Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
So I was sitting in my statistics class ( ) when we were asked to pair up and discuss how much we think the government standard for yearly income of a family of 4 is to be in poverty.
We had to break down monthly expenses to come up with our yearly income. What would the fine individuals define as poverty here on the ole dakka dakka?
My class being made up of almost entirely upper middle class to upper upper class and being 18 - 21 years old believed that 12-15k a year is what the government should consider poverty. They felt that meat everyday was a privilege and that you can buy ramen and mac n cheese for cheap. That they shouldn't have a vehicle or use almost no income on clothing as those are privileges.
They agreed that food for 4 should only cost $250 a month at most. Rent and utilities should be only $500 a month. No other expenses were considered because poor people don't need them.
Now having grown up on the bad side of poor I thought their concept of poor was hilarious. Maybe I am biased though as I've experienced how expensive poor can be.
So what do you all think? Or at what point should the government give out aide assuming you believe that governments should provide some assistance naturally.
They agreed that food for 4 should only cost $250 a month at most. Rent and utilities should be only $500 a month. No other expenses were considered because poor people don't need them.
Food for 4, $250 a month? Rent plus utilities $500?
Your classmates don't know anything about how the world operates.
At any rate, the federal poverty level is something like $28,000 (or maybe $32k?) per year for a family of 4 and TRUST ME....that threshold is set way way too low.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/09/23 21:14:29
BrotherGecko wrote: So I was sitting in my statistics class ( ) when we were asked to pair up and discuss how much we think the government standard for yearly income of a family of 4 is to be in poverty.
We had to break down monthly expenses to come up with our yearly income. What would the fine individuals define as poverty here on the ole dakka dakka?
My class being made up of almost entirely upper middle class to upper upper class and being 18 - 21 years old believed that 12-15k a year is what the government should consider poverty. They felt that meat everyday was a privilege and that you can buy ramen and mac n cheese for cheap. That they shouldn't have a vehicle or use almost no income on clothing as those are privileges.
They agreed that food for 4 should only cost $250 a month at most. Rent and utilities should be only $500 a month. No other expenses were considered because poor people don't need them.
Now having grown up on the bad side of poor I thought their concept of poor was hilarious. Maybe I am biased though as I've experienced how expensive poor can be.
So what do you all think? Or at what point should the government give out aide assuming you believe that governments should provide some assistance naturally.
.....wow.
my cousin has a family of 6. 2 more thant for and food costs her 800$ a month. My mom pays 500$ in "Rent" a month and she owns the house.
Im sure I would love my kids to subsist on Ramen & Cheese. Its not like Ruffage is needed.
my guess is these kids are "College Poor" Where they can still get all the food from the cafeteria, but not enough to get the Iphone 10000 that just came out.
Those prices are at least 20% lower than basic foodstuff prices where I'm at, and I live in a high production agricultural and dairy region. The only thing on that list that I can find at those prices is the lunch meat. Even then it would be from the "end of its shelf life" store....which is a terrible idea when purchasing meat.
Ex: non-organic fresh chicken (meaning it hasn't been pumped full of saline and then frozen to sell at higher weight) runs at least $5.50 per pound here. Thats deboned thigh meat, not breast. A pound of mid grade cheese (on sale) is $12. A loaf of wheat bread is $4-$7. Non-organic broccoli is $4 or more per pound. Apples aren't even in the ball park of $1.33 per pound.
Thats in urbanized & suburban Northern California. You don't even want to know how much basic stuff costs in a place like Alaska, where most things have to be flown in from elesewhere.
#Realtalk If you buy 6 lbs of chicken for $15 its probably going to cook down to less than 3 lbs due to being pumped full of weight adding saline.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/09/23 21:30:27
Food for 4 at 250$ / month is only possible if you strike a deal with food producers and can buy stuff at a much lower price. Else 60$ per week for 4 or about 8$ per DAY for 4 people or 2$ per DAY for ONE person is...what? Your classmates have zero idea on how the world works.
BrotherGecko wrote: So I was sitting in my statistics class ( ) when we were asked to pair up and discuss how much we think the government standard for yearly income of a family of 4 is to be in poverty.
We had to break down monthly expenses to come up with our yearly income. What would the fine individuals define as poverty here on the ole dakka dakka?
