America's Poor Live Better Than Most Of Humanity

[grasping the after wind]

Perhaps some people find the fact that some are allowed to be more rich than others to be so great a problem they are willing to allow some to be more equal than others in order to rectify it?

 

[Yoder777]

Why is it so hard for some people to admit they are thankful for having been born in this country? Immigrants certainly are thankful. Why are there thousands risking their lives to get into this country instead of the other way around?

 

[MachZer0]

yes, I'm sure you can tell these folks to fall on their knees and thank God for their circumstances.

That this is in America doesn't end the suffering.

What does your picture represent?

 

[Yoder777]

Perhaps some people find the fact that some are allowed to be more rich than others to be so great a problem they are willing to allow some to be more equal than others in order to rectify it?

I've read George Orwell's Animal Farm and what it taught me is that when government bureaucrats promise to make everyone in society economically equal, what that really means is crippling poverty for everyone except for the ruling elites. That's exactly what happened in the Soviet Union. I would rather live in a society that provides a good education, opportunities to succeed for people who are willing to work hard, a legal system that provides equality under the law, and a social safety net to help people get back on their feet when necessary.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Yes yes. Of course you don't see it. You're not looking and not speaking to them.

These three no doubt look as contented as a cow.


Never fear however. All is right with the world.
YOUR world anyway.

I told my boss once, concerning my responsibility to 'care', "I can't care more than you do, it's your business."

If those who have the power, means, and responsibility to affect change don't care, why should I? And if I did what good would it do?

The teacher told the class of youngsters that if anyone needed to go to the bathroom they should just raise their hand, then asked if there were any questions. Little Johnny, smart-aleck that he was, responded by asking the teacher, "What good will that do?"

If you look carefully at our problems, and the proposed solutions, you'll find that two very predictable approaches are taken,

One: Talk the problem to death.

Two: Ignore it and maybe it will go away.

.

 

[RDKirk]

Again the government of the United States is not a Christian institution and should not be expected to behave as if it were.

Well, there is the issue and that is what would make all the difference in the world, if everyone in the US who calls himself or herself a Christian would acknowledge that the United States is not a Christian institution--and never has been.

But you won't find too large a percentage of Christians in America who will accept that.

 

[kermit]

The points you are making I've heard many times before. What do you think of this video as a counterpoint? I am honestly curious.

Are the Poor Getting Poorer? - YouTube

That video is full of some interesting nonsense. First off all the claim that that real incomes have increased when reality shows the exact opposite. His example of the pie was flawed. No, you don't want a smaller peice of a larger pie because the increase in the size represents inflation. He then compares the the average income fo the top 20% with the bottom 20%. While it shows that the bottom income increased faster than the the average of the top 20% he failed to mention that both increased slower than cost of living. He completely ignored that the very top of the 20% saw their income increase vastly outpage cost of living.

 

[Yoder777]

That video is full of some interesting nonsense. First off all the claim that that real incomes have increased when reality shows the exact opposite. His example of the pie was flawed. No, you don't want a smaller peice of a larger pie because the increase in the size represents inflation. He then compares the the average income fo the top 20% with the bottom 20%. While it shows that the bottom income increased faster than the the average of the top 20% he failed to mention that both increased slower than cost of living. He completely ignored that the very top of the 20% saw their income increase vastly outpage cost of living.

You've made some interesting points and I will have to look into it in more detail. What did you think of this information?

Even if you’re stuck in the bottom 5% of the US income distribution your standard of living is about equal to that of the top 5% of Indians. Even if you’re in the bottom 10% your standard of living is about the same as that of the bottom 10% in other rich countries like Sweden and Finland. And when we sweep everything together into some sort of quality of life measure the American poor are better off than the French or German poor.
Astonishing Numbers: America's Poor Still Live Better Than Most Of The Rest Of Humanity - Forbes

Is there some validity to the argument that instead of trying to redistribute the pie, government policies should try to make the pie bigger? Was it John Kennedy, a Democratic president, who said that a rising tide lifts all boats?

 

[jgarden]

Astonishing Numbers: America's Poor Still Live Better Than Most Of The Rest Of Humanity - Forbes

As Americans, we should thank God everyday for our high standard of living compared to the rest of the world.

Champagne Units

A champagne unit is a US military unit staffed by celebrities or people from wealthy or politically powerful families. Such units have often been part of the National Guard, and assigned to lower-risk duty inside the United States. The term is pejorative, with the connotation that such units were havens for those with connections who wished to avoid conscription into more dangerous duty while still gaining the prestige afforded in the United States to military service.

