# How America treats the poor **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 11, 2013, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-america-treats-the-poor/668598 "2013-09-11T20:10:52Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 17\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2013, 10:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-america-treats-the-poor/668598/141 "2013-09-13T22:43:07Z")
> [@yellowjacketcoder](#): > > And I’m saying that is totally unconvincing to me, so spouting “The bible says we should” is not useful argument. I don’t even know what your point is. I’m not trying to convince you to do something based on the bible. That would be weird since I am an atheist. ---
**Author:** ![Dangerosa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/22d042/32.png) [@Dangerosa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dangerosa)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2013, 11:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-america-treats-the-poor/668598/142 "2013-09-13T23:42:13Z")
I ran to the store today. I feed a fifteen year old boy - so in addition to the plenty of healthy foods we have for the family, we need what appears to be a bottomless supply of fairly cheap calories. The clerks look at me funny - organic milk and vegetables and $2 pizzas. Around here, the cheapest full sized frozen pizza you can get is 2 - they aren't great, but they are edible. I picked up the cheap Budding lunchmeat and bread - .99 for the cheapest loaf of white bread, and $.60 each for 90 calorie packets of lunchmeat. The bread is 130 calories for two slices - so 220 calories for lets say $1.30, I need 1600 a day, means $7 a day in really cheap sandwiches - or a hell of a lot of mayo. I always wonder about peanut butter being cheap - now my husband is a choosy mom - only Jif in our household, but our peanut butter budget is huge - and I don’t eat the stuff - its on toast for him and a few after school peanut butter sandwiches for the kids. ---
**Author:** ![Broomstick](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/broomstick/32/246_2.png) [@Broomstick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Broomstick)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2013, 12:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-america-treats-the-poor/668598/143 "2013-09-14T00:38:49Z")
> [@yellowjacketcoder](#): > > Congratulations, you found that I didn’t have the worst possible situation to be in while broke. In general, I find that we should be making policy for the medians, not the exception. Being poor is harder for diabetics, but that’s because anything is harder when you’re a diabetic. The problem is that people arguing for diets composed of only rice and beans; or pasta and nearly expired meat; or endless tiny turkey sandwiches are NOT making policy for the median, they’re making policy for the young and healthy who can endure that sort of deprivation longer than anyone else. Note I said _endure_, not thrive on it. No one thrives on a diet that insipid and lacking in vegetables and fruit. The disabled and those with chronic health conditions are more likely to be poor than the able-bodied because they are less desirable as employees to many, thus, they are less likely to be hired and more likely to be laid off. The median condition of the poor, especially the long-term poor, is not the same as the median condition of the middle or upper class. > [@](#): > > If you read the whole exchange, you’ll find that it includes pastas and sandwiches. Forgive me if I can’t produce a weekly menu from nearly a decade ago to tell you everything I ate. And just because meat is being marked down doesn’t mean it’s bad. The idea that if you must buy everything as fresh as possible (and therefore as expensive as possible) is rather silly when you’re talking about eating as a poor person. No, you’re just advocating that people purchase meat the very day it is about to be throw out as unsuitable to be sold, meat that is older and going to go rancid quicker than fresher meat. Here, poor people, eat these dregs that are nearly unfit to be consumed so we don’t have to throw out our own trash! > [@](#): > > But while we’re at it, I don’t think anyone is expecting this to be a long-term solution. They expect people to work their way out of poverty, so these diets and measures are supposed to be temporary. I have a feeling that position will be dismissed as well, though. Not dismissed, no, but I counter that it is based on untrue assumptions. Right now, someone over 35 who is laid off might not find work for _years_ - at one point during the Great Recession those over 40 who were laid off were _averaging_ two years until they could get another job. _Two years_. Two years on the inadequate diets proposed is too long, people will start acquiring nutritional deficiencies in that time period. This also disregards that such a high percentage of people in poverty are _children_. And no, this isn’t an emotionally-based “think of the children!” appeal, it’s based on facts: if you want healthy adults you need to have good diets for children. Not endless rice and beans with no vegetables, not endless tiny turkey sandwiches, but actual nutrition. The growing body needs MORE nutrients than an adult does, not less. Failure to provide this can stunt growth, weaken bones - not to the point of them breaking young adulthood but making osteoporosis more likely later in life - lead to bad teeth, lowered immune response and thus more frequent illness, and that’s just the tip of the iceberg. Lack of adequate protein can impair muscle development. Lack of vitamin D can cause rickets. My desire to see poor children properly fed is an investment in the future adults of society and not just “aw… the poor widdle kiddies!”