THis article is MUCH TOO LONG to post here, so I edited as to include only what reached out to me,,,,


This '��poverty denialism'�� rests on three claims:

first, that America'��s poor are fabulously wealthy by global standards and thus, should essentially stop complaining;

second, that the poor buy expensive food with their SNAP benefits and have all manner of consumer goods in their homes, which means they aren'��t poor in any sense that should cause concern;

and third, that large numbers of welfare recipients commit fraud in order to get benefits, and then misuse the benefits they receive. In short, these are not the deserving poor; �their pain is not real.

1. to diminish the real hardship faced by the poor in the United States...solely because it is usually not as crushing as suffering elsewhere is neither a logical nor ethical response to that hardship. This is why the international standard for evaluating poverty is not simply a set dollar equivalent amount, but is determined by looking at what percentage of a country'��s citizens live at half or less of the nation'��s median wage.

To be at half or less of the median in any society, no matter what that median might be, is to be at a significant disadvantage relative to others in the job market, housing market, in terms of the quality of education your children will likely receive, and in terms of the health care you can access. If the median income is well above your own, you will be effectively priced out of the market for any number of opportunities.


It'��s the kind of argumentation that would justify telling a Japanese American who was herded into an American internment camp during World War Two that they have nothing to complain about and should actually be grateful; after all, they could have been in Tokyo when we firebombed it, or in Hiroshima or Nagasaki when we dropped the atomic bombs.

... In other words, this kind of comparison between the suffering one is currently experiencing and the much greater suffering one could theoretically experience elsewhere lacks all moral and practical relevance.

http://www.timwise.org/2014/11/poverty-denialism-in-a-culture-of-cruelty-bashing-the-poor-as-right-wing-amusement/#more-6141


COMPARING THE SUFFERING OF ONE AND THE EQUIVALENT OR GREATER SUFFERING OF ANOTHER LACKS ALL MORAL AND PRACTICAL REVELANCE,,,,,,,, and is common practice in debates and discussions

Like the time I was inline at Kroger store. The lady in front of me used her food stamp card to get cash. She then used the money to buy several packs of cigarettes. I was so happy that this poor woman was able to enjoy a little luxury that the rich enjoy.

Im so glad you recognize a food stamp card, most states issue cards that are debits for BOTH food and money,,,,just like picking credit or debit,, there is a balance and available balance in both accts that one cannot go over,, ,, no way to use the 'food' portion for cash,,

I don't believe this to be true,,,lol

though there may be something to higher stress and likelihood of seeking out an addictive behavior or practice,,


cigs are expensive,,and addictive across economic lines,,

Well technically it is true that higher income people are less likely to smoke. However, the bigger correlation is that the more educated the individual the less likely they are to smoke. Take a look at this.
http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2010/04/consumption

the significant factor here is the question 'do you smoke?' ,,,,which indicates a 'current status' that doesnt really cover whether people have quit who once did smoke, or whether they just never smoked

my personal observation is smoking is addicting across economic and age and educational lines,, however, the longer one lives and learns and the more they earn,,the more access they have to resources and motivation to help them stop,,,,

Accept you are making a lot of assumptions. The age range of the study was 30-64 so most likely their education wasn't changing. Plus other studies show that young smokers are more likely to stop smoking than older smokers.

http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/adult_data/cig_smoking/

Here is one from the CDC showing age, ethnicity, gender, poverty level. Age only varies a few percent. Education is the biggest discrepancy.

the longer one lives and learns and the more they earn,,the more access they have to resources and motivation to help them stop,,,,

education and earnings are more likely to present resources and motivation to assist in quitting bad habits,,,,

Some people can't accept that being different is not good or bad, but simply different. It is much easier to generalize, accept stereotypes and judge others than to understand them.
We should be equal and treated that way, but we were not born equal to begin with. We do not have the same backgrounds, physical or mental abilities or talents at birth. Not to mention an access to an education and health care. Therefore, our starting positions are not equal and even with a determination, discipline and hard work it is not always possible to overcome all the obstacles in our lives and achieve the results we want.
I have seen topics like this turned into personal insults exchange and have no wish to participate in any discussion on that level. Therefore, I shall restrain myself from any further elaborations for a while and keep reading other opinions.
Maybe we were not all born equal, but I believe that everyone should be treated with respect. If it is too hard not to (in)directly label others because of different views, simply leave me out of it. No reply is a reply. Read it that way.

the " poor " are bankrupting the country...

You can keep repeating that all you want. The data still shows age not to be much of a factor.

She swiped the card twice, once to pay for some food, then she swiped it again for cash to pay for the cigs. Easy to spot those Lonestar Cards. I couldn't believe my lying eyes but the clerk confirmed what she did. He said it happens a lot.

sounds as if the clerk doesn't know what the card is only, just that people use it for items he probably thinks they shouldn't

but as I said, on the card one can use the FOOD allotment for FOOD and then a CASH allotment for whatever they can pay for for CASH.

they cant get CASH for the FOOD portion.

like in anything, people will always find ways to commit fraud, its just much harder with the cards in terms of actually using them for something other than what they are intended. UNLESS selling the cards themselves

I agree. I am not attempting in anyway concerned with good or bad in this discussion personally. I just don't believe that having more money or education makes one less likely to smoke,, although I do believe there may be more resources and information to assist them in STOPPING at some point between 30 and 65 when they could then answer a NO to if they smoke.


I believe impoverished are more likely to commit physical crimes , not because they are better or worse, but due to different circumstancs and RESOURCES.

I believe most social issues come back to RESOURCES.

It's a shame when taxpayer hard earned dollars are wasted.

Meanwhile, the majority of impoverished people don't commit crimes.

cause they don't have guns..

. . . in the Hebei Provence of northern China, that is.

Ok,

of course they don't Dido

the majority of women aren't pregnant, but Id gamble they are much MORE LIKELY to become pregnant then men

lol


likely invites the issue of correlation, not CAUSATION,,,