My class being made up of almost entirely upper middle class to upper upper class and being 18 - 21 years old believed that 12-15k a year is what the government should consider poverty. They felt that meat everyday was a privilege and that you can buy ramen and mac n cheese for cheap. That they shouldn't have a vehicle or use almost no income on clothing as those are privileges.
They agreed that food for 4 should only cost $250 a month at most. Rent and utilities should be only $500 a month. No other expenses were considered because poor people don't need them.
Now having grown up on the bad side of poor I thought their concept of poor was hilarious. Maybe I am biased though as I've experienced how expensive poor can be.
So what do you all think? Or at what point should the government give out aide assuming you believe that governments should provide some assistance naturally.
I think your class has yet to actually live in the real world.... Disturbingly.
First off, make sure to tell everyone in your class about this. You might not die of starvation, but you will die long before your should if you live off nothing but packaged noodles because there is virtually nothing in those things to keep you healthy and any parent who feeds their kids nothing but Ramen, probably needs to have Child Services called on them. That's fething neglect/abuse.
And yes, your class is hilariously out of touch with anything approaching reality.
I'm single with no kids, and I need $200 minimum if I want to eat food that will kill me in 60 years. Closer to $300 if I actually want to, you know, eat vegetables, fruit, and meat, regularly (I hear those things are like, totally important for a healthy diet). And that's just me! Multiple me by 4 and you get $1200 and honestly I live pretty sparingly when it comes to food. I usually skip lunch.
I would love to know where I could live only $500 rent. I live in one of the lowest cost of living parts of the country, and I still pay just under $700. Given that there are only a few places in the US with public transportation, I'd love to know how your class expects these hypothetical family to make any income at all, because walking distance is going to produce extremely limited job opportunities most places and the places where you can get public transport or walk to work have rent a hell of a lot higher than $500. And what about phones? Most employers will want you accessible by phone.
Also, by not needing other expenses, do you mean your class expects people to live with no electricity, no running water, and to never pay local utility fees?Depending on location those things will run you anywhere from $150-#300 a month. I'd really love to know how we're even cooking those ramen noodles without electricity. Or are we just eating that crap out of the package? And what if my rotten diet of Ramen noodles ends up sending me to the hospital?
Bare minimum, I need $2400 a month to survive and pay all my expenses (rent, bills, car payments, insurance, food that won't kill me) and i am a single guy with no kids. I really, really hope your teacher gave these kids an F. I expect a degree of 'just not getting' from people, but this defies even common sense.
Rent + Utilities @ 500 month is doable, in a shared living space. The rent at my old apartment was $400 per person for 3 people in a 3 bedroom, with utilities being about 60 per person average month twice that in winter. Granted it was kind of crummy apartment but certainly livable. I know there were some families living in the same building cramming more payers into comparable spaces at the same rents, albeit in violation of housing laws. It wouldn't be unthinkable that some folks are able to drive their rent share down to sub-$300/month levels even in relatively expensive areas.
Last year I did an experiment to see how low I could get my food costs while meeting a reasonable nutirtion standard and that was at about $3.50/day , though that figure was tainted by the fact I already had lots of spices, dishes/pans and other accessory items on-hand.
I think the question should be less be "What's the bare minimum someone can survive on", as you can drive that pretty low. The question should really be more how much does a person need to live with dignity, with security and stability.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/09/23 21:36:22
I dont know American prices, but food itesm should have a fairly consistent relative price.
Poorer people eat less meat, a lot of people eat Italian in the US, I know this much. But did you know that a proper Italian pizza or spaghetti dish should have very little meat and a lot of tomato to make up.
Most actual Indian and chinese curry dishes go easy on the sauce and what is in it, and long on the rice.
Now I am a gross hypocrite because I ate two pieces of fried chicken and chips tonight, and a 7UP for £2.20, and had the same again with a Tango as I was still hungry. Thats cheap eating for the UK, and anything but healthy and meat heavy, but I could and should eat better for less.
Between rice, corn, bread, noodles and pasta as bulk staples you can eat heartily for very little money. It is what most people on this planet do.
n'oublie jamais - It appears I now have to highlight this again.
It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. By the juice of the brew my thoughts aquire speed, my mind becomes strained, the strain becomes a warning. It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion.
BrotherGecko wrote: upper middle class to upper upper class and being 18 - 21 years old
believed that 12-15k a year is what the government should consider poverty.
That they shouldn't have a vehicle or use almost no income on clothing as those are privileges.
They agreed that food for 4 should only cost $250 a month at most. Rent and utilities should be only $500 a month.