. > [@](#): > > Since you keep ignoring the part where I advocate for easier and less restrictive aid to the poor, you’ll forgive me if I have little faith that this will be read, but in general the elderly either need to get a low stress job or use their retirement funds; the disabled have their own programs, but the idea that a disabled person cannot support themselves through work would be offensive to most disabled people My disabled spouse would LOVE to work, there certainly is work that he could do, that he’d like to do, _but people don’t want to hire him because he walks funny_. Sorry if that’s too brutal for you, but I’ve seen it over and over for 25 years. It’s supposed to be illegal but a lot of people would rather hire a less qualified able-bodied person than hire a capable disabled person. So what are they to do? Starve? Live in a cardboard box? Oh, and those “programs for the disabled”… you have to be _disabled enough_ to get them, just having a bad limp or functional eyesight that still isn’t good enough to let you drive or being hard of hearing just doesn’t cut it. If you’re not _completely_ disabled you’re told to find a job, you’re told to tell employers they have to accommodate you, and meanwhile you’re competing against the able-bodied who require no accommodation at all. Who do you think the average employer will hire? And, do tell, what is a “low stress job”? I’d love to know what that is, I might want to apply for it. I suspect they’re the sort of thing that’s minimum wage, which is not a living wage at any age these days. A lot of elderly _don’t_ have retirement funds thanks to a tanking stock market, or they’re not going to have one because they were laid off at 50 and had to spend it then so they wouldn’t wind up in a homeless shelter because employers no longer value experience, just exploitable youth, or they outlived their planned retirement funds and will have to find work at 85 or 90. Well, gee, maybe the elderly who outlive their planned retirement - when all those fund planners told them 20 years would be enough - should just kill themselves to save the rest of us inconvenience? I, for one, do not find that acceptable. This, by the way, is not directed solely at you but at several people on this thread who clearly have no notion what it is to be actually poor or how inadequate the current provisions for the less fortunate are. You say you advocate for easier and less restrictive aid to the poor, then you turn around and say the elderly should just get a job and pointing out that the disabled are at a disadvantage is somehow insulting to the disabled. Which is it? Are you advocate for the poor or an advocate for getting the lazy bums off their asses? ---
**Author:** ![Broomstick](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/broomstick/32/246_2.png) [@Broomstick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Broomstick)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2013, 1:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-america-treats-the-poor/668598/144 "2013-09-14T01:35:57Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > See what I was responding to. > > Under that scheme, if the person works earning $16K a year, his income is $24K a year. If he works earning $5K a year, his income is $24K a year. If he works earning $1K a year, his income is $24K a year. If he doesn’t work, his income is $24K a year. > > So - what is his incentive to work? > [@Jas09](#): > > That’s a fair point, and one of the major problems with a negative income tax (fraud being the other big one). > > I think it could be ameliorated by setting the baseline (the “no income at all” case) and then phasing out the benefit. So a worker that makes $16k (to use your number) would still get to keep a portion of that $24k benefit - perhaps bringing his total income up to $30k (or whatever). Basically use income or a payroll tax to “claw back” some of the default benefit. > [@Terr](#): > > My head hurts just thinking about the forms and the bureaucracy required to implement this and the enormous possibilities of fraud. > > That is why I kinda like the scheme that the guy upthread proposed (and which I tried to evaluate in [A proposed "welfare" scheme (from another thread) - Great Debates - Straight Dope Message Board](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=702053)). Give $10K to everyone 18 and above, $5K to below 18s. Unfortunately, as you can see from that thread, taxes would have to increase hugely to accommodate it. Gentlepersons, let me introduce you to the [Earned Income Tax Credit](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earned_income_tax_credit) which is what I think you’re aiming for. It already exists, although I think the numbers involved are too low. For those who don’t want to follow links - you have to be employed to get teh EITC, but up to a point, the more you earn the greater the EITC. Thus, the poor both are rewarded for working and also are rewarded for seeking additional wages. ---
