Yet Another Conservative Argument About Poverty Appears To Be Wrong.....

[Zizkov]

Shocking! But VPM said the US poor were doing so much better then everywhere else!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/poverty-us-world_us_57a4bad8e4b021fd98786aa8

 

[VanPastorMan]

Shocking! But VPM said the US poor were doing so much better then everywhere else!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/poverty-us-world_us_57a4bad8e4b021fd98786aa8

International comparisons like these are inevitably crude, in part because poorer countries don’t have the infrastructure to collect statistics as reliably as the U.S. does. And to make their comparisons, Edin and Shaefer couldn’t always use the exact same years. But the paper’s conclusion is consistent with other data showing that the standard of living for America’s poor is way behind that of peer countries in Europe and Asia. A big reason for that is that safety net programs in the U.S. provide a lot less protection than those overseas.
The above paragraph makes their study not so truthful. If you can't get the same type of data in those countries that you do in ours then who is to say that those other countries aren't doing worse? I would also point out that in poorer countries quality of life has to be looked at. The poor in this country have homes,not shacks. They are heavier than say the African countries where we see tremendous poverty. The poor in this country have tvs,phones,computers,and a variety of other electronic devises.
To say that we have to throw more money as does Europe for instance is always the liberal talking point. Throw enough money at something and the problem goes away. They do it with education on all levels from Head Start to Bernie's free college for everyone. But we can't foot the bill for such things. We will be like Europe and fall behind even further.
We have thrown trillions of dollars at the war on poverty. How is that working? Have the poor moved to the middle class? Many poor who are on public assistance feel trapped. My sister was one of those. She was on welfare and then decided just to leave it behind. She isn't rich,but she is working hard for herself and her kids and grand kids.

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

International comparisons like these are inevitably crude, in part because poorer countries don’t have the infrastructure to collect statistics as reliably as the U.S. does. And to make their comparisons, Edin and Shaefer couldn’t always use the exact same years. But the paper’s conclusion is consistent with other data showing that the standard of living for America’s poor is way behind that of peer countries in Europe and Asia. A big reason for that is that safety net programs in the U.S. provide a lot less protection than those overseas.
The above paragraph makes their study not so truthful. If you can't get the same type of data in those countries that you do in ours then who is to say that those other countries aren't doing worse? I would also point out that in poorer countries quality of life has to be looked at. The poor in this country have homes,not shacks. They are heavier than say the African countries where we see tremendous poverty. The poor in this country have tvs,phones,computers,and a variety of other electronic devises.
To say that we have to throw more money as does Europe for instance is always the liberal talking point. Throw enough money at something and the problem goes away. They do it with education on all levels from Head Start to Bernie's free college for everyone. But we can't foot the bill for such things. We will be like Europe and fall behind even further.
We have thrown trillions of dollars at the war on poverty. How is that working? Have the poor moved to the middle class? Many poor who are on public assistance feel trapped. My sister was one of those. She was on welfare and then decided just to leave it behind. She isn't rich,but she is working hard for herself and her kids and grand kids.

Gods, you're stupid.

 

[T.M.P.]

Gods, you're stupid.

No, he's below stupid. He's an imbecile. Which is a step below idiot and a step above retarded. Correction, after reading that post, it's obvious he's borderline retarded...

 

[Mas-sa-suta]

No, he's below stupid. He's an imbecile. Which is a step below idiot and a step above retarded. Correction, after reading that post, it's obvious he's borderline retarded...

To see a couple of mental deficients reach out to one another is truly heartwarming.......

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

To see a couple of mental deficients reach out to one another is truly heartwarming.......

Sup, homey?

You should hang around here more. C-$ is in the house right now, and you two should get along spendidly.

 

[T.M.P.]

To see a couple of mental deficients reach out to one another is truly heartwarming.......

It's funny because you're short, fat, bald, and ugly with Bozo the clown hair but still think you can talk shit. I can't imagine the ugly fat bitches that lowered themselves to fk your hideous ass.