No other expenses were considered because poor people don't need them.
So woefully out of touch is almost sad. Remind me again why 18 year old kids are allowed to vote?
Anyway, my family of four spends at least $150 a week at the grocery store (and we don't buy expensive stuff either). The mortgage alone for my tiny townhouse is more than three times what these kids think rent and utilities should cost. Having some kind of vehicle is a must for anyone to hold a job, especially if you live in an area without reliable mass transportation. Oh, and you still need money to buy clothes, which is not a 'privilege' at all.
Most disgusting of all is the tired trope of "poor people shouldn't be able to enjoy anything because they are poor."
d-usa wrote: "When the Internet sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending posters that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing strawmen. They're bringing spam. They're trolls. And some, I assume, are good people."
2015/09/23 21:46:26
Subject: Re:Potential thought exercise on poverty.
Well yeah, shared living spaces can knock your rent down A LOT. In the Bay my shared living space rent was $650 per month, with the cheapest deal in town being $400 per month in the shared warehouse buildouts....which were in no way set to building code and many times meant living in a polluted ex-industrial building. Since moving for school my shared space rent has gone down to $320 per month, but thats an INSANELY good deal. Most rent in my town is $700-$900 for a room.
At any rate its important to keep the focus not on our individual costs as single folks, but on the costs for a family of 4. In a discussion of economics or price points, the family is the structural unit in question.
In either a single or dual wage earning household, parents are not going to be a position to reduce rent via shared space in the same way that single folks can. As stated by several folks, you can't just feed kids pasta and ramen noodles. Talk to some single mom's about what its like trying to get kids to school, doctors, appointments, etc without a car. Etc etc.
Most actual Indian and chinese curry dishes go easy on the sauce and what is in it, and long on the rice.
Between rice, corn, bread, noodles and pasta as bulk staples you can eat heartily for very little money. It is what most people on this planet do.
A good pot of curry is absolutely the cheapest way to eat healthy, you'll get no argument there.
On the second note, I think you are bypassing the fact that most poor folks in the world who exist on staple food purchases also have subsistence farming or hunting to suppliment their caloric intake. I'm kinda talking specifically about life in post-industrial Western society.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/09/23 21:48:29
Those prices are at least 20% lower than basic foodstuff prices where I'm at, and I live in a high production agricultural and dairy region. The only thing on that list that I can find at those prices is the lunch meat. Even then it would be from the "end of its shelf life" store....which is a terrible idea when purchasing meat.
Ex: non-organic fresh chicken (meaning it hasn't been pumped full of saline and then frozen to sell at higher weight) runs at least $5.50 per pound here. Thats deboned thigh meat, not breast. A pound of mid grade cheese (on sale) is $12. A loaf of wheat bread is $4-$7. Non-organic broccoli is $4 or more per pound. Apples aren't even in the ball park of $1.33 per pound.
Thats in urbanized & suburban Northern California. You don't even want to know how much basic stuff costs in a place like Alaska, where most things have to be flown in from elesewhere.
#Realtalk If you buy 6 lbs of chicken for $15 its probably going to cook down to less than 3 lbs due to being pumped full of weight adding saline.
I live in the Boston area and I've found his estimates to be mostly reflective I've what seen at the stores with better prices. The prices you're quoting are what I'd expect to pay if I walked into whole foods or something, buy I can regularly find apples for $0.89-$0.99 a lbs. This is the weekly flyer from where I usually take my mom to get groceries:
Looks like chicken fresh chicken thighs are $1.99/lb this week. If somebody wanted to charge me $5.50/lb for chicken it better still be alive and laying golden eggs. I don't envy your pricing.
EDIT: Which isn't to say I'm advocating for the position that would put the poverty bar so low. I'm firmly in the camp of people being entitled to a higher standard of living than that, it's just your food seems really expensive and that's interesting to talk about.
This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2015/09/23 21:54:57
There are 2 of us, my lizard, 2 cats, the fish and the big bird. The animals get their food which consists of various different bits and bobs but we eat egg noodles with vegetables and a little meat, Potatoes with vegetables and maybe a sausage, Pasta with vegetables, rice with vegetables and sometimes meat.
We used to eat a lot of meat and as a result meat would make up most of our food costs. Now I love meat but when 2 dollars of pasta can last for days or a bag of rice for weeks it's definitely the way to go when you are poor/saving money/wanna try something different. Just add meat here and there (because we do need meat).