**Author:** ![yellowjacketcoder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/4bbf92/32.png) [@yellowjacketcoder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yellowjacketcoder)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2013, 2:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-america-treats-the-poor/668598/145 "2013-09-14T02:36:51Z")
> [@Broomstick](#): > > The problem is that people arguing for diets composed of only rice and beans; or pasta and nearly expired meat; or endless tiny turkey sandwiches are NOT making policy for the median, they’re making policy for the young and healthy who can endure that sort of deprivation longer than anyone else. Note I said _endure_, not thrive on it. No one thrives on a diet that insipid and lacking in vegetables and fruit. Funny, I lived on that diet for over a year. Guess I was really days away from death and didn’t know it! This is a problem I have with a lot of these arguments: people come by and scream how “it just can’t be done” and “you never get yourself out of that hole” and “your health will implode”, and while that may happen to some people, having lived it and having had none of those things come to pass, those arguments lose a lot of weight. Let me repeat something: I know that can happen to some people, I am simply saying that presenting it as death-defying is ludicrous. > [@Broomstick](#): > > No, you’re just advocating that people purchase meat the very day it is about to be throw out as unsuitable to be sold, meat that is older and going to go rancid quicker than fresher meat. Here, poor people, eat these dregs that are nearly unfit to be consumed so we don’t have to throw out our own trash! No, I’m not, and strawmanning my argument pisses me off really fast. I argue for getting meat when it’s getting marked down because it isn’t fresh. That means it’s several days old, but not rancid, and would probably be on the shelves for several more days before it’s thrown out. And frankly, even it it’s on it’s last legs, throwing it in the freezer will give you another month on it. > [@Broomstick](#): > > Not dismissed, no, but I counter that it is based on untrue assumptions. Right now, someone over 35 who is laid off might not find work for _years_ - at one point during the Great Recession those over 40 who were laid off were _averaging_ two years until they could get another job. _Two years_. Two years on the inadequate diets proposed is too long, people will start acquiring nutritional deficiencies in that time period. And a lot of those people were averaging two years out of work because they had a spouse that was working, so it wasn’t critical for them to get back to work, or they had savings, and it wasn’t critical for them to get back to work, or they were too proud to take a job at a lower salary in the meantime. And really, the amount of nutrients you _need_ before running into health problems is incredibly low - a bag of mixed veggies thrown in with the pasta will give you 2-3 meals with enough veggies to get all the nutrients you need long-term. > [@Broomstick](#): > > This also disregards that such a high percentage of people in poverty are _children_. And no, this isn’t an emotionally-based “think of the children!” appeal, it’s based on facts: if you want healthy adults you need to have good diets for children. Not endless rice and beans with no vegetables, not endless tiny turkey sandwiches, but actual nutrition. The growing body needs MORE nutrients than an adult does, not less. Failure to provide this can stunt growth, weaken bones - not to the point of them breaking young adulthood but making osteoporosis more likely later in life - lead to bad teeth, lowered immune response and thus more frequent illness, and that’s just the tip of the iceberg. Lack of adequate protein can impair muscle development. Lack of vitamin D can cause rickets. My desire to see poor children properly fed is an investment in the future adults of society and not just “aw… the poor widdle kiddies!”. Kids, which can get free school breakfasts and lunches that will contain all the vitamins and minerals they need every day they’re in school? And the protein they can get from the beans and meat mentioned above? The vitamin D comment actually made me laugh - you can get all the vitamin D you need by spending half an hour a day outside. Doesn’t get more free than sunlight. > [@Broomstick](#): > > My disabled spouse would LOVE to work, there certainly is work that he could do, that he’d like to do, _but people don’t want to hire him because he walks funny_. Sorry if that’s too brutal for you, but I’ve seen it over and over for 25 years. It’s supposed to be illegal but a lot of people would rather hire a less qualified able-bodied person than hire a capable disabled person. So what are they to do? Starve? Live in a cardboard box? This is going to sound rude, but is it your husband’s disability that’s keeping him from a job, or your husband? Because I’ve worked with plenty of people that walked funny and yet had no trouble finding work. I’m not saying it’s easy; I’m saying that there are a lot of people out there that use disability as an excuse. > [@Broomstick](#): > > Who do you think the average employer will hire? The right person for the job. Quite honestly, I don’t think most disabilities will keep someone from most jobs. Guy in the wheelchair wants be a miner? Sure, he’s not getting that. Guy in the wheelchair wants to be the assistant manager at some retail outlet? Sure, if he has the skills for the job. > [@Broomstick](#): > > And, do tell, what is a “low stress job”? Most office work, which is most work in this country, AFAICT. > [@Broomstick](#): > > Well, gee, maybe the elderly who outlive their planned retirement - when all those fund planners told them 20 years would be enough - should just kill themselves to save the rest of us inconvenience? I, for one, do not find that acceptable. Given that nobody but you has brought that up, seems like a strawman to me. > [@Broomstick](#): > > Which is it? Are you advocate for the poor or an advocate for getting the lazy bums off their asses? Who says it can’t be both? They aren’t mutually exclusive. ---