Generally those with such fk'd up physical traits develop a personality. Not you Bozo, your persona is even uglier and more offensive than your clown hair and pot belly.

 

[mk_peters]

It's funny because you're short, fat, bald, and ugly with Bozo the clown hair but still think you can talk shit. I can't imagine the ugly fat bitches that lowered themselves to fk your hideous ass.

Generally those with such fk'd up physical traits develop a personality. Not you Bozo, your persona is even uglier and more offensive than your clown hair and pot belly.

This is just mean-spirited. I can't imagine what would cause one human to treat another this way. Peace.

 

[MyTeamIsOnTheFloor]

This is just mean-spirited. I can't imagine what would cause one human to treat another this way. Peace.

It's tribal.

 

[mk_peters]

It's tribal.

View embedded media

I wonder if there is a strain of cannabis for that. Peace.

 

[whobop]

International comparisons like these are inevitably crude, in part because poorer countries don’t have the infrastructure to collect statistics as reliably as the U.S. does. And to make their comparisons, Edin and Shaefer couldn’t always use the exact same years. But the paper’s conclusion is consistent with other data showing that the standard of living for America’s poor is way behind that of peer countries in Europe and Asia. A big reason for that is that safety net programs in the U.S. provide a lot less protection than those overseas.
The above paragraph makes their study not so truthful. If you can't get the same type of data in those countries that you do in ours then who is to say that those other countries aren't doing worse? I would also point out that in poorer countries quality of life has to be looked at. The poor in this country have homes,not shacks. They are heavier than say the African countries where we see tremendous poverty. The poor in this country have tvs,phones,computers,and a variety of other electronic devises.
To say that we have to throw more money as does Europe for instance is always the liberal talking point. Throw enough money at something and the problem goes away. They do it with education on all levels from Head Start to Bernie's free college for everyone. But we can't foot the bill for such things. We will be like Europe and fall behind even further.
We have thrown trillions of dollars at the war on poverty. How is that working? Have the poor moved to the middle class? Many poor who are on public assistance feel trapped. My sister was one of those. She was on welfare and then decided just to leave it behind. She isn't rich,but she is working hard for herself and her kids and grand kids.

The poor in other countries are much worse off than what we have here. I'm not sure how that's even debatable.

 

[T.M.P.]

The poor in other countries are much worse off than what we have here. I'm not sure how that's even debatable.

You're as stupid as VPM. Neither of you read the article. Neither of you understand the criteria. And yet both of you bleat out an opinion based on some arbitrary measure that would ever shift if questioned. STFU. Stick with commenting about a flaccid old man's game.

 

[IUJIM]

No, he's below stupid. He's an imbecile. Which is a step below idiot and a step above retarded. Correction, after reading that post, it's obvious he's borderline retarded...

Actually, idiot is below imbecile. Moron is above both.

 

[VanPastorMan]

The poor in other countries are much worse off than what we have here. I'm not sure how that's even debatable.

I have an example for this. Our youth group just came back from Mexico. They built a house for a family of four. The house they built is not something anybody on this board would want to live in, and probably would refuse to live in it. Yet this family is very thankful for the small box because they had been living in a shack, a literal shack which was put up by the husband. Yet according to the article cited if the husband dies the same time as a man in one of our poor counties who had an apartment then this shows that Americans and Mexicans are living in the same conditions. LoL. Roflol, guys like Goat will tell me how wrong I am. It really is laughable.

 

[T.M.P.]

It's like a Hee Haw crowd up in this thread.

Hee hee hee haw haw haw...

 

[HA2740]

 

[T.M.P.]

 

[T.M.P.]

