case of fingers typing what the mind wasn't saying or the mind saying what the fingers weren't typing. I meant the exact opposite. Our poor look very wealthy to the poor in Southeast Asia and even to most in the middle class. Sorry about that.
 
This is a case of fingers typing what the mind wasn't saying or the mind saying what the fingers weren't typing. I meant the exact opposite. Our poor look very wealthy to the poor in Southeast Asia and even to most in the middle class. Sorry about that.

Ah, okay. Yes, I agree, although that's just in material terms. Not all riches can be measured in material terms. Once you achieve a basic level of material wealth (i.e. covering basic needs, however you judge those according to appropriate local standards, an increase in material wealth brings rapidly diminishing returns in terms of feelings of contentment, fulfilment, and wellbeing. This is why materially poorer societies generally exhibit radically lower levels of mental illness and personal and familial dysfunction than very affluent societies. In the West, our riches are literally driving us mad.
 
Ah, okay. Yes, I agree, although that's just in material terms. Not all riches can be measured in material terms. Once you achieve a basic level of material wealth (i.e. covering basic needs, however you judge those according to appropriate local standards, an increase in material wealth brings rapidly diminishing returns in terms of feelings of contentment, fulfilment, and wellbeing. This is why materially poorer societies generally exhibit radically lower levels of mental illness and personal and familial dysfunction than very affluent societies. In the West, our riches are literally driving us mad.

I know what you mean. Here in the states it is always keep up with the Jones. It seems we covet what ever our neighbors have or the kid at school is wearing or a new car etc. Some of the most contented people I ever met were what were would describe as dirt poor in Laos, Vietnam and Thailand. Once they had their basic needs, it time for family. Real nice folks that makes me miss them today.
 
I know what you mean. Here in the states it is always keep up with the Jones. It seems we covet what ever our neighbors have or the kid at school is wearing or a new car etc. Some of the most contented people I ever met were what were would describe as dirt poor in Laos, Vietnam and Thailand. Once they had their basic needs, it time for family. Real nice folks that makes me miss them today.

Yes, that was my impression of SE Asia too; materially poor, but spiritually and psychologically rich... and generous to a fault. What they had they shared, and I never once saw a Keep Out sign that wasn't referring to a land-mine field.
 
Can people who are poor have cars? Absolutely.
 
Yes, that was my impression of SE Asia too; materially poor, but spiritually and psychologically rich... and generous to a fault. What they had they shared, and I never once saw a Keep Out sign that wasn't referring to a land-mine field.

Exactly.
 
I'm sure the socialists will fly plane-loads of food in any day now.

Sad that drones are much more popular.

And they don't carry food. :(
 
Hi fellas,

I recall one film ("Pay it forward") where an old woman was a bum and at the same time was driving some gas-guzzler* around.

So, if one has money for car and gas, should s/he be considered poor? Should s/he receive welfare, food stamps and such? Please, discuss.
:)


* (well, at least from European perspective :wink: )




It depends on whether they're actually using the car for it's intended purpose or living in it.
 
From dictionary.com

poor

1. having little or no money, goods, or other means of support

poverty

1. the state or condition of having little or no money, goods, or means of support; condition of being poor

Can we please stop referring to people in America as poor or living in poverty? They do not fit the definition at all and the definition does not change because the government wants it to.

We need to come up with another term for people that have what they need plus are given money on top of that.

It costs a lot of money to buy, use and maintain a car so to answer the OP, no poor people, by these definitions, could not have cars.

If you have a car and the money to maintain and use it, you are not, by definition poor or living in poverty.
 
Back
Top Bottom