**Author:** ![Farin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e79b87/32.png) [@Farin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Farin)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2013, 3:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-america-treats-the-poor/668598/146 "2013-09-14T03:20:57Z")
> [@yellowjacketcoder](#): > > Let me repeat something: I know that can happen to some people, I am simply saying that presenting it as death-defying is ludicrous. My opinion is that you have it the wrong way around: _Some People_ Can Survive Fine. I admit that it’s only anecdotal, but I lived in bad places as a minor and the children on these sorts of diets (which were mainly Mexican-origin families who were used to the rice and beans existence) were not healthy in many ways. While you get adequate protein to stave off starvation, it’s deficient enough that for a long term time (especially in the “Growth” phases of youth) it can be harming. A young adult in the 20-30s with a healthy childhood is definitely in the space in their life where they can go for even a few years in that funk of eating Ramen and rice and beans. Outside of that rough (some people can survive like that at 10 and some can survive like that at 50) age range surviving like that is where it hurts. Yes, it’s _possible_, but it’s rather mean when we are talking about moving a family’s food budget from maybe $140 a month to $280 or $300 so that they have a food budget that makes sense. Give them _fresh_ fruits and vegetables and meat. I’m sure some could survive on 3 barely made turkey sandwiches a day, but I don’t want to force people into that corner. > [@yellowjacketcoder](#): > > And a lot of those people were averaging two years out of work because they had a spouse that was working, so it wasn’t critical for them to get back to work, or they had savings, and it wasn’t critical for them to get back to work, or they were too proud to take a job at a lower salary in the meantime. And really, the amount of nutrients you _need_ before running into health problems is incredibly low - a bag of mixed veggies thrown in with the pasta will give you 2-3 meals with enough veggies to get all the nutrients you need long-term. I also need to disagree, here. People who “had savings” in a manner that they are living on it need to get back to work as soon as possible. A spouse that was working may have paid the bills, but the collectors will come and garnish the spouse down to nothing, simply because you lost half your income. Just because they shut off your credit cards doesn’t mean they don’t want the money back. Worse is, usually people who had a working spouse, the working spouse was making less than half of the one who was laid off. Worse, after they were forced into servitude to whatever creditors they had, they weren’t eligible for food stamps because the net income was above the line. “Well, they aren’t poor.” Maybe. But they sure as heck aren’t eating well. > [@yellowjacketcoder](#): > > Kids, which can get free school breakfasts and lunches that will contain all the vitamins and minerals they need every day they’re in school? And the protein they can get from the beans and meat mentioned above? The vitamin D comment actually made me laugh - you can get all the vitamin D you need by spending half an hour a day outside. Doesn’t get more free than sunlight. Yeeeeeeeeaaaaaah. Kids don’t get that in a lot of places. The breakfasts at my child’s elementary school? Cold cereal (apple jacks, frosted flakes, or cheerios!), a…thing they call an egg sandwich (with bread that was stale during Nixon’s presidency and an…I don’t know what it is, but it’s yellow!). Lunch? A carboard, plastic, and grease medley formed into a rough pizza slice shape or a “hamburger” (no cheese, which may be a good thing). The side is apples or broccoli. Worse? My school district isn’t poor. > [@yellowjacketcoder](#): > > This is going to sound rude, but is it your husband’s disability that’s keeping him from a job, or your husband? Because I’ve worked with plenty of people that walked funny and yet had no trouble finding work. I’m not saying it’s easy; I’m saying that there are a lot of people out there that use disability as an excuse. > > The right person for the job. Quite honestly, I don’t think most disabilities will keep someone from most jobs. Guy in the wheelchair wants be a miner? Sure, he’s not getting that. Guy in the wheelchair wants to be the assistant manager at some retail outlet? Sure, if he has the skills for the job. > > Most office work, which is most work in this country, AFAICT. Most jobs I’ve applied for have this annoying little entry: “Must be able to lift 75 pounds.” With the exception of my current job (Which I got through connections) every job I’ve ever