I have an example for this. Our youth group just came back from Mexico. They built a house for a family of four. The house they built is not something anybody on this board would want to live in, and probably would refuse to live in it. Yet this family is very thankful for the small box because they had been living in a shack, a literal shack which was put up by the husband. Yet according to the article cited if the husband dies the same time as a man in one of our poor counties who had an apartment then this shows that Americans and Mexicans are living in the same conditions. LoL. Roflol, guys like Goat will tell me how wrong I am. It really is laughable.

Dude, you really need to quit creepin' on the children and maybe spend some time learning how to read. Until you actually comprehend simple English you'll never understand how stupid you are.

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

Yet according to the article cited if the husband dies the same time as a man in one of our poor counties who had an apartment then this shows that Americans and Mexicans are living in the same conditions. LoL. Roflol, guys like Goat will tell me how wrong I am.

You are wrong, because the article neither claimed nor implied anything of the sort.

 

[T.M.P.]

You are wrong, because the article neither claimed nor implied anything of the sort.

Well, now you get why he's a horrible Christian. He doesn't comprehend what he's reading. It's like posting an explanation for metrics to freetards.

 

[mike41703]

spendidly.

splendidly

 

[Zizkov]

You're as stupid as VPM. Neither of you read the article. Neither of you understand the criteria. And yet both of you bleat out an opinion based on some arbitrary measure that would ever shift if questioned. STFU. Stick with commenting about a flaccid old man's game.

And this is how you end up with Trump as a nominee. There was nothing difficult to understand about the article, yet people seem to be too stupid to understand it.

 

[T.M.P.]

And this is how you end up with Trump as a nominee. There was nothing difficult to understand about the article, yet people seem to be too stupid to understand it.

And, they argue it by parroting propaganda they heard from other morons.

 

[Capitol Hoosier]

 

[VanPastorMan]

You are wrong, because the article neither claimed nor implied anything of the sort.

Goat, they are comparing death rates. I read that. I see this as too simplistic to say that the poor in America have it as bad off or worse than other nations. Also when they talk about Europe I think you have to admit that we can't keep on paying people who are not working. It is a failed system if we do that. Look at Greece.

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

Goat, they are comparing death rates. I read that. I see this as too simplistic to say that the poor in America have it as bad off or worse than other nations. Also when they talk about Europe I think you have to admit that we can't keep on paying people who are not working. It is a failed system if we do that. Look at Greece.

You don't know what you're talking about.

 

[T.M.P.]

Goat, they are comparing death rates. I read that. I see this as too simplistic to say that the poor in America have it as bad off or worse than other nations. Also when they talk about Europe I think you have to admit that we can't keep on paying people who are not working. It is a failed system if we do that. Look at Greece.

Are you just trying to take back the OTF village retard crown from C-$?

 

[T.M.P.]

You don't know what you're talking about.

Said everyone with a semblance of intelligence.. ad nauseum.

 

[jughaid]

And this is how you end up with Trump as a nominee. There was nothing difficult to understand about the article, yet people seem to be too stupid to understand it.

Yes, certainly nothing difficult to understand. You see/read/think what you want to see/read/think. The authors are sociologists and social workers (both academic hotbeds of objective thinking) who quote other like-minded (Amartya Sen) authors. Not difficult to prove your point when you select what the criteria that defines well-being. Every side does this.

The unpublished article state that "measures of consumption and income are but indirect markers" of well-being. So they have selected some other criteria that "most would agree" are better at defining it. Bloody hell hard thing to do as definitions of well-being vary among my family, let alone regions and countries. Their reasons for consumption/income not being good measures are unconvincing. They argue that certain consumption can decrease the quality of life. Agreed, but they fail to point out that there are times when a longer life does not equate to increase in the quality of life. This suggests is that it is all very subjective, which is why those on the left will eat this up and those on the right will sniff their nose.

The article is useful in pointing out disparities in their well-being factors in the U.S. This is not new information. What is also not new is this thread. Take a look -- whether you agree with him or not, the only person who actually stated anything other than snide comments or verbal assaults is VanPastorMan.