..... During the Vietnam war, service in the National Guard and Reserve components were seen as a way to avoid combat. Although some number of Guard and Reserve units were in fact "called-up" to combat duty in every US war since they were founded, the risk was especially low in the 1970s.

Only 8700 of these soldiers were sent to Vietnam, 0.3% of the personnel who served. Furthermore, a greatly disproportionate number of famous, wealthy, and/or politically connected young men received slots in the Guard or Reserves during Vietnam, including 360 professional athletes such as Bill Bradley and Nolan Ryan.

..... One well known champagne unit was the Texas Air National Guard 147th Fighter Interceptor Group, at Ellington Field in Houston. During the Vietnam War many well-connected sons landed in this posting, sometimes with the help of politicians such as Ben Barnes.

147th Fighter Group
**********************************
- Lloyd Bentsen Jr., son of Lloyd Bentsen
- George W. Bush, son of George H. W. Bush
- John Connally III, son of John Connally Jr.
- the son of John Tower
- James R. Bath
- seven members of the Dallas Cowboys

Champagne unit - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"I am angry that so many sons of the powerful and well placed and many professional athletes (who were probably healthier than any of us) managed to wangle slots in Reserve and National Guard units. Of the many tragedies of Vietnam, this raw class discrimination strikes me as the most damaging to the ideal that all Americans are created equal and owe equal allegiance to our country."
- General Colin Powell

Its also these same American poor, when drafted, are put on the front lines in war where the risk is greatest - while the sons of the rich and powerful were placed in "champagne" units "assigned to lower-risk duty inside the United States."

 

[abdAlSalam]

You've made some interesting points and I will have to look into it in more detail. What did you think of this information?

Is there some validity to the argument that instead of trying to redistribute the pie, government policies should try to make the pie bigger? Was it John Kennedy, a Democratic president, who said that a rising tide lifts all boats?

The problem is that, while we are one of, if not the richest countries in the world. But our wealth is distributed in a manner that would make a third-world plutocrat drool. The rising tide lifts all boats saying may have applied in Kennedys day because even back then, we were fairly concerned about giving the average American a fairer shake. This video illustrates the problem quite well:

Wealth Inequality in America - YouTube

 

[Yoder777]

The problem is that, while we are one of, if not the richest countries in the world. But our wealth is distributed in a manner that would make a third-world plutocrat drool. The rising tide lifts all boats saying may have applied in Kennedys day because even back then, we were fairly concerned about giving the average American a fairer shake. This video illustrates the problem quite well:

Wealth Inequality in America - YouTube

Yet compared to the poor in a vast majority of the world's countries, even Western European ones, America's poor are either better off or doing just as well.

 

[RDKirk]

"I am angry that so many sons of the powerful and well placed and many professional athletes (who were probably healthier than any of us) managed to wangle slots in Reserve and National Guard units. Of the many tragedies of Vietnam, this raw class discrimination strikes me as the most damaging to the ideal that all Americans are created equal and owe equal allegiance to our country."

Well, with regard to the safety of Guard and reserve units, that got changed in the 80s--by Congress with plenty of support from Powell's cohort. Prior to the 80s, the "Total Force" was predominantly the active duty force with Guard and Reserves forming the smaller portion.

That was turned upside down. In order to make it impossible for the president to carry out a Vietnam-sized war without the full participation of Congress, the active duty component was made a much smaller portion of the Total Force--really, more of a training and maintenance cadre, in terms of preparation to fight a major war--and the Reserve and Guard forces were designed as the real combat forces. In other words, another Vietnam could not be engaged without Congress calling up the Reserves and Guard.

That's exactly how it has played out in the War on Terror. That's why I'd advise a young guy joining the military today to go active and put in for long overseas tours--being in the Reserves in time of war means you will fight...but if you're active duty, you have a good chance of spending your tour in Germany or Hawaii.

Its also these same American poor, when drafted, are put on the front lines in war where the risk is greatest - while the sons of the rich and powerful were placed in "champagne" units "assigned to lower-risk duty inside the United States."

BTW, the protests against Vietnam actually started after the college draft deferments were dropped. As long as being in college kept one from being drafted, there were no protests. Imagine that.

But today's volunteer army is essentially the same thing as having draft deferments--people with other economic options are generally not enlisting.

