"The opposite of poverty is justice"

Intended for constructive conversations. Exhibits of polarizing tribalism will be deleted.
BRUTE
Posts: 3797
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2015 5:20 pm

Re: "The opposite of poverty is justice"

Post by BRUTE »

ffj wrote:
Tue May 23, 2017 10:45 pm
@brute
So you are saying that minorities are incapable of avoiding entrapment?
no. maybe reading brute's post would have helped in understanding what he's saying.

User avatar
jennypenny
Posts: 6845
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2011 2:20 pm

Re: "The opposite of poverty is justice"

Post by jennypenny »

@scriptbunny -- I appreciate what you're trying to accomplish. As a woman though, how do you see it if you remove race from the problem? Up until recently, women were treated as property in western cultures. Not to the same extent as slaves, but most women didn't enjoy freedom in the same way that men did. Many women around the globe are still treated as property. I'm old enough to remember women trying to break into male-dominated jobs. It upsets me when I think about some of the smarter women I knew growing up who couldn't go to college or pursue a career beyond the typical stuff (teacher, nurse, etc). It upsets me that most of the 'history' I know is really just the history of white men.

What can be done about that now though? I could demand that women be compensated, but what sense would it make to have men who weren't even alive back then compensate women today for indignities from which they would never suffer?

To my mind, it makes more sense to start from where we are. Where (specifically) aren't things fair (like in the criminal justice system)? How can we fix that problem? Can we make sure that education is equally good regardless of race or geography. Can we make sure that healthcare is equally good? I think those kinds of actions would produce more bang for the buck than trying to compensate people individually. (Wouldn't that create problems within the community since not everyone would benefit?)

I really hope this doesn't sound condescending. I don't mean it that way at all, but I know that it's bad form for white people tell non-white people what to think and I don't want to do that. It drove llorona away and I'm still sad about that. Hopefully you see this as people sharing their honest opinion in a way that opens up a dialogue more than shuts it down, if that makes sense. Stay engaged, challenge what people have said or ask for explanations if something doesn't make sense. Some differences are simply from different life experiences or living in different areas of the country. And sometimes the old curmudgeons are wrong and don't be afraid to call them on it.

For me, my main question is what is the [your] ultimate goal? If the goal is full equality, I'm not sure if continuing to pick at the proverbial scab is the quickest route. I came to that conclusion about women's battle for equality. When the old guard of feminism cried misogyny every time someone criticized HRC during the campaign, I think it did more harm than good. I think it would have been better to avoid the issue entirely and let anyone with misogynist thoughts believe that their opinion was so outmoded that it wasn't even worth mentioning anymore.

All that said, no amount of money can make things equal -- it can only provide equal opportunities. The rest is up to the individual. This forum is proof of that when it comes to finances. It's the difference between agency and empowerment. I dislike the term empowerment because it implies success is contingent on the support of someone else. Agency comes from within.

Riggerjack
Posts: 3178
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 3:09 am

Re: "The opposite of poverty is justice"

Post by Riggerjack »

And sometimes the old curmudgeons are wrong and don't be afraid to call them on it.
Well, I for one, come here (in the politics forum) to be called on it.

Here, I can rub my notions against other people's notions. Where my ideas are better, they will round off yours, and vice versa. Nothing is gained by talking to people who agree with me. There is no friction, and no improvement down that road.

I'm here for the better ideas. I'm here to have my blind spots pointed out.

And after doing this for decades, I seem to have a pretty thick skin, yet still find I am wrong on occasion. And that's the best, when I see there is something I was wrong about, and fix it.

User avatar
jennypenny
Posts: 6845
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2011 2:20 pm

Re: "The opposite of poverty is justice"

Post by jennypenny »

I should have said 'us' instead of 'them' since I count myself among the old curmudgeons, especially if we're going to start rubbing our notions up against each other. :D

Campitor
Posts: 1227
Joined: Thu Aug 20, 2015 11:49 am

Re: "The opposite of poverty is justice"

Post by Campitor »

I'm a minority (hispanic), a 1st generation immigrant, grew up with 1 parent until age 10 when grandmother moved in, experienced racism growing up (some of it violent), and family was poor in my early years.