 

[IUecho87]

Yes, certainly nothing difficult to understand. You see/read/think what you want to see/read/think. The authors are sociologists and social workers (both academic hotbeds of objective thinking) who quote other like-minded (Amartya Sen) authors. Not difficult to prove your point when you select what the criteria that defines well-being. Every side does this.

The unpublished article state that "measures of consumption and income are but indirect markers" of well-being. So they have selected some other criteria that "most would agree" are better at defining it. Bloody hell hard thing to do as definitions of well-being vary among my family, let alone regions and countries. Their reasons for consumption/income not being good measures are unconvincing. They argue that certain consumption can decrease the quality of life. Agreed, but they fail to point out that there are times when a longer life does not equate to increase in the quality of life. This suggests is that it is all very subjective, which is why those on the left will eat this up and those on the right will sniff their nose.

The article is useful in pointing out disparities in their well-being factors in the U.S. This is not new information. What is also not new is this thread. Take a look -- whether you agree with him or not, the only person who actually stated anything other than snide comments or verbal assaults is VanPastorMan.

It's because what he said was stupid.

So, his opinion is to be valued even though it completely misses the mark?

Everyone gets a trophy..

If only society was set up like the Olympics....you have your regular Olympics and the Special Olympics....the big important political and social policy decisions will be made by the logical, intelligent citizens.....and rest of the retards can argue about their favorite middle eastern fairy tales, who's their favorite duck dynasty character, and come up with excuses why Trump is worthy for president.

 

[kkott]

The poor in other countries are much worse off than what we have here. I'm not sure how that's even debatable.

You're both right. The article only cites specific criteria: life expentancy, infant mortality, incarceration rates, etc... I was just in Mexico, and I don't think it is debatable that the poor there have far less "stuff" and net worth. But I think they also tend to live healthier lives: ie. while they eat less, they eat better: less fast food, more water, less carbonated drinks, etc... America's poor often have enough income to have "choices", and they mostly seem to make bad ones. The poor and most of the population I saw, in Mexico are thin, so that alone is a huge difference.

 

[Chester Fried]

You're both right. The article only cites specific criteria: life expentancy, infant mortality, incarceration rates, etc... I was just in Mexico, and I don't think it is debatable that the poor there have far less "stuff" and net worth. But I think they also tend to live healthier lives: ie. while they eat less, they eat better: less fast food, more water, less carbonated drinks, etc... America's poor often have enough income to have "choices", and they mostly seem to make bad ones. The poor and most of the population I saw, in Mexico are thin, so that alone is a huge difference.

Agreed.

The entire article is one big strawman argument. I don't doubt on the factors cited the results are correct. But the cited factors are not the only ones that determine quality of life. I bet the poor in the countries studied would trade places with their American counterparts in a heartbeat.

 

[RBB89]

Yes, certainly nothing difficult to understand. You see/read/think what you want to see/read/think. The authors are sociologists and social workers (both academic hotbeds of objective thinking) who quote other like-minded (Amartya Sen) authors. Not difficult to prove your point when you select what the criteria that defines well-being. Every side does this.

The unpublished article state that "measures of consumption and income are but indirect markers" of well-being. So they have selected some other criteria that "most would agree" are better at defining it. Bloody hell hard thing to do as definitions of well-being vary among my family, let alone regions and countries. Their reasons for consumption/income not being good measures are unconvincing. They argue that certain consumption can decrease the quality of life. Agreed, but they fail to point out that there are times when a longer life does not equate to increase in the quality of life. This suggests is that it is all very subjective, which is why those on the left will eat this up and those on the right will sniff their nose.

The article is useful in pointing out disparities in their well-being factors in the U.S. This is not new information. What is also not new is this thread. Take a look -- whether you agree with him or not, the only person who actually stated anything other than snide comments or verbal assaults is VanPastorMan.

Didn't you post that asinine Hillary "AUTISM" video? Kinda hard to take you seriously after that...

