"Poverty is moral failure"

Post Reply New Topic

http://www.vulture.com/2015/05/briefcas ... er_vulture

I actually like the title: "Poverty is moral failure" more than "Is being poor a moral failure?"

Poverty nearly always is the result of someone's moral failure - just that it goes both ways so often; there are plenty of poor where it's not their fault, plenty of rich who've done their best to create jobs, tithe etc. where they're exemplary at trying to fix the problem. On the other side you do have poor people who dug their own hole and you do have rich people who are absolutely dreadful stewards of the commonweal.

So long as it's not 'the poor' or 'the rich' but each individual accounting for their contribution (financial or otherwise) I'm more than happy to agree that poverty is a moral problem.

The weird thing is, in America the view was for a long time the exact OPPOSITE. Poverty was viewed as noble and a sign of the inherent godliness of a man. This was at a time when most people were subsistence farmers.

This view was probably exported from England, where the rich were traditionally viewed as greedy and having gotten where they were by fraud and luck. However, the rich held the mirror image view of the poor, that the poor were lazy, too lazy to work, and had to be kicked like a mule to get them to do an honest day's work. Henry Ford summed it up this way: "The average man won't do a day's work unless he is caught and can't get out of it."

During the Gilded Age both views battled it out. By the 1920s Ford's view had won. The First Great Depression saw a return to the "noble poor" view, but after WW2 the "lazy poor" view had won out again. With jobs plentiful and the good life so easily within reach, if a man was poor there was obviously something wrong with HIM. After the postwar boom ended in the 70s, there was a brief return to the noble poor view, then Reagan came along and the poor have been viewed as lazy ever since.

Strangely, the economic doldrums since the popping of the dot.com bubble in 2000 haven't seen a return to the noble poor view, instead it has reinforced the lazy poor view. For most of the decade of the 2000s, books on getting rich were popular, which along with an expansion of debt and the idea that "the rich invest in real estate" fueled a bubble that nearly destroyed the world economy when it burst.

Since 2008, the have-lesses have been turned against the have-nots, each side blaming the laziness of the other for the problems. NBC (US) put an article up on their website a few years ago about the "intentional poor", people who view poverty as either a noble rejection of the evils of consumerism or necessary dues to pay now to be rich later. It was under the "In Plain Sight: Poverty in America" series, which remarkably disappeared when the media wanted to give Obama credit for "the recovered economy".

I just realized I need to go back and shave off one significant corner of that slab of tautology I just dropped.

Clearly a solar flare setting the world back hundreds of years, global weather patterns bringing us back to the 1930's dustbowl environnment, things like that creating poverty are the gameboard getting changed. I also forget, it's not an excuse for the existence of poverty but an understanding - some would actually, subconsciously speaking, seek it out no matter what.

All that aside though I do think the equation of poverty and moral failure works much better when it's not addressed who is the fail-er.

Off topic posts have been removed.

Please, people, let's show some respect to the OP and stick to the subject of this thread.

Sure. I want Beneficii to know my intention was not to be disrespectful and if it seemed that way, I apologize.

The video above describes why there is a poverty in culture in providing
subsistence making work for a culture that is no longer what it is
for thousands of years as foragers, then agrarians, and then
manufacturers. The key is, then, there is a tangible product.

Now, the product of the work is often not something
that can be sensed or felt with little to no social roles.

But anyway; it's not anyone's fault when they are poor
when there are not jobs provided to gain subsistence;
where foraging, agriculture, and manufacturing
are no longer viable solutions for sustenance.

Information Technology and resulting globalization
is the Moral Failure, as this new way of life has
no soul or heart. Humans used to rule the
world and they still do; but machines
are replacing the workforce, in cold
souled, and hearted ways of roles.

Poverty rates are assigned as dollar
amounts not earned; But the death
of the human soul and heart IS
true poverty; and truly life away
from work producing tangible
products that can be sensed
and felt, in ways of human
sharing, helps one to keep
the value of both the
product and the heart
and soul of human
Integral and whole,
as common humanity;
with THOSE social roles.

