Is Poverty In America More A Choice Or A Condition?

[chri'stina 190]

I think it's a combination, not just one or the other.

To me it matters the age of the person and into what situation they were born.

A child of course has no choice about being poor or rich, they can't do anything about it. I feel the most badly for children in poverty, because they really can't do anything to change it while they are young.

I think the environment people are born into has a strong influence on them and sometimes they stick to what they know, even if it's a bad situation. Such as a woman who will marry an abusive husband after having an abusive father(not all abused women do this, I mean the ones that do). They had the choice to not marry an abusive person, but their frame of mind leads them back into the cycle of abuse. Or like in projects where the men are not around to give a good example to the young boys, and they have children with several women. A child looking at that may think "I don't want this for my life" but may end up doing the same thing. It's familiar.

A book I had to read for a class, "There Are No Children Here" has some good examples of how choices and environment can keep someone in poverty. Maybe some are familiar with it, I know they made it into a movie. It's about a man who went to go do sociology research in the projects of Chicago, one project in particular. He followed the lives of brothers in one family, and how no matter how many times they had said they wanted to be different and not be in gangs when they got older, would end up getting into major trouble. Their neighborhood was very dangerous, and their education very lacking. There was no one around that was a good example to them of working hard. Only one of the brothers made something of his life, and was actually adopted by the man who did the research, and went on to college. He proved that you can get out of that life cycle if you want to, but it is very hard. But not impossible. It's possible if you are willing to work hard to get out of the cycle and willing to ignore the bad influences. Of course it's hard if there are bullets flying through your neighborhood.

Another example that might sound cliche is The Pursuit of Happyness movie, based on a real story. I know not every person who is poor is going to be really good at math and stuff like the guy was, but he proved that you can change your life if you really want to. It takes lottttts of hard work though.

I grew up in a family that struggled sometimes. We weren't poor, but didn't have much extra money.

Financial Aid for college is so available and can truly pay for your college. I went through college 100% being paid through financial aid, and I was not even poor. Just getting by. All you really need is to do fine in school, then you can start at a community college which is easier to get into, and then go on to a university, and it can be paid 100%. It's such a valuable resource. So many people could take advantage of it that aren't.

I didn't read every page of this thread so I'm sorry if I am repeating what anyone else has said already.

One more thing I thought of is something Gupt (I think, sorry if I'm wrong) said awhile ago, and I remembered it because I thought "That's so true." How did so many immigrants come to this country with nothing and ended up living "the American dream" like owning their own houses and running their own businesses and succeeding after HARD work, and yet people born here sometimes can't seem to do the same thing.

So I can't deny that some people can't get out of their poverty for various reasons, but it's also about motivation and choice IMO.

And when I think about the homeless in the US vs the homeless in India, it's such a completely different situation. That doesn't mean I don't care about those in poverty here, but I think they have so many more opportunities to get by here than they would in a country like India. Here a problem can be that they might just not know about resources that can help them.

That was long winded!!

[homesick_american 1]

Yup - coz you have never been in the situation where it may be one of your only options to get ahead in life.

I have never been in that situation, but that is not why I would not join the military.

Wouldn’t be for me either. The way the military has been used in recent years (in fact going all the way back to Vietnam & Korea), I’m not convinced that I would really be “serving my country”, certainly not in the best way. Those uber-patriotic enlistment commercials seem rather euphemistic to me...

I certainly wouldn't want to serve in the military at the moment. The United States has an all-volunteer military and as such has a moral obligation to NOT send troops into harm's way without a very, very, very good reason. Iraq doesn't qualify. I LOATHE the way the Bush administration is using the military for its own ends and how it abuses the patriotism and pride of the young men and women who serve.

It's sick.

[Alex+R 0]

Yup - coz you have never been in the situation where it may be one of your only options to get ahead in life.

I have never been in that situation, but that is not why I would not join the military.

Wouldn’t be for me either. The way the military has been used in recent years (in fact going all the way back to Vietnam & Korea), I’m not convinced that I would really be “serving my country”, certainly not in the best way. Those uber-patriotic enlistment commercials seem rather euphemistic to me...

