Black Myth Bustin' Time. (welfare rich)

Exactly right, IMHO. Some personal background needed:

After having attended college in the US and loved the whole experience, I wanted MORE of the American Dream – nothing else would do. Unfortunately (though most would call it the opposite) I had a rather large building materials company to come back to in the Dom Rep. Wasn’t as much of a choice as it was an obligation; moreover when my Dad died a day before I turned 22 and we inherited 47% of the stock in it along with veto powers over all others (family members). Worked there for six years, and that’s when I really got an education. Turns-out (for right or wrong reasons and all of the ones in between) there was a LOT of resentment for my Dad’s rather dictatorial ways for over 30 years, and even having said power, college didn’t teach me how to cheat – guess they are missing a course in “How to deal with everyone against you.” Now, besides flat-out not liking the job (while I was highly successful at it, overall 40% sales improvement in said six years, though I could, I wasn’t willing to keep “selling iceboxes to Eskimos.” Which, in a comparable way, was exactly what I was doing.

Lifestyle? Through the roof, had more money than I could possibly know what to do with – cars (plural), houses, etc. But the whole thing was simply depressing to me. Here came an iron-worker, and my job was to convince him I was giving him the best possible price, while knowning the books I knew it was nothing short of highway robbery.

Long story short, I sold our stock in the company (to the great joy of those that bought it) and moved on, to what I thought were greener pastures. Having married my second American (no kids from the first, as decent a human being as I’ve ever known. Zero courts or obliged support) I decided I wanted to give the US a real try, short after I married my second American. Had the money, the youth and – so I thought – the experience to deal with any sort of boss that came my way. After six years as a department manager at Bloomie’s, I realized it was all for naught – he/she who has the connections, wins. The buyer’s job I was promised from day one, was just that, an empty promise. Meanwhile I rented from my brother in-laws and kept pretty fine cars as my mode of transportation. After all, I figured working 50-60 hours a week (and showing results) would allow me to climb the socio-economic ladder. Never happened – stuck in the same position with a “next year promise” each time – thus it came to me (mind you in my mid-thirties and with a kid now) thet BStals and actions walk.

Left Bloomingdale’s and worked RE for a while – same crap,different concept as I finally ended-up making some good bucks as a computer consultant/teacher (median age of the place might have been 50/55 at the time and ‘puters’ were a real puzzle to most Realtors.

Got divorced again in the meanwhile and made sure I paid the outrageous child-support assigned me by the American Courts (where I never should accepted proceedings) by the time my son was 14 – o

Fats-forward to now. Moved back to the DR, where , besides selling my stock in the company along but separate Real Estate interest in it, I’ve devoted myself into selling some other RE holdings I had. Hasn’t been an easy road – paying all my child-support at once put in rather dire straights…though that is exactly what I wanted. I hate owing money to anyone.

But finally I had a breakthrough and managed to sell one of my remaining properties And what do you know? After driving a 15 year-old Camry since I got my first purchase was an '08 4Runner 4 x 4 Ltd. Nothing tricked about, other than full insurance and every protective device known to man. But dammit! Even if I realize it is not the soundest of investments, NO one can take the pleause of drivind and/or playingg loooking at the thing.

Could I have invested the $45,000 (cars are really expensive here) in a more profitable way? But of course. I’ve been trained as a business man from youth. But by the same token, if I die 2morrow, my son’s career if paid for – unless his Mother squandered all the hundreds of thousands of dollars I sent here way.

Bottom line: still own four apartment and some land. And I feel the least bit guilty about my choices. In fact, none at all.
If my son doesn’t inherit another dime from me…we’ll, a call a year (On Father’s day) is surely not going to make me feel guilty.

As long or as short a time left I have here, I intend to live to the fullest of my capacities. No guilt involved at all. Juts making sure, both him and his Mother, don’t keep thinking of myself as a checkbook/wallet with legs and little else.

I may day tomorrow, but no one’s going to take away – within my means --my last decade as a fully functioning member of this society.,

Hell, if one I wanted (which I don’t) I need not give explanations (or even less-likely BS)

There is one rule that holds for all groups of people: Everyone makes the choice they think was the best one for them at the time. This doesn’t mean that people will actually make good choices. But simply that everyone has a reason for their choices. When analyzing the actions of others, it is useful to try to figure out what made them think that particular action was the best one.

You have trouble thinking of why anyone would want to live in a lowscale neighborhood. I prefer these neighborhood and I can think of dozens of reasons why I’d choose to live there (and I do). I can’t understand why anyone would want to spend hours of their precious lives and thousands of dollars commuting. I think this is an insane use of resources. Commuting is a luxery as sure as a Caddilac is. But I trust commuters have their reasons.

I have a friend. Like most women in my part of Africa, she lives in a mud hut. She has a gravel floor. She has no electricity or running water. She eats a diet of boiled leaves and millet, which she grows herself. She has only left her village a couple times in her life. Things like soda or new clothes are a once-a-year treat. She can go weeks without seeing money.

She has been having trouble conceiving. She will be visiting a hospital in a large city to get pricey modern fertility treatment.

My volunteer friends were shocked that this kind of pricey treatment even exists, much less that a dirt poor village woman would spend what is surely her life savings on it.