The greatest message of the video
above, is this is all a new experiment
in humankind; this Info TECH. revolution;
and truly it is becoming a revolution of the
machine instead of continued evolution of the
human being as flesh and blood connecting social
animals with social roles. And social roles are of highest
importance; as utopian rat models of society in the experiment
of John Calhoun in the 60's, shows a lack of social roles can lead to
extinction, of at least, a society of rats; humans do share much of that
social animal DNA as well. And with rates as high as 50% of college graduates
not gaining jobs a decade after college, still living at home with parents, and many
others underemployed in service jobs, far below their education; this current experiment
of society is not working well for more folks. But alas, the bright side is at least their is still
Social Welfare to provide a safety net for a cultural experiment that is not currently working well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_B._Calhoun

Poor folks should watch the video above; and not listen to the voices of generations before; some retired
with golden feathered nests; when social roles in work are plentiful; and even early retirement is possible.

I come from the days before; I live in comfort in retirement; but I am not so cold souled and hearted not to
look further to the truth to see that poverty, largely in ways of not finding jobs, is the problem of a culture
that's experiment produces raising the incomes of those 'who own the machines' while relegating the
populace to a life of social roles in work, if any, with little human connection in products that can be
felt and sensed; in a life of both disconnectedness from humans and the rest of feeling
sensing human nature with 'earthy' nature ; There is not only a poverty in our modern
cultures in moral failure of providing healthy social roles of work; there is almost
a total apathy of even admitting what the real problem is; where the
fictional movies; the terminator series and matrix series, are more or
less already truth come in flesh and blood
machine reality; where the moral
failure is a poverty of
machines; that
is the cause
of poverty;
period;
overall,
today,
at
least.

And seriously, in many ways
the folks who entertain themselves
including me in someways, are here
simply because there is no social roles
provided for them, in society they can do.

In my work area; when the Info Tech revolution
is just starting in the early 80's, I am hired in a
before, totally unrelated area of employment
associated with Computer Tech stuff; that
becomes part of employment then; and
my skills are needed; now most everyone
has those skills; I thrived on the rise up;
and now others are paying the price of
the end result of shiny new machines
that multi-task human skills; for
a human who is NOT evolved
to multi-task machine
cognition and
social cognition
activities at one time;
per the smallest example
of the cashier at McDonalds
with service with a cash register
smile. That's a hard job; and evolution
of human being and science now evidences
why; and why our culture in ways of adequate
social roles is failing greater every day. Now
folks moreover must create their own social roles.
And that is possible for imaginative and creative individuals.

But they are truly the outliers; some folks have difficulty tapping
that potential; for many environmental and innate reasons, for now.

Anyway, it's a fascinating topic of discussion; and there are many more
reasons and solutions that meet the 'eye's of much 'deeper minds' with
both the science and art of the human nature of humanity
in mind AND HEART AND SOUL AND SPIRIT OF HUMAN
BEING. It's much more complicated than either
an economic math equation or
a conservative
Sunday School
Class; for 'eyes'
'seeing deeper'.

Well, as I've been mostly sleeping the past 36 hours, I've been out of the loop.

My post was just a little off topic and it was about climate change. I didn't figure it would be thought of as off topic when I posted it. It was about a possible cause of climate change. Anyway, just thought I'd let you know what the post was about in case you were wondering and it wasn't meant to be disrespectful.

This Ted Talk gets very emo and new agey toward the end, but I think it's relevant.

Last edited by Nebogipfel on 29 May 2015, 5:02 pm, edited 2 times in total.

I've deleted my response to this video about three or four times now just because its too dark and over-the-top to share publicly.

The crux of it - attempting a clean version; as a race we derive value and mating rights by a social totem pole. Someone has to be on the top, someone has to be on the bottom. While heartless and loveless when that's determined by nature itself, it'll be utterly sadistic when the only measurer of 'right to procreate' and 'right to live' is man himself because man's cruelty to man has to be turned up a notch for every natural litmus test not provided. If all peaceful ways of one person earning dominance over another or right to have and another no right to have, we'll be a truly hideous lot.

I think the examples of domesticated Wolves, show that domestication of humans is not all what it's cut out to be.

But at least in places in the U.S.; we can still be wild and free; but only if we assert that freedom can we do it.

The fact that I have no interest now in reproducing and have no children; does set me apart from
what I am free to do; it's nice to have children; but lots of individual potentials of human
freedom certainly go with that; as well as any time to even have inclination to do it.