We spent about 60NZD this week on food and it will last 8 days with 3 meals a day.
We always eat oats in the morning with half a banana each (cheapest breakfast we could come up with).
Lunch is home made bread with lettuce, carrot, sometimes a little fish or leftovers in it with some fruit.
Dinner is a pasta, egg pasta or rice dish with vegetables (spinach if we can afford it, corn, peas, carrot, onion etc) and a little meat.
Honestly id say I have never felt better overall. Without pets our food costs would go down a lot more (I think to less than 50NZD a week). If someone has a crock pot with a small startup cost in the week you can make some delicious loafs of bread for low cost. The bread is incredibly filling too.
I think a family of 4 could comfortably live healthily off 125NZD a week here well before all the non food related costs come in anyway...
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/09/23 22:02:36
2015/09/23 22:06:28
Subject: Re:Potential thought exercise on poverty.
Those prices are at least 20% lower than basic foodstuff prices where I'm at, and I live in a high production agricultural and dairy region. The only thing on that list that I can find at those prices is the lunch meat. Even then it would be from the "end of its shelf life" store....which is a terrible idea when purchasing meat.
Ex: non-organic fresh chicken (meaning it hasn't been pumped full of saline and then frozen to sell at higher weight) runs at least $5.50 per pound here. Thats deboned thigh meat, not breast. A pound of mid grade cheese (on sale) is $12. A loaf of wheat bread is $4-$7. Non-organic broccoli is $4 or more per pound. Apples aren't even in the ball park of $1.33 per pound.
Thats in urbanized & suburban Northern California. You don't even want to know how much basic stuff costs in a place like Alaska, where most things have to be flown in from elesewhere.
#Realtalk If you buy 6 lbs of chicken for $15 its probably going to cook down to less than 3 lbs due to being pumped full of weight adding saline.
I live in the Boston area and I've found his estimates to be mostly reflective I've what seen at the stores with better prices. The prices you're quoting are what I'd expect to pay if I walked into whole foods or something, buy I can regularly find apples for $0.89-$0.99 a lbs. This is the weekly flyer from where I usually take my mom to get groceries:
Looks like chicken fresh chicken thighs are $1.99/lb this week. If somebody wanted to charge me $5.50/lb for chicken it better still be alive and laying golden eggs. I don't envy your pricing.
EDIT: Which isn't to say I'm advocating for the position that would put the poverty bar so low. I'm firmly in the camp of people being entitled to a higher standard of living than that, it's just your food seems really expensive and that's interesting to talk about.
That $5.50 is actually lower than a lot of the stores here. You should see the Whole Foods and Co-op prices on meat....
And yeah, its totally true that I don't eat the absolute bottom of the barrel price point stuff. Most of my calories come from grains, dried fruit, and vegetables....and candy. I'll admit that part, lol. When I buy a protein source I pay a bit more because its worth it to me. I also grow my own basil, chard, carrots, potatoes, bell peppers, tobasco peppers, meyer lemons, strawberries, and mint. Soon I'll be trading for eggs from my neighbors up the street who keep 6 laying hens.
Hoping to grow a few tobacco plants this year too!
Chongara wrote: Rent + Utilities @ 500 month is doable, in a shared living space. The rent at my old apartment was $400 per person for 3 people in a 3 bedroom, with utilities being about 60 per person average month twice that in winter. Granted it was kind of crummy apartment but certainly livable. I know there were some families living in the same building cramming more payers into comparable spaces at the same rents, albeit in violation of housing laws. It wouldn't be unthinkable that some folks are able to drive their rent share down to sub-$300/month levels even in relatively expensive areas.
Last year I did an experiment to see how low I could get my food costs while meeting a reasonable nutirtion standard and that was at about $3.50/day , though that figure was tainted by the fact I already had lots of spices, dishes/pans and other accessory items on-hand.
I think the question should be less be "What's the bare minimum someone can survive on", as you can drive that pretty low. The question should really be more how much does a person need to live with dignity, with security and stability.
A 3br house where I live is $1500+ a month, plus utilities, and that's going to be an older home (as in: built 1900-1925), with a 50/50 chance of having only 2-prong plugs in the walls.... so you either don't own anything that requires an outlet, or you have to buy an adapter.
It is best to be a pessimist. You are usually right and, when you're wrong, you're pleasantly surprised.
Most disgusting of all is the tired trope of "poor people shouldn't be able to enjoy anything because they are poor."