applied for has that on the job description somewhere. Everything from the retails jobs I had as a minor (Cashiering is a heavy-lifting gig! But not really.) to a job I had as a software phone support person. I’ve seen that requirement used to drop people. A lot. So if it even LOOKS like the guy might have trouble moving a ream of paper, he’s off the consideration list. “25 years” of unemployment might be excessive, but I’d give him the benefit of the doubt about discrimination of that sort. > [@Dangerosa](#): > > I ran to the store today. I feed a fifteen year old boy - so in addition to the plenty of healthy foods we have for the family, we need what appears to be a bottomless supply of fairly cheap calories. The clerks look at me funny - organic milk and vegetables and $2 pizzas. > > Around here, the cheapest full sized frozen pizza you can get is 2 - they aren't great, but they are edible. I picked up the cheap Budding lunchmeat and bread - .99 for the cheapest loaf of white bread, and $.60 each for 90 calorie packets of lunchmeat. The bread is 130 calories for two slices - so 220 calories for lets say $1.30, I need 1600 a day, means $7 a day in really cheap sandwiches - or a hell of a lot of mayo. > > I always wonder about peanut butter being cheap - now my husband is a choosy mom - only Jif in our household, but our peanut butter budget is huge - and I don’t eat the stuff - its on toast for him and a few after school peanut butter sandwiches for the kids. Peanut butter used to be cheap. The people started buying it because it was cheap. Now it’s expensive as heck. But I must note with your anecdote that you have purchased the base needs for your teenager: Fruits, vegetables, meats (if you are into that sort of thing) and THEN buy him all of the filler calories that us old people all wish we could still eat. Try feeding your teen nothing but those $2 pizzas and peanut butter and other “cheap calorie” food. Betcha a whole bunch of your apples/carrots/etc go missing. If you’re lucky, he’ll leave the door to the fridge intact. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Farin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e79b87/32.png) [@Farin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Farin)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2013, 3:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-america-treats-the-poor/668598/147 "2013-09-14T03:27:44Z")
> [@Farin](#): > > Yes, it’s _possible_, but it’s rather mean when we are talking about moving a family’s food budget from maybe $140 a month to $280 or $300 so that they have a food budget that makes sense. Give them _fresh_ fruits and vegetables and meat. I’m sure some could survive on 3 barely made turkey sandwiches a day, but I don’t want to force people into that corner. Just to clarify: A single _person_ can probably live on $150 a month in groceries. But that is roughly the _maximum_ a _family_ (of any size) gets to subsist each month. The average single person take home is $60-100, based on where you live and how much your state hates you. That’s the problem. Giving a single person $150 a month would go a long way. And giving a family $300 a month would go along way to helping the poor out of Poor-Land. ---
**Author:** ![Broomstick](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/broomstick/32/246_2.png) [@Broomstick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Broomstick)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2013, 3:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-america-treats-the-poor/668598/148 "2013-09-14T03:47:54Z")
> [@yellowjacketcoder](#): > > Funny, I lived on that diet for over a year. Guess I was really days away from death and didn’t know it! > > This is a problem I have with a lot of these arguments: people come by and scream how “it just can’t be done” and “you never get yourself out of that hole” and “your health will implode”, and while that may happen to some people, having lived it and having had none of those things come to pass, those arguments lose a lot of weight. > > Let me repeat something: I know that can happen to some people, I am simply saying that presenting it as death-defying is ludicrous. I never claimed it was “death-defying”, I said it was unhealthy. Why are you promoting an unhealthy diet as a “solution” to poverty? Yes, IF you had been eating well for years and suddenly ate crap for a year you’d probably be OK, but that doesn’t mean it’s anywhere near an ideal state, or that someone else wouldn’t suffer for it. Someone with a chronic disorder like diabetes needs _better_ nutrition than average, not worse. > [@](#): > > And a lot of those people were averaging two years out of work because they had a spouse that was working, so it wasn’t critical for them to get back to work, or they had savings, and it wasn’t critical for them to get back to work, or they were too proud to take a job at a lower salary in the meantime. And a lot of them _didn’t_ have a working spouse or _didn’t_ have savings and _weren’t_ to proud but didn’t get hired because they were “overqualified”. I know too many people who wound up either couch-surfing or in homeless shelters these past few years. The thing is, such people simply disappear from the middle-class neighborhoods where they used to live so the more affluent simply don’t see it. > [@](#): > > Kids, which can get free school breakfasts and lunches that will contain all the vitamins and minerals