The idea of priests in Catholic Churches not getting married; overall; has some
merit; as communion with the greater forces of nature are certainly
easier to obtain in a world farther away from the responsibilities
of what must be done in everyday life. And on top of that
becoming a structured part of a religion to do that
is highly restricting, as well, per individual
feelings and senses understood
and expressed about
GOD FREELY.

I have a feeling the GOD of Nature
will win out; history shows
this time and time again
to be true; no matter
the experiments that
humans put forth
out of human nature
and Nature in general
balance..

Last edited by aghogday on 29 May 2015, 5:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I said no because, its not usually a moral failing of the individual in poverty...but it is certainly a moral failing of society, I figured the quiz meant the former though.

Oh, I'm talking about having to use lethal force against people meaning to kill you either for their own entertainment, or for sport, or because you morally upstaged them somewhere and left em feeling salty. A bit like Game of Thrones with a lot more technology.

I think the greatest thing about technology is it is making people softer, overall.

Bars used to be a scary place to go to, with folks starting fights with folks.

But now truly folks have softened; and while I personally do not see that
as healthy; it does lower testosterone levels in males as fat percentages
go up in body; even at the military gym I go to; the military audience
there is extremely soft; and often punching on a smart phone;
rather than a punching bag; and lifting half as much as folks
did when I am young; Ah, the darkness of life; always
has a silver lining, somewhere; A country of softer
folks means less violence.

And that ironically is growing across the globe,
as machines take the punch
out of human
beings.

I am peaceful and strong;
I can live life strong
without punches;
thank goodness;
smiles..

And seriously I am the 'omega';
male when I am younger and
generally speaking, I am recognized
as the 'alpha' male archetype when
I go to bars now. But no; not before;
and it's fascinating to observe the differences
in that; living in both places in one lifetime.

Alpha, is definitely the best;
particularly, when
it is humbly done.

Usually the old adage is folks get weaker when
they get older; but in my case, I for one can prove
in empirical numbers that I get twice as strong in
9 months, moving from a quarter of a ton of lifting
power in my legs to close to a half a ton, last year.
That does show the incredible potential of human
epigenetics; at even the 'advanced age' of
55 next week. And my stimulus
of adaptation, and change
in environment, is
martial arts
and ballet
style dance..

I don't think we will ever go back
to the 'gladiator days' again;
pushing buttons
is even the
new way
of war
with
drones and
such as that..

The games of thrones
and video games
take the
place of
flesh and blood
aggression and
violence in
virtual
games and
plays of life.

And that's
a good
thing too..

But not for me..

I direct, produce
and act my own
real life flesh and
blood play; and
stay away from
all virtual stuff,
except for
writing
and
photos,
and such as that..

It can be put this way:

A Buddhist monk is poor, he owns nothing, he lives in a monastery where all work and possessions are communal. Moral failing? Most would say no.

A drug addict in the ghetto is also poor. He lives in a tumbledown old house, and gets around on a beat up old bicycle. Any money he gets goes to his habit. Moral failing, you betcha.

In America we have few of the former and lots and lots of the latter. Crack addicts lie to get a food stamp card good for several thousand dollars a month in what is supposed to be food. They then sell the cards for 50% value to those people driving Cadillacs who are the ones buying filet mignon and lobster. Or, alternately, they will buy a single apple and get $200 cash back. The apple goes in the trash and the cash is used for drugs. They repeat this until all the money is gone.

And then there are the people who get "disability" and sell drugs on the side, and since they get SSI nobody looks too closely at them. That sort of thing is what makes the working poor mad, and vote Republican. The working poor work and work and see others in the ghetto selling drugs and food stamp cards, and they wonder why they bother working.

SSI pays more than working 20 hours a week at McD's, and the drugs and women being sold on top of that makes the "disabled" able to afford a tricked out 1974 Impala with 24 inch chrome rims and top of the line stereo system blasting rap music, and that Impala takes them to a home in the ghetto that looks bad outside but has a 60 inch TV inside and an Xbox with all the latest games, and expensive furniture, and so on.

Yes, there are the truly disabled, and they live awful lives because unlike Tyrone who is really in the business of drug dealing and pimping and who is only on SSI to mask his true occupation the truly disabled don't have "multiple streams of income" to use a phrase that was popular in the 2000s. Tyrone only wants to LOOK poor, he really is pulling in a rather hefty income from illegal activities. People see him and not Lisa who has migraines or Joe who has seizures.