Hey, that's standard for the course. These people are poor since they don't deserve better, either as punishment for past sins or because they're just plain dumb. Help a beggar find a job and he'll no longer need your help. Give him money for food today and you can give him money tomorrow and the day after too, which means you look good every day.
Not US prices ofc, but my living arrangements come to about 400 a month on loan payments and about, hmm, 300? on utilities like electricity, water, heating and internet/TV. I also need to keep my car fueled and serviced, and clothes aren't just a luxury unless I want to look like some bandit from a cheap near-future scifi dystopia film.
2015/09/23 22:18:07
Subject: Re:Potential thought exercise on poverty.
Chongara wrote: I'm firmly in the camp of people being entitled to a higher standard of living than that, it's just your food seems really expensive and that's interesting to talk about.
Nah, I get it. There's a big convo to be had about the higher price point for locally produced goods as opposed to industrial scale farming and then shipped halfway across the world. In general, pricing in California is higher than other places. I could find cheaper meat/cheese if I want to other stores....but I have comparison shopped those items and I'd rather eat humus than bargain basement meat.
As an individual, I spend about $30-$40 per week on groceries and another $20 on food from the cafeteria or cheap restaurants around town. Its not the cheapest possible route, but its damn sure cheaper than most.
I watched some fool spend $100 on bottled water at the Co-op the other day. Yep, $100 on bottled water....like we were living somewhere without a functional sewage & H20 delivery infrastructure. /sigh
Chongara wrote: Rent + Utilities @ 500 month is doable, in a shared living space. The rent at my old apartment was $400 per person for 3 people in a 3 bedroom, with utilities being about 60 per person average month twice that in winter. Granted it was kind of crummy apartment but certainly livable. I know there were some families living in the same building cramming more payers into comparable spaces at the same rents, albeit in violation of housing laws. It wouldn't be unthinkable that some folks are able to drive their rent share down to sub-$300/month levels even in relatively expensive areas.
Last year I did an experiment to see how low I could get my food costs while meeting a reasonable nutirtion standard and that was at about $3.50/day , though that figure was tainted by the fact I already had lots of spices, dishes/pans and other accessory items on-hand.
I think the question should be less be "What's the bare minimum someone can survive on", as you can drive that pretty low. The question should really be more how much does a person need to live with dignity, with security and stability.
A 3br house where I live is $1500+ a month, plus utilities, and that's going to be an older home (as in: built 1900-1925), with a 50/50 chance of having only 2-prong plugs in the walls.... so you either don't own anything that requires an outlet, or you have to buy an adapter.
Well yeah, prices are different everywhere. I guess what I was trying to say is that without more context for where OP lives it's perhaps a bit premature to call a guess of $500 month for low-end guess on as "rent totally out touch with reality". Just because up until last year, I was paying about that much out in actual reality. Sure some of the doors may have been in disrepair, the carpet was a bit old and the water in the downstairs bathroom was a bit spotty but the living conditions were hardly squalid.
EDIT: Though their other claims are pretty wrong-headed, guess I'm just trying to give these kids the benefit of the doubt where I can.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/09/23 22:23:03
2015/09/23 22:23:40
Subject: Re:Potential thought exercise on poverty.
Even in the US, cost of living can vary pretty wildly. There are places where 500 a month in rent for an apartment wouldn't be that unreasonable. In others, you couldn't get a tiny studio for twice that. It all depends extremely heavily on where you live.
I am the Hammer. I am the right hand of my Emperor. I am the tip of His spear, I am the gauntlet about His fist. I am the woes of daemonkind. I am the Hammer.
A better question would be to ask, why are there poor people? Bill Gates makes billions per year but people have to work two jobs to make it. Teachers qualify for public assistance while corporate CEOs own private islands. It's about priorities. The CEO of Sony Corp. makes $1.8 million per year so that the company can pay a living wage to all workers in facilities in Japan. .Meanwhile Sony Pictures (US) pays 17 execs over $1 million and the CEO makes $3 million, $1.2 million more than the CEO of the parent company. We have messed up priorities in the US.