What was emphasized in my house growing up:

1) You can always do better.
2) Read lots of books - it's your gateway to a better life.
3) Do good in school.
4) Welfare is for people who need it or people too lazy to work. If you're healthy and can work - you don't need it.
5) You better be the hardest working guy in the room because life doesn't give you anything unless you work hard for it.
6) There are bigots and idiots in every culture - don't let it taint your opinion about a particular ethnicity or class.

I understand there are groups who need help to get on their feet or those who need long term assistance to survive as a result of circumstances or injuries beyond their control - I'd truly want to help those people. But I get upset when a hand up becomes a hand out. It was tough growing up poor but I was still happy because I loved reading and had a local library to support my reading addiction. I worked 30 hours a week through middle school and high school because my parents couldn't afford to buy me clothes or school supplies. I worked over 40 hours a week to pay for my college tuition and books. I worked 60+ hours a week in a minimum wage job when I got laid off so I could put food on the table and provide for my wife and newborn. I could have collected unemployment or welfare - I refused both because I was healthy, knew I could work, and a better paying job would eventually show up. It's amazing how many opportunities develop when you constantly go the extra mile.

Black people don't need reparations - they have the intelligence and wherewithal to improve their own lives. What is needed in the poor Black, Hispanic, and <insert race of the month here> is a culture shift that promotes education, integrity, and self reliance. My family, who couldn't speak a drop of english when they arrived in the USA, became successful via unrelenting effort and education. I've met too many wealthy and successful African-Americans, Hispanics, Muslims, Africans, etc., to swallow the "institutional racism" narrative.

In my book the opposite of poverty is self reliance - its the only true path to prosperity. The USA provides every opportunity to succeed. It provides free education up through high school, builds libraries that provide every convenience needed to be a polymath or narrowly focus on a single discipline - you can even learn how to invest, save, and ERE. It contains a vast infrastructure geared towards churning out massive amounts of money. This country is so full of opportunities that a homeless and illegal immigrant was able to find a road to success and citizenship by "whispering" to dogs. If you can't outcompete a homeless and illegal Mexican - you have no hope - no amount of reparations or "justice" will turn you into a success. There is a group of people who have tons of money thrown at them but 70% of them still go broke - lottery winners. Throwing money at a person doesn't automagically guarantee success.
Last edited by Campitor on Thu May 25, 2017 1:21 am, edited 1 time in total.

The Old Man
Posts: 503
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2012 5:55 pm

Re: "The opposite of poverty is justice"

Post by The Old Man »

jennypenny wrote:
Wed May 24, 2017 4:18 pm
It upsets me when I think about some of the smarter women I knew growing up who couldn't go to college or pursue a career beyond the typical stuff (teacher, nurse, etc). It upsets me that most of the 'history' I know is really just the history of white men.
http://info.vassar.edu/about/vassar/history.html
A History of Vassar College: A pioneer for women’s education and liberal arts education in the United States, Matthew Vassar founded Vassar College in 1861. Opening its doors to its first class of 353 students paying $350 for tuition and “residence” on September 26, 1865, the college offered young women a liberal arts education equal to that of the best men’s colleges of the day. Coeducational since 1969, Vassar College set the standard for higher education for women for more than 100 years and now sets the standard for true coeducation. Recognized as one of the best liberal arts colleges in the country, Vassar has successfully fulfilled its founder’s goals.

"...couldn't go to college...": Vassar has existed since 1865. They were one of many.

"...the history of white men...": When I was in school we learned about the history of China, Africa, Mughals (India), and Europe. Although, I will admit the history of Latin America was limited at best. At university my major did not require a history component, but if one was so inclined one could take courses in virtually any field of history. There was no history of white men. The purpose of History is to provide an understanding of the past so as to provide guidance for the future. To that end it is the responsibility of the Historian to write history in as objective a fashion as possible. Likewise, it is the responsibility of the reader to understand that objectivity is an elusive goal.

