Is poverty relative? (1 Viewer)

[Goobieman]

Is poverty relative to time and place?

And if so, how can you argue that the "poor" in the US actually poor?

 

[Stinger]

Is poverty relative to time and place?

And if so, how can you argue that the "poor" in the US actually poor?

I recall that during the early 90's reading an article on just this very subject where it noted that adjusted for inflation the average family in poverty at that time, according to the census records, spent more money yearly than the average middle class family of the 60's earned. I look back on my growing up years and yes we would have been called poor back then although we considered ourselves middle class.

 

[AndrewC]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/19/AR2006101901137.html


Poverty is relative. Yes, many poor in America are actually poor. The standard of living in America is very high. Also the cost of living in America is very high. Therefore the definition of poor is different from other nations. Many in America are considered poor, though they have a place to sleep and food to eat. That alone makes you middle class in many places.

Poverty and rampant debt could be helped if Americans would stop investing in consumer goods and invest in themselves. Immigrants who come to American to improve their lives do this with amazing results. The American dream has been distorted into a buffet of electronic and material wealth. In the 50's, The American dream was a home of your own and maybe a car. Today, the American dream is a home with a two car garage, a large SUV (or two), big screen, mobile phone, and 512 channel on demand goodness. I say back to basics everyone. Be a good citizen and invest in yourselves. Just say know to useless consumer goods.

 

[FallingPianos]

I say that if you have clothing on your back, food on your plate, and a shelter over your head, with some free time to spare, that you are not truely poor. everything else is relative.

 

[Patrickt]

You cannot honestly compare the poor in a rich country and the poor in a poor country. Apples and oranges.

 

[Stinger]

I say that if you have clothing on your back, food on your plate, and a shelter over your head, with some free time to spare, that you are not truely poor. everything else is relative.

And one of the biggest health crisis the poor in American face is obesity. Our poor eat themselves to death. Compare that to the true poverty in the world.

 

[FallingPianos]

And one of the biggest health crisis the poor in American face is obesity. Our poor eat themselves to death. Compare that to the true poverty in the world.

a lot of that has to do with the quality of the food people eat, rather than the quantity. its quite possible to be fat, but also be malnourished. but yes, your point still stands.

 

[Goobieman]

Poverty used to mean a lack of basic needs, like food, shelter, water, etc.

If you have a phone and a car and cable TV, you arent impoverished.

 

[Stinger]

a lot of that has to do with the quality of the food people eat, rather than the quantity. its quite possible to be fat, but also be malnourished. but yes, your point still stands.

Alot of it has to do is that the poor have no problem eating in this country and in fact indulge in it.

 

[FallingPianos]

Alot of it has to do is that the poor have no problem eating in this country and in fact indulge in it.

indeed it does.

 

[Patrickt]

"And one of the biggest health crisis the poor in American face is obesity."

I know it's popular to hate fat people and they're one of the few groups in the U.S. who are expected to accept responsibility for anything but I don't buy the hyped health crisis. Is it a problem? Sure. Is it one of the biggest health crisis facing the U.S.? I don't think so.

There are a lot of reasons for people choosing to eat too much. I have known people who grew up hungry and malnourished and they couldn't not eat when there was food present. A neighbor's wife hid food in the house. Not a cookie or something but cases and cases of canned goods. Intellectually she knew they weren't going to starve again but emotionally she couldn't help herself. I grew up in a family where if you left a Brussel sprout on your plate you got a lecture on the starving children in China who would kill for that Brussel sprout. If a serving dish had food left Mom would put it on our plates and say, "Eat, eat."

A friend of mine was in the Ukraine when Stalin starved six million Ukranians to death. She was the same way. If there was food on the table you had to eat it.

Where I live now the Indians have faced times of feast and times of famine for generations. The famines are less frequent now but the need to eat when food is present is still there so many of them are fat. Not the rolly-polly can't get up and walk kind of fat but fatter than optimum.

I left my apartment one day and I heard someone calling my name. I looked around and an Indian woman who sold me tacos in the street was running in a 5k run. I had no idea they made lime-green lycra shorts that big. She was not only running but she was talking to me. Her three large sons were pacing her on the sidewalk and cheering momma on. Now, they were fat but they were also fit.

The weight parameters for being healthy are broader, I believe, than Americans accept. Too skinny and too fat are bad but being above or below the federally declared optimum is not necessarily a problem.

I do not measure poverty or rich by the % of fat a person has.

 

[Topsez]

There is no excuse for a healthy American to live in poverty... but that is just me speaking... Poor or living in poverty is a choice as has been pointed out earlier by the reference to the Mexicans being able to pull themselves out of poverty utilizing a sound hard work ethic.

If the area you live in is impoverished then move to an area where there is great growth and work your butt off and you won't be living in poverty... the problem is the work ethic for those able to work.

People with limited income should budget and accept the reality of priorities of food, shelter, health and education... Pay for everything you want with cash after the basics is paid... save for the car or house... pay cash and use no credit... Most people in poverty give 20% or more of their income to a milk skinned banker or loan agent in an airconditioned office wearing shiny shoes and suit. It should be illegal to loan people in poverty money... simply send them strait to the government for assistance if they can't make it without a loan.

 

[Kandahar]

The answer to your poll question is yes and no. In economic terms, there are two distinct categories of poverty: relative and absolute.

If you're in absolute poverty, you don't have enough food, shelter, clothing, or medical care to meet your basic needs. You most likely have no education whatsoever. You probably have a large family, and if you're female, you've probably been married since age 14 or earlier. Under these kind of conditions, poverty is not relative. Poor is poor is poor, no matter where you live.

However, there is a separate category called relative poverty. If you're earning $10,000 a year and living in San Francisco, you're going to feel quite poor compared to everyone else. And in fact, you are. If you're earning $10,000 a year and living in Afghanistan, you're going to feel incredibly wealthy and fortunate compared to everyone else. And in fact, you are.

 

[Goobieman]

The answer to your poll question is yes and no. In economic terms, there are two distinct categories of poverty: relative and absolute.

Its pretty clear that in the US we concern ourselves with relative poverty, as there is little -- if any-- absolute poverty.

Solving the 'problem' of 'relative poverty' is nothing more that determining what standard of living we think people should have and what we need to to to see they have it. That's entirely subjective, and is a very mobile goal post.

 

[Diogenes]

Of course poverty is relative.

In the museum in Winnipeg there is a replica of the Nonesuch, the first trading ship to enter Hudson's Bay in the early 17th century. According to the plaque at the base of the replica England had a population of 6 million at the time, and 1 million of these depended on charity to make it through each day.

A century later, Good Queen Anne of England gave birth to 15 children. The one who lived the longest died of smallpox when he was nine.

Now that was poverty on a scale that we haven't seen in this country.

Poverty is relative, but it's more accurate to compare the poverty of the poorest citizens of the country now with the condition (and prospects) of the poorest citizens 50 or 100 years ago. It is not useful to compare the poorest 5% now with the richest 5% now as a measure of social failure, since the income gap only indicates how far a young person can go if they have the ambition and work ethic to do so. Almost all of the people I graduated from school with were in poverty at the time - none of us had the money or income to buy a house and raise a family when we went looking for our first job, but a good many of my classmates have become quite wealthy over their working careers.

 

[Stinger]

"And one of the biggest health crisis the poor in American face is obesity."

I know it's popular to hate fat people .......

Spare me, with that the rest gets ignored.

 

[Patrickt]

Stinger: "Spare me..."|

Okay. You're spared.