Six mistakes mankind keeps making century after century: Believing that personal gain is made by crushing others; Worrying about things that cannot be changed or corrected; Insisting that a thing is impossible because we cannot accomplish it; Refusing to set aside trivial preferences; Neglecting development and refinement of the mind; Attempting to compel others to believe and live as we do
Wealthy people and those sheltered from realities of living on small amounts always greatly underestimate how little you can survive on because they never have to face the reality of it. They do some sums and assume it's as straight forward as they think and are quite casual about how easy it is for poor people not to be allowed 'luxuries' like a TV or books, which you even get given in prison. But when you've never had to go without, it's very easy not to have empathy and just tell others how easy it should be and how they don't deserve better.
TV isn't a luxury, that always makes me laugh. As things go for hours of entertainment related to the investment, it's about the cheapest thing you can possibly have. And people should have a reasonable expectation of affording such an ubiquitous item for the home which for most is the primary source of news, weather information and education as well as entertainment. People bored out of their skull living in a house fitted out like a cell will do nothing to increase productivity or wellbeing, despite how some believe that being poor automatically means you should have nothing more than the barest food and a bed.
As a slightly younger than 25 year old, I want to meet the people in your group who said that and punch them all in the face.
When it was me and the gf, we would spend at least thirty quid on food a week, and we weren't able to afford extremely nice things. We used to buy reduced bread then freeze it. And freeze anything that was cheap. We managed to survive but it was rather hard.
But the only way to get better off people to understand this is to make them poor. Give them three people dependent on them and send them into the really world trying to feed a family on that much. See if they can last the month.
DS:90-S+G+++M++B-IPw40k03+D+A++/fWD-R++T(T)DM+ Warmachine MKIII record 39W/0D/6L
agnosto wrote: A better question would be to ask, why are there poor people?
Because in ANY society there are haves and have nots. Even if you remove all material possessions, currency, and types of wealth some people are left with more "human capital" in the form of their mental or physical ability.
Read Edmund Burke's commentary on the "leveling of society" if you'd like to ponder the social aspects of what a truly equalized mass society actually brings about.
If that's your take-away,either we're reading two different Burkes or coming to completely different conclusions. Burke proposes that society, in general, is best-functional, and happiest, when the happiness and security of its constituent members is highest and best assured. In essence, a society is greater than the total sum of its parts. He was also an old-school, one might even say "original", Conservative thinker, of the sort from a time when being in a position of power placed upon one the responsibility of ensuring equality, security, safety, and other such things as we have now enshrined in the Bill of Rights, to those of lower social standings.
Modern-day Conservatives would appall Burke.
It is best to be a pessimist. You are usually right and, when you're wrong, you're pleasantly surprised.
agnosto wrote: A better question would be to ask, why are there poor people?
Because in ANY society there are haves and have nots. Even if you remove all material possessions, currency, and types of wealth some people are left with more "human capital" in the form of their mental or physical ability.
Read Edmund Burke's commentary on the "leveling of society" if you'd like to ponder the social aspects of what a truly equalized mass society actually brings about.
Or just look at countries like Sweden who do a fair job of it. I'm not advocating stripping the rich and throwing them out on their silken knickers. I'm saying that,as a society, the US is fairly morally bankrupt when it comes to equality of living standards. You can't just throw the poor into slums, throw them some food and forget about them. At some level we have expect more than "you get what we give you." not what your dad or grandfather worked for and you inherited.
I went from sometimes being homeless and sleeping in a car when I was a child to being comfortably upper middle-class through hard work and perseverance. That doesn't mean that I'm blind to what people struggle with because we, as a society, seem to value the work of people at the top more than the people who make their work possible. How far would they have gotten without that underpaid cop protecting their property or that underpaid teacher guiding their early steps ?
Six mistakes mankind keeps making century after century: Believing that personal gain is made by crushing others; Worrying about things that cannot be changed or corrected; Insisting that a thing is impossible because we cannot accomplish it; Refusing to set aside trivial preferences; Neglecting development and refinement of the mind; Attempting to compel others to believe and live as we do
I should note that the professor laughed at what they thought poor was.
My house is a very comfortable and sometimes too big 3200 sq. ft, the next house over is 36,000 sq ft. A half mile from me is an actual scale replica of a castle complete with period appropriate furnishings and has a helipad on the roof. Actually helipads seem to be relatively common around where I live.
I drove past the highschool near my house and was sad when all the cars in the parking lot were worth 60-80k.
So yah these kids mostly have no idea what most of America looks like lol.
) when we were asked to pair up and discuss how much we think the government standard for yearly income of a family of 4 is to be in poverty.
The Undying Spawn of Shub-Niggurath 
5000pts 
6000pts 
3000pts