IlliniDave
Posts: 3837
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2014 7:46 pm

Re: "The opposite of poverty is justice"

Post by IlliniDave »

Campitor wrote:
Wed May 24, 2017 10:44 pm
...
In my book the opposite of poverty is self reliance ...
This struck me as the most profound idea to emerge in the thread. It captures the philosophy of my grandparents (the three I knew were all children of immigrants that grew up on farms).

It speaks to a different definition of poverty than how it's defined by the government and most people (generally income is less than X, X being a function household size). Your words speak more to a poverty of spirit. Certainly the deepest form of poverty is heavy one-way reliance on others. Sadly, it is too often unnecessary (I have a nephew who is the embodiment of that).

ThisDinosaur
Posts: 997
Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2015 9:31 am

Re: "The opposite of poverty is justice"

Post by ThisDinosaur »

jennypenny wrote:
Wed May 24, 2017 4:18 pm
It's the difference between agency and empowerment. I dislike the term empowerment because it implies success is contingent on the support of someone else. Agency comes from within.
I've never been able to explain why "empowerment" was such an annoying word. That pretty much sums it up. Can you do "privilege" and "awareness" next? Or "family values?"

And +1 to RiggerJack's statement about wanting to have a change of mind. I love when someone can change my opinion about something. It feels like I'm learning.

ThisDinosaur
Posts: 997
Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2015 9:31 am

Re: "The opposite of poverty is justice"

Post by ThisDinosaur »

IlliniDave wrote:
Thu May 25, 2017 7:30 am
Certainly the deepest form of poverty is heavy one-way reliance on others.
What about people with loads and loads of money but no skills? Where does Paris Hilton fall on the spectrum of poverty to self-reliance?

Dragline
Posts: 4436
Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2011 1:50 am

Re: "The opposite of poverty is justice"

Post by Dragline »

General Snoopy wrote:
Thu May 25, 2017 12:58 am
There was no history of white men. The purpose of History is to provide an understanding of the past so as to provide guidance for the future. To that end it is the responsibility of the Historian to write history in as objective a fashion as possible. Likewise, it is the responsibility of the reader to understand that objectivity is an elusive goal.
Laudable thought, but not in keeping with the realities of the human condition or the way historians work -- i.e., the way people perceive reality and their pasts. There is no such thing as "objectivity" in the telling of stories from the past unless you suddenly become omniscient and able to comprehend everything at once. What you end up with in "popular history" is a series of fallacies about Golden Eras and Dark Ages that various people find attractive depending largely on who they are.

The way it really works in that each age looks at history through its own lens, which may be clear on some things and cloudy on others, and will care or find more meaning in some things than others. E.g., why very few people actually celebrate Columbus on the US holiday of Columbus Day anymore.

Case in point -- the recent removal of various historical statues in New Orleans, including a monument that commemorated an 1874 attack on the racially integrated city police and state militia by a white supremacist group called the Crescent City White League -- and yes, there is a white history all over the place if you look. Or the 1990s removal of Marx and Lenin statues all across Eastern Europe for another example.

And the backlash by the Alabama legislature to "preserve" such historical monuments, which ironically are not in fact histories of what they depict, but actually the history of the priorities of society at the times they were erected -- often generations later.

The history of history is that it is constantly being revised, albeit usually more on emphasis than on factual disputes -- as it should be in a dynamic, pluralistic society. There are, occasionally, incredible factual breakthroughs, though, such as the development of carbon dating and the use of DNA testing to verify that Jefferson did in fact sire children with Sally Hemings, despite the consistent denial of that inconvenient fact by contemporary historians for 200 years.