I certainly wouldn't want to serve in the military at the moment. The United States has an all-volunteer military and as such has a moral obligation to NOT send troops into harm's way without a very, very, very good reason. Iraq doesn't qualify. I LOATHE the way the Bush administration is using the military for its own ends and how it abuses the patriotism and pride of the young men and women who serve.

It's sick.

Wait, why do they have more of an obligation to not put an all-volunteer army into harm's way without a good reason than to a drafted army?

[Caladan 19]

I think she meant that those friends of yours are the exceptions. I'm guessing she included the "of course many make it out of poverty" section to avoid posts like this one. She was just saying it's not the norm.

I read what she wrote and I stand by what I wrote. I think some people born into poverty do give up trying, or they never try in the first place. If they're not going to at least TRY, then I don't really want to hear any b!tching. I have respect for people who at least TRY.

Eh. Trying is sometimes like wishing for sunshine and fairies. The thing is, with educated parents and a middle class set of valuesm, pretty much any kid that manages a B average in school will head off to college and do more or less okay. Parents will pay for college and tutors and SAT prep and all of that.

Without money, though, there's a lot less margin for error. Bright kid who messes up -- legally, scholastically, emotionally, whatever -- has a lot more resources than the poor kid, and the social capital to get second chances. Case in point: My college roommate made Cs and partied and probably has a great career as an accountant now. Had I done that, I would have lost my scholarship and not graduated. Would I be markedly lazier than her had I done that? No, but her parents were rich. Money buys you a lot of room to screw up, lots of guidance counselors, lots of school districts.

Quite a lot of it is expectations, too. C. never went to college despite having straight As in high school, because no one in his family had the expectation that he'd do anything but get a job. They're hardworking people, but I think people underestimate how much a "choice" really has to be on someone's radar before they get it as a choice. If your parents are educated and successful, you see that from the time you're a little kid and dropping out isn't a live choice for you. If everyone you know works as a farmer or a carpenter, it's very hard to decide that you'll be the academic, and even harder to navigate a world that is mostly an old boys' network.

I think "choice" and "condition" is a false dichotomy. The conditions influence the choices you have available, and the consequences of a choice vary depending on the conditions one finds himself in. (You think Paris Hilton got out of jail for any reason other than her wealth and celebrity? You think Joe Schmoe would have? Even though they made the same choice?)

[homesick_american 1]

Wait, why do they have more of an obligation to not put an all-volunteer army into harm's way without a good reason than to a drafted army?

Sure. If it were REALLY essential to national security and a war we actually had to fight and was crucial to the continued existence of the United States, we'd probably reinstate the draft.

[homesick_american 1]

Eh. Trying is sometimes like wishing for sunshine and fairies. The thing is, with educated parents and a middle class set of valuesm, pretty much any kid that manages a B average in school will head off to college and do more or less okay. Parents will pay for college and tutors and SAT prep and all of that.

Without money, though, there's a lot less margin for error. Bright kid who messes up -- legally, scholastically, emotionally, whatever -- has a lot more resources than the poor kid, and the social capital to get second chances. Case in point: My college roommate made Cs and partied and probably has a great career as an accountant now. Had I done that, I would have lost my scholarship and not graduated. Would I be markedly lazier than her had I done that? No, but her parents were rich. Money buys you a lot of room to screw up, lots of guidance counselors, lots of school districts.

Quite a lot of it is expectations, too. C. never went to college despite having straight As in high school, because no one in his family had the expectation that he'd do anything but get a job. They're hardworking people, but I think people underestimate how much a "choice" really has to be on someone's radar before they get it as a choice. If your parents are educated and successful, you see that from the time you're a little kid and dropping out isn't a live choice for you. If everyone you know works as a farmer or a carpenter, it's very hard to decide that you'll be the academic, and even harder to navigate a world that is mostly an old boys' network.