they need every day they’re in school? That’s two meals a day five days a week - guess they can just fast on the weekends, holidays, and summer break. > [@](#): > > The vitamin D comment actually made me laugh - you can get all the vitamin D you need by spending half an hour a day outside. Doesn’t get more free than sunlight. That amount is _only sufficient for white people_. The dark skinned need more than that. In fact, in many northern states winter sun can be insufficient even for Causians. On top of that, the dark skinned are far more likely to be lactose-intolerant than the lighter-skinned, which compounds the problem. Every week I get people in my shop who need shoe modifications due to deformities brought on by rickets. A sad number of them are under 30 so you can’t excuse it as something in the past now suffered only by the elderly. > [@](#): > > This is going to sound rude, but is it your husband’s disability that’s keeping him from a job, or your husband? Ah, yes, here we come to the “blame the victim” scenario. No, it’s not my husband. He’s been told _to his face_ he’s not being hired because he’s disabled. Illegal of course, but it would be just his word against the employer’s. So, when he couldn’t be hired he started his own business. Unfortunately, a health problem some years ago meant we had to liquidate. At the time it wasn’t so bad as I had a middle-class job, but then I got laid off. He’s currently trying to start a new business. No, it’s not him. When he can’t find someone to hire him he does his best to hire himself. > [@](#): > > Because I’ve worked with plenty of people that walked funny and yet had no trouble finding work. I’m not saying it’s easy; I’m saying that there are a lot of people out there that use disability as an excuse. Yes, and there are a lot of employers who use it as an excuse not to hire someone. Or do you think prejudice doesn’t exist? > [@](#): > > The right person for the job. Quite honestly, I don’t think most disabilities will keep someone from most jobs. Guy in the wheelchair wants be a miner? Sure, he’s not getting that. Guy in the wheelchair wants to be the assistant manager at some retail outlet? Sure, if he has the skills for the job. Only if there isn’t an equally qualified able-bodied person. Unless an employer is explicitly rewarded for hiring the crippled he or she is going to be more inclined to hire the able-bodied, by and large. There are exceptions, but not enough of them. ---
**Author:** ![Pjen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Pjen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pjen)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2013, 5:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-america-treats-the-poor/668598/149 "2013-09-14T05:01:05Z")
> [@yellowjacketcoder](#): > > And remind me again why I should care what _any_ religion has to say on the matter? Because religions are the form on which morals have been built over the centuries. Because many people believe they should follow those strictures, especially when they all agree on something. And especially now that modern evolutionary theory also supports much of what the old religions said. ---
**Author:** ![Pjen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Pjen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pjen)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2013, 5:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-america-treats-the-poor/668598/150 "2013-09-14T05:05:26Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > Please explain what the incentive is for that person to work. In countries that do this (Germany, France, the Netherlands) there is no evidence that there is any more work avoidance than in other countries where welfare is not close to minimum wage level. This is for two reasons- most people would rather work with the prospect of improvements rather than be a welfare drone, and secondly with people on less than living wage welfare, they enter the black economy or resort to crime. Those who want to avoid real work will do so whether welfare is high or low. ---
**Author:** ![Dangerosa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/22d042/32.png) [@Dangerosa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dangerosa)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2013, 1:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-america-treats-the-poor/668598/151 "2013-09-14T13:28:17Z")
> [@Farin](#): > > But I must note with your anecdote that you have purchased the base needs for your teenager: Fruits, vegetables, meats (if you are into that sort of thing) and THEN buy him all of the filler calories that us old people all wish we could still eat. Try feeding your teen nothing but those $2 pizzas and peanut butter and other “cheap calorie” food. Betcha a whole bunch of your apples/carrots/etc go missing. If you’re lucky, he’ll leave the door to the fridge intact. 🙂 Of course - we are NOT poor (and by some measures not even middle class), I stay at home and can take time to go to the grocery store every day for fresh fruit and vegetables, and I have time to cook them. So there is no reason for us to live off rice and beans, ramen, potatoes, peanut butter, Wonder bread offbrands, and frozen pizza. However, those are my son’s favorite food groups - and since he eats two more meals a day than the rest of us, that is what he gets. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2013, 12:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-america-treats-the-poor/668598/152 "2013-09-15T00:36:04Z")