I found it extremely interesting during the Falklands War that Prince Andrew was not just wearing a fancy military uniform, but was actually flying combat missions. Just don't see that happening much in the US.

 

[abdAlSalam]

Yet compared to the poor in a vast majority of the world's countries, even Western European ones, America's poor are either better off or doing just as well.

Id rather be poor in a place like Germany or Norway than be poor in certain places in America.

And what is your point anyway, because the American poor have it better than the rest of the world we should be unconcerned with poverty and wealth inequality in our own country?

 

[Lethe]

And what is your point anyway, because the American poor have it better than the rest of the world we should be unconcerned with poverty and wealth inequality in our own country?

That's the message.

 

[PreachersWife2004]

Id rather be poor in a place like Germany or Norway than be poor in certain places in America.

And what is your point anyway, because the American poor have it better than the rest of the world we should be unconcerned with poverty and wealth inequality in our own country?

Know how people kinda get their panties in a bunch when some Christians start saying they're being persecuted when in reality they're not?

In some cases, being "poor" is kinda the same deal. You ain't really poor in most cases if you live in the United States.

Granted, there are truly poor people. But I don't think most of the people here in the US have ever really experienced true poverty.

 

[Yoder777]

Id rather be poor in a place like Germany or Norway than be poor in certain places in America.

And what is your point anyway, because the American poor have it better than the rest of the world we should be unconcerned with poverty and wealth inequality in our own country?

No, I am saying we should be thankful for what we have in addition to pursuing policies that better our already great nation. It's not either/or.

I've read George Orwell's Animal Farm and what it taught me is that when government bureaucrats promise to make everyone in society economically equal, what that really means is crippling poverty for everyone except for the ruling elites. That's exactly what happened in the Soviet Union. I would rather live in a society that provides a good education, opportunities to succeed for people who are willing to work hard, a legal system that provides equality under the law, and a social safety net to help people get back on their feet when necessary.

Critics of America complain about the scandal of persistent poverty in a nation of plenty, but the immigrant cannot help noticing that the United States is a country where the poor live comparatively well. This fact was dramatized in the 1980s when CBS television broadcast "People Like Us," which was intended to show the miseries of the poor during an American recession. The Soviet Union also broadcast the documentary, probably with a view to embarrassing the Reagan Administration. But by the testimony of former Soviet leaders, it had the opposite effect. Ordinary people across the Soviet Union saw that the poorest Americans have television sets and microwave ovens and cars. They arrived at the same perception of America as a friend of mine from Mumbai who has been trying unsuccessfully to move to the United States for nearly a decade. Finally, I asked him, "Why are you so eager to come to America?" His reply: "Because I really want to move to a country where the poor people are fat."
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2006/02/whats-great-about-america

 

[abdAlSalam]

Granted, there are truly poor people. But I don't think most of the people here in the US have ever really experienced true poverty.

Perhaps where you have lived. Where I grew up folks often had to choose between adequately feeding their children or keeping the lights on.

 

[dies-l]

Perhaps where you have lived. Where I grew up folks often had to choose between adequately feeding their children or keeping the lights on.

Many of the world's poor have no lights to keep on and still lack the means to adequately feed their children. I don't think I really knew what poverty looked like until I helped build a "house" out of a dozen or so tree branches, a giant sheet of plastic, and two sheets of tin and had the homeowner react as though we had built her a $10million mansion.

 

[abdAlSalam]

Many of the world's poor have no lights to keep on and still lack the means to adequately feed their children. I don't think I really knew what poverty looked like until I helped build a "house" out of a dozen or so tree branches, a giant sheet of plastic, and two sheets of tin and had the homeowner react as though we had built her a $10million mansion.

And that somehow negates the plight of the poor in our own country?

What do you think would happen to the US if we decided that we no longer desired to provide public housing or rent assistance, that somehow conditions for people living in those environments wouldnt change for the worse? The reason that we have such a high standard of living in this country and that we dont see as much of the third world is because we have made the conscious decision as a society to help those who live in poverty. Other countries are either unable or unwilling to do the same for their own citizens. That fact doesnt make poverty in America somehow less of an issue.

 

[dies-l]

Id rather be poor in a place like Germany or Norway than be poor in certain places in America.

And what is your point anyway, because the American poor have it better than the rest of the world we should be unconcerned with poverty and wealth inequality in our own country?

In my experience, those who do the most to address global poverty tend to be the same people who are aggressively combating poverty locally.