Sorry, rutabaga is the only vegetable.
How many years did you spend in economically depressed areas, since the question has come up?
Not a few years, but for about a year in the early Eighties, I lived in a steel mill town with an unemployment rate of 25%. Domestic violence, alcohol abuse, depression rates, and crime rates all rose after unemployment did, so they were clearly the result of hard times, not the cause of them.
Seems to me that the easiest way to reconcile the two views in the OP is to look at an area that became economically depressed and compare the before-and-afters. You don’t 'have to live there, as I did.
Who is this “you” that you’re attributing such vile sentiments as “we need to keep them away so they don’t lower our standard of living”? And who is this “we” who see the same situation through a much more compassionate lense??
Your very premise is poisoned from the get go.
This is where I wish we had a like button.
When I was poor I blamed it on the government but I don’t blame the government for my current affluence. Oddly enough my political leanings shifted a little.
From the way you post on this board I don’t think you are capable of compromising on anything. In other words, you are part of the problem.
But fine, let me try. If we could rid the conservatives in general and the Republicans in particular of the Trump, McConnell, Cruz, and Faux news crowd we might be able to solve some problems in this country.
There’s a good Ted Talk about that: Poverty isn’t a lack of character; it’s a lack of cash by Rutger Bregman (14:58)
It is a discussion of Universal Basic Income, ultimately, but the data points he uses support the title, IMO.
Purely from octopus’s quote in the OP I have to agree with it. If you place people in adverse circumstances it’s more likely to all go a bit “lord of the flies”. Seems like an reasonable argument for trying to eradicate such inequality. If there is further context from octopus that suggests those in deprived circumstances must have an inherent character flaw then no, I would disagree.
Nothing is certain though is it? And the truly evil position to take would be a simple assumption that the poor deserve their lot or are incapable of living any better. I lived in a deprived area for the first 20 years of my life and in an affluent area now, My mother and father were both from very poor backgrounds and the general background level of violence and criminality were light years away from what I experience now. I know from long childhood experience that being poor is not a character flaw but also that deprivation will often accentuate the worst of human nature.
Will Rogers of Oklahoma once said “I never met a man I didn’t like.”
Gil Froshisher of So. Kalinkey once said “I never met a human I couldn’t hate.”
I report. You decide.
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
This is all we need to fix America
-
Disclose the UFO technology, let the American people and the people of the world have access to clean energy from the solar winds, build sustainable wind plants, dump coal and “clean coal”. Move toward free energy. Dump to utilities which charge customers outrages prices for energy
-
Release all the secret patents which have the power to change the plant for good
-
Change the monetary system, dump the federal reserve private bank with the illegal leash it has on the globe. Move towards the gold standard or Bitcoin.
-
Put Rand Paul in office
-
dump the Deep Staters in both parties who seek to keep the National Security Apparatuses going.
About 14 years over the course of my life, most of it in my childhood, but I’ve been told that’s not relevant to this thread.
I don’t see where that was said.
I will say this about my experiences. I started school in the ghetto. In second grade my family upgraded from a three- to a four-room apartment a mile down the road to another depressed area but one that was merely working class poor. I found myself two months behind the rest of my class.
The difference? My ghetto school was mostly black. My working class school was mostly white.
As the OP wrote, looking back I could have taken this either as a condemnation of black families or an exaltation of white families. I did neither. I took it as a condemnation of a systemically racist society that treated blacks differently. The white working class families were not lauded for their dedication to getting their kids properly educated, and not just because so many of them didn’t have this dedication. They were discriminated against and locked out of much of affluent society in similar fashion, although not as forcefully and irrevocably.
Racism, classism, nationalism, and all the other ways society sorts individuals into superior and inferior groups are the true weights that the poor and the lowly have to throw off just to achieve some measure of equality with those who sailed weightless through life and consider the poor’s top to be the bottom that they can ascend from.
Not all the poor and the discriminated against rise. Many are indeed crushed by this weight. They serve as convenient visible symbols through which the whole can be condemned. With history’s usual irony, many of the white working class and even some middle class who succeeded with a somewhat lesser weight in the past are now being crushed by a new set of systemic societal weights. They are angry and loud and are lashing out at perceived inferiors as the blame rather than the affluent who run society. It’s gotten ugly and will get worse because history is not on their side.
I just realized there’s a Monty Python reference that fits here.
Yep. Society is to blame. Not individuals, society. Nothing can change until we agree on that issue and charge them for their crimes.
Please stay on topic or at least make an effort to relate your comment to the topic.
[/moderating]
So there are too many conflicted voters, or groups of voting blocs with irreconcilably disparate priorities and viewpoints? Is that your point here?
Ok. That’s enough. I’m putting you on topic limitation.
You may no longer bring up UFOs, ETs or similar in any thread in which it’s not already a part of the conversation.
No warning here but next time it will be.
I think the OP is more right than wrong.
One of the core differences between ideological liberals and conservatives is their beliefs on free will.* Liberals generally believe that many things that appear to be free choices are actually socially determined. They tend to believe that your actual ability to do things that are the rational and beneficial choice for you is a product of things like your executive function and willpower, which are determined by your upbringing, history of trauma, genetics, and other factors. (This is in addition to and apart from debates about what the rational choice is, in which conservatives tend to ignore things like the value of social status when analyzing the behavior of the poor.)
Conversely, conservatives tend to believe in a sort of 18th-century psychology/ethics that either denies the existence of these social determinants or else denies that they are relevant to analyzing moral and policy obligations.
That is why two different people can see the exact same thing—like a poor person spending too much money on a car, or someone responding inappropriately to police questioning—and reach very different conclusions about blame and policy.
*-most people who fit these labels are not especially ideological and they adopt them as an identity because of other social pressures—those people do not have consistent core beliefs like highly ideological people do. They tend to use the free will argument hypocritically, marshalling one side or the other when convenient for their tribe.
It’s kind of a cop out, but I think there are elements of both at play in most scenario.
I really just wanted to respond to say, where you been, man?!
It’s not post hoc reasoning if multiple studies have established a correlation.Here’s one [domestic violence]:
And here[domestic violence]:
And here [alcohol abuse]:
This study
And here [murder and suicide]:
Besides which, my point was this: if those things happen after and not before the area becomes impoverished, they’re obviously not causing it.
Post #6