I think "choice" and "condition" is a false dichotomy. The conditions influence the choices you have available, and the consequences of a choice vary depending on the conditions one finds himself in. (You think Paris Hilton got out of jail for any reason other than her wealth and celebrity? You think Joe Schmoe would have? Even though they made the same choice?)

You're assuming I voted "choice". I voted "condition". Bet you didn't see that one coming.

I did say "try". I did not say "succeed". I know it's hard, but like I said...you have to at least f*cking make some effort. Also, I may have been born middle class but that does not mean that my childhood was not difficult and effort-free.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I think "choice" and "condition" is a false dichotomy. The conditions influence the choices you have available, and the consequences of a choice vary depending on the conditions one finds himself in. (You think Paris Hilton got out of jail for any reason other than her wealth and celebrity? You think Joe Schmoe would have? Even though they made the same choice?)

Interesting point.

Eh. Trying is sometimes like wishing for sunshine and fairies. The thing is, with educated parents and a middle class set of valuesm, pretty much any kid that manages a B average in school will head off to college and do more or less okay. Parents will pay for college and tutors and SAT prep and all of that.

Without money, though, there's a lot less margin for error. Bright kid who messes up -- legally, scholastically, emotionally, whatever -- has a lot more resources than the poor kid, and the social capital to get second chances. Case in point: My college roommate made Cs and partied and probably has a great career as an accountant now. Had I done that, I would have lost my scholarship and not graduated. Would I be markedly lazier than her had I done that? No, but her parents were rich. Money buys you a lot of room to screw up, lots of guidance counselors, lots of school districts.

Quite a lot of it is expectations, too. C. never went to college despite having straight As in high school, because no one in his family had the expectation that he'd do anything but get a job. They're hardworking people, but I think people underestimate how much a "choice" really has to be on someone's radar before they get it as a choice. If your parents are educated and successful, you see that from the time you're a little kid and dropping out isn't a live choice for you. If everyone you know works as a farmer or a carpenter, it's very hard to decide that you'll be the academic, and even harder to navigate a world that is mostly an old boys' network.

I think "choice" and "condition" is a false dichotomy. The conditions influence the choices you have available, and the consequences of a choice vary depending on the conditions one finds himself in. (You think Paris Hilton got out of jail for any reason other than her wealth and celebrity? You think Joe Schmoe would have? Even though they made the same choice?)

You're assuming I voted "choice". I voted "condition". Bet you didn't see that one coming.

I did say "try". I did not say "succeed". I know it's hard, but like I said...you have to at least f*cking make some effort. Also, I may have been born middle class but that does not mean that my childhood was not difficult and effort-free.

Do you have any idea how condescending your posts sound?

[Caladan 19]

How do you judge whether someone's trying? I'm serious. I don't know other people's lives well enough to know whether they're not trying, at the limit of their talents, or down on their luck. Heck, if you're poor, you're a medical emergency away from being totally skunked, and then someone probably wants to cut your medical care because you're not 'trying' hard enough.

Why should someone poor have to try harder than someone middle class just to keep the middle class happy? They should if they want to succeed, of course, but it seems a little much to demand that other people prove to society that they're trying, especially if you think that most of the reason they *do* have to try harder isn't just their fault.

[mawilson 2,133]

Why should someone poor have to try harder than someone middle class just to keep the middle class happy?

The same reason someone middle class has to try harder than someone upper class to achieve the same thing?

The upper class is, according to some, similarly unattainable to those not born into upper-class families.

[homesick_american 1]

Do you have any idea how condescending your posts sound?

If they're half as condescending as yours are sanctimonious, I think we BOTH have a problem.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Do you have any idea how condescending your posts sound?

If they're half as condescending as yours are sanctimonious, I think we BOTH have a problem.

Idiosynrcasies aside, social ineptitude can be a real hinderance when blogging.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I think its very easy for successful people to see the failures of others as being deserved.

[Alex+R 0]

I missed Caladan so much.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I missed Caladan so much.

Me too - her posts are always thoughtful.

[Caladan 19]

I think its very easy for successful people to see the failures of others as being deserved.

And to see the failures of other successful people as just bad luck.