> [@Broomstick](#): > > Gentlepersons, let me introduce you to the [Earned Income Tax Credit](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earned_income_tax_credit) which is what I think you’re aiming for. It already exists, although I think the numbers involved are too low. No, it isn’t. What I was suggesting was $10K to each citizen, no matter what his income is. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2013, 1:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-america-treats-the-poor/668598/153 "2013-09-15T01:25:19Z")
> [@Pjen](#): > > In countries that do this (Germany, France, the Netherlands) there is no evidence that there is any more work avoidance than in other countries where welfare is not close to minimum wage level. Please show me any country that implemented something like this (that is, if you work and earn N, the government will add to you X-N where X is some kind of “reasonable” income). ---
**Author:** ![Manlob](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/96bed5/32.png) [@Manlob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Manlob)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2013, 2:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-america-treats-the-poor/668598/154 "2013-09-16T02:27:10Z")
For cost comparison, the following was on on my receipts yesterday in Los Angeles, Total cost: $38.30. I am not sure how long that would feed one person, but this is probably less than $3 per day. Spent about 2 minutes on the store website clicking on some offers, but somebody with more time could certainly reduce price more. I know I missed a web coupon for 50 cents off the peanut butter and paid twice as much as I could have for the bananas. 3 grapefruit 1.09 pounds broccoli crowns 1 canaloupe melon 1 bundle celery 2 tomatoes 5 oranges 2 limes 1 eggplant 2 bell peppers 5 apples 5 pears 3 large peaches 1.76 pounds of grapes 7 bananas 4 boxes of a dozen granola bars 3 one pound boxes of saltine crackers 1 jar peanut butter 1 can albacore tuna 1 can chunk light tuna 2 tubs of cream cheese 12 bagels 12 eggs 1 pound pistachio nuts ---
**Author:** ![Dangerosa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/22d042/32.png) [@Dangerosa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dangerosa)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2013, 2:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-america-treats-the-poor/668598/155 "2013-09-16T02:37:38Z")
> [@Dangerosa](#): > > Of course - we are NOT poor (and by some measures not even middle class), I stay at home and can take time to go to the grocery store every day for fresh fruit and vegetables, and I have time to cook them. So there is no reason for us to live off rice and beans, ramen, potatoes, peanut butter, Wonder bread offbrands, and frozen pizza. However, those are my son’s favorite food groups - and since he eats two more meals a day than the rest of us, that is what he gets. By the way - one thing about the unhealthy fifteen year old diet is that he’s fifteen - and in spectacular shape because he’s a skateboarder. He isn’t carrying extra weight (yet). He gets plenty of exercise, he’s growing like a weed. His body can actually process through these junk calories without the sort of damage they’d do to - oh, say his father, who is overweight and mostly sedentary already. Or me, who isn’t overweight, but am in the process of losing ten and have borderline high cholesterol and a family history of type II diabetes. That will change in oh, so too few years and he’ll be wondering where those fifteen pounds came from. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2013, 5:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-america-treats-the-poor/668598/156 "2013-09-16T05:49:17Z")
> [@ITR\_champion](#): > > Well I’ve learned something new today. Thank you. But in any case, the PPACA (“Obamacare”) is expanding Medicaid and making subsidized health care plans available to both the poor and middle class. Once in effect, the poor will thus have health care. Not necessarily. Here in Georgia, the Republican government is fighting Obamacare tooth and nail. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2013, 5:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-america-treats-the-poor/668598/157 "2013-09-16T05:51:05Z")
> [@Toffe](#): > > Just another data point - and not in any way intending to diminish or dismiss anyone’s difficulties - but US$1133/month is more than my take-home pay here in Rio de Janeiro, and about US$50 below my nominal salary. That’s for full-time skilled work, and above average here - around three times the minimum wage. > > Rio de Janeiro isn’t a cheap city to live in - not cheaper than the US (except presumably outlier cities like New York). By the Big Mac Index as a quick comparison point, Brazil is more expensive than the US: [http://www.economist.com/content/big-mac-index](http://www.economist.com/content/big-mac-index) > > I guess all I’m trying to say that in a discussion about how America treats the poor, it’s worth looking at exactly what being “poor” means. Some of us in America have no desire to see the slums of Rio de Janiero spring up in our cities. It’s not a GOAL, unless you’re a libertarian or a Republican, y’know? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-america-treats-the-poor/668598.md?page=7)