 

[jughaid]

You're both right. The article only cites specific criteria: life expentancy, infant mortality, incarceration rates, etc... I was just in Mexico, and I don't think it is debatable that the poor there have far less "stuff" and net worth. But I think they also tend to live healthier lives: ie. while they eat less, they eat better: less fast food, more water, less carbonated drinks, etc... America's poor often have enough income to have "choices", and they mostly seem to make bad ones. The poor and most of the population I saw, in Mexico are thin, so that alone is a huge difference.

This. Of the criteria used by the authors, certainly levels of incarceration and risk of homicide have much (not all) to do with choices made. Even infant mortality rates must involve some choices. If you correct for how such rates are determined (i.e., who is included as an infant), the rate in the US falls to a similar rate as France. In fact, the US infant mortality rate for the first month after birth is lower than many european countries. Problem is the rest of the 11 months. I suppose that many of those deaths have to do with low-birth weights/health issues, perhaps stemming from mother behavior during pregnancy, rather than neglect and/or lack of support.

 

[kkott]

Agreed.

The entire article is one big strawman argument. I don't doubt on the factors cited the results are correct. But the cited factors are not the only ones that determine quality of life. I bet the poor in the countries studied would trade places with their American counterparts in a heartbeat.

I question that. Most people I met, despite working in pretty entry-level or menial jobs, or just folks on the street, seemed pretty happy. Far happier than most Americans in similar situations. They live a different, slower, more humble/frugal life, but they seemed happy for the most part.

 

[Chester Fried]

I question that. Most people I met, despite working in pretty entry-level or menial jobs, or just folks on the street, seemed pretty happy. Far happier than most Americans in similar situations. They live a different, slower, more humble/frugal life, but they seemed happy for the most part.

Some people in Mexico have to feel that way since a couple hundred thousand come in illegally each year at great risk to themselves. It's obviously going to be a person by person case though.

 

[kkott]

Some people in Mexico have to feel that way since a couple hundred thousand come in illegally each year at great risk to themselves. It's obviously going to be a person by person case though.

I think it's all economic. A peso is worth about 1/18th a US dollar and work is hard to find. They are generally coming here and sending most of their earnings back to Mexico. I think there would be far less if they could make a decent wage there. Much more family-centered imo too.

 

[Chester Fried]

I think it's all economic. A peso is worth about 1/18th a US dollar and work is hard to find. They are generally coming here and sending most of their earnings back to Mexico. I think there would be far less if they could make a decent wage there. Much more family-centered imo too.

Isn't that the point? There's more opportunity in America for lower economic classes than there is in many other countries, especially Mexico. I understand why people wouldn't want to leave home, but they feel they need to leave to provide for their family. I'd probably do the same if I were in their situation.

All things considered, America is a good place to be poor. That being said, we need to do more to improve things for our lower classes. No doubt.

 

[jughaid]

Didn't you post that asinine Hillary "AUTISM" video? Kinda hard to take you seriously after that...

Yes, I did. That was hilarious, wasn't it?

That video was posted in response to a couple of threads in the WC -- one about how great Obama (proof was that he like mustard on hot dogs) and the other was a sophomoric video on the size of Trump's hands. Most on that forum get bent out of shape with notions about only serious content with sources, but then there is always crud like the hands video or other such nonsense. But funny how the Hillary thread got pulled but the Trump one remains though... Guess satire is in the eyes of the beholder.

 

[T.M.P.]

Yes, I did. That was hilarious, wasn't it?

That video was posted in response to a couple of threads in the WC -- one about how great Obama (proof was that he like mustard on hot dogs) and the other was a sophomoric video on the size of Trump's hands. Most on that forum get bent out of shape with notions about only serious content with sources, but then there is always crud like the hands video or other such nonsense. But funny how the Hillary thread got pulled but the Trump one remains though... Guess satire is in the eyes of the beholder.

No, it was stupid.