But, here, having children is life. The most important person in village is not the richest. It is the one with the most children. Children work the fields, increasing your income potential. And children represent your only chance for security in old age. In short, being rich in family provides the same things here (security, economic mobility, status) that being rich in money provides in America. None of this is obvious at first glance. Only by living within a community and being close to people in it can you begin to understand the reasons for their values.

If you want her to change her ways, you could try to tell her that children are not the end all and be all. You can tell her she should seek financial independence and save for her golden years. You can tell her to find other avenues. But that won’t work. Trying to change a person’s actions by changing their values is not effective.

But, if you give her access to free education, loans for starting businesses, and a safe place to store her savings, she will work towards financial independence. If you build up infrastructure and fight corruption so that there are other options than farming, she will seek them out. If you increase access to television and newspapers, she will begin to find role models other than the ones in her village be exposed to different lifestyles she may begin to emulate (like our money-centered one). If you want to change her actions, you need to change her situation.

And even then, you must examine whether or not those actions are even worth changing. After all, we continue to rank people based on wealth even after they have more money than they could ever spend in their lifetime. Our measure of “success” Is to some degree arbitrary. And it is a product of our culture that may not carry over into other cultures. For example, you will find many very successful cultures that do not value home ownership to the degree we do (like in Europe). It’s not like we have some monopoly on “most sensible status symbols.”

In short, if you want people to change, stop calling them “stupid”, recognize your own prejudices, and start trying to understand them.

That’s assuming people think, which may at times be an overly optimistic assumption.

even sven that is the damn smartest thing anyone’s said all day. Thank you for putting it so well.

Not to zombify unnecessarily, but I skimmed the paper (the site didn’t ask me to pay for it…), and their points seem to be:

  1. People with lower income spend a greater proportion of their income on “visible consumption” than people with greater income,
  2. People who live in geographic areas in which others of their race are predominantly of lower income spend a greater proportion of their income on “visible consumption” than people whose “reference group” is of higher average income,
    3. This is true regardless of race.

Although they do find that minority persons spend more on “visible consumption” than white persons of the same income level, this seems to be largely related to the differences in the “reference group”:

So if this paper is correct, poor black people (hispanic people, etc.) spend more on flashy stuff than comparable white people because they’re more likely to live in an area where most of the other same-race people are also poor, not because they lack values or are inherently tasteless or what have you.

Poor white people, it seems, are more likely to have a significant number of middle- or upper-class white (i.e., same-race) persons within their local geographic area. Of course, how this would suppress a desire for status display, I dunno: maybe by setting the bar high enough to be clearly out of reach?

JRB

It reminds me of the old joke about the two guys getting chased by a hungry bear. When one pauses to put on his running shoes, the other asks: “why are you doing that, do you think you can outrun that bear?” The second replies “I don’t have to outrun the bear, I just have to outrun you…”

It does ring true when I think of the middle-class white people I know (which is to say practically all the white people I know). In a world where the middle class can generally afford a nice SUV and McMansion, jumping up to the next tier of consumption means truly astronomical spending. Even assuming you did that, everyone would know it was all show. Thus it makes more sense to put on an appearance of thrift and responsibility and let that be your status symbol. Nowadays, at cocktail parties I actually hear people bragging about what they don’t own and don’t owe, as if thrift and anti-consumption are the new status symbols. I find myself inwardly agreeing, though I know we’d all like to drive better cars and live in better houses if we could responsibly afford them. Who can make sense of it all…

Myth busting welfare statistics
51.1 % are children
.4 % fraud rate
48.3 white
43.3 black
7.6 perm.disabled
13.4 oldsters
less than 1 % are defined as able bodied males
It takes up 1.9 % budget.

Does Kisha tell Secton 8 about being “helped out” by Jayquan? About his paying her bills and buying her nice things? How often does he visit? Does he have a permanent address, or is he “sharing” something with a friend? Does he stay overnight? If he loves her so much, why doesn’t he help get her off assistance?

I work with Section 8 Housing, and the number of women who live on it while being “helped out” by men is ridiculous. And it is fraud that takes our tax dollars.

Now while it isn’t true that African American men are the only ones spending a substantially disproportionate amount on vehicles there is a significant correlation. African American males are statically poorer. Now while it may be labeled politically incorrect to say a specific group often wastes a larger portion of a smaller income on an devaluing status symbol, they may deserve the criticism.

That said, racism needs to be confronted wherever it’s found.

Cite?

And, what myths?

Good point, and I think you’re probably right.

I’d just add that the pleasure of being seen in a Viper is actual quality of life (to him).

This list does not tell you the breakdown based on length of time on welfare. Who spends two months, two years, or a lifetime on the program?

I know for a fact that my state tries to get people ON welfare who will shortly get OFF welfare to make the stats look better. It also doesn’t list how many able bodied male are unoffically living with women and children who are on welfare.

Once you start working with welfare clients on a day-to-day basis, you see what is really going on.

I’m pretty sure gonzomax’s figures came (indirectly) from a report on a program called AFDC – Aid to Families with Dependent Children. That being that case, it’s not remotely surprising that a large number of recipients are… children. :rolleyes:

Try again, gonzomax. Those numbers are not remotely useful in a discussion of welfare as a whole or of Section 8 recipients in particular.

Or better still, don’t.

Regards,
Shodan