IlliniDave
Posts: 3837
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2014 7:46 pm

Re: "The opposite of poverty is justice"

Post by IlliniDave »

ThisDinosaur wrote:
Thu May 25, 2017 7:39 am
IlliniDave wrote:
Thu May 25, 2017 7:30 am
Certainly the deepest form of poverty is heavy one-way reliance on others.
What about people with loads and loads of money but no skills? Where does Paris Hilton fall on the spectrum of poverty to self-reliance?
I don't know enough about Paris Hilton to answer that directly. But certainly one can posit a person immersed in wealth that is poor in the sense Campitor described. At the same time it doesn't mean that someone wealthy by windfall is necessarily poor because they can't go out and kill a buffalo with a bow and stone-tipped arrow. If there's active mutual reliance between a person and the universe of "others" (i.e., the person works to earn money to provide for his needs, or the inheritor of a fortune engages in a life of philanthropy and volunteer work) then the person is not deeply poor in the sense I meant. I don't think I'd even call the inheritor of a fortune who hides out in the musty upstairs room of his grandfather's mansion spending down the wealth of his ancestors deeply poor. It's possible he's quite poor in spirit, but the money he spends provides livelihood to others and is not taken from others by taxation or donation (though he is the beneficiary of intra-family charity, but that's sometimes what families do).

ThisDinosaur
Posts: 997
Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2015 9:31 am

Re: "The opposite of poverty is justice"

Post by ThisDinosaur »

Wealth is not measured in dollars but in time. (The number of years of expenses/resources you have currently saved up.) This is a basic insight of ERE but is not commonly understood in the outside world. The "Case for Reparations" link that scriptbunny posted has a very emotional historical explanation for why so few African Americans have wealth by any definition. There is only so self-reliant you can become when you can't really ever own anything without fear it will be taken away. Black americans are more aware than any other group that property rights are an illusion. Its a necessary illusion that holds society together, but still just an illusion.

IlliniDave
Posts: 3837
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2014 7:46 pm

Re: "The opposite of poverty is justice"

Post by IlliniDave »

ThisDinosaur wrote:
Thu May 25, 2017 8:27 am
Wealth is ... (The number of years of expenses/resources you have currently saved up.) ... property rights are an illusion. Its a necessary illusion that holds society together, but still just an illusion.
So wealth is an illusion? I wouldn't necessarily disagree with that--from a certain philosophical perspective. And also by extension poverty is an illusion?

I don't think things have to be absolute and permanent to exist, especially abstract things like wealth.

I would argue that there is no single definition of wealth. In the broadest sense it's relative to whomever it is applied to and has different facets, and is probably as much an emotional state as is it a quantifiable physical tally. The same is true for poverty. How many years you can get by with your accumulations is one measure of wealth, and of course is especially applicable to those who are looking to accumulate in order to live off the stash for a long time. I'm not sure that perspective is a unique insight to ERE, the uniqueness is more in the strategies developed for shortcutting the process to get "there".

ThisDinosaur
Posts: 997
Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2015 9:31 am

Re: "The opposite of poverty is justice"

Post by ThisDinosaur »

IlliniDave wrote:
Thu May 25, 2017 8:51 am
So wealth is an illusion?
Kind of. Robert Shiller talks about how different financial products are "inventions" by humans. They are just different sorts of contracts, and a contract is only as good as the government that enforces it. If enforcement is unreliable, or there is a class of citizens who are subject to different rules, then no resource or instrument has an owner. There's a scene in Schindler's List where he's telling his jewish workers he wants to pay them in pots and pans. One of them says,"money is still money," and Schindler says, "no its not. That's why we're here."

The Old Man
Posts: 503
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2012 5:55 pm

Re: "The opposite of poverty is justice"

Post by The Old Man »

@Dragline

History is not Psuedohistory.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudohistory

Edward Gibbon is my benchmark for how to do history.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Gibbon
In this insistence upon the importance of primary sources, Gibbon is considered by many to be one of the first modern historians. Many people disagree with his conclusions, but they do not disagree with his methods or sources.

About the "history of white people," OK you have piqued my interest. What are some examples? Try to keep it to what historians would refer to as History and not as Pseudohistory/propaganda.

Campitor
Posts: 1227
Joined: Thu Aug 20, 2015 11:49 am

Re: "The opposite of poverty is justice"

Post by Campitor »

What about people with loads and loads of money but no skills? Where does Paris Hilton fall on the spectrum of poverty to self-reliance?
People fall out of the 1% bracket more often than you think. American income ladders are very active - those who start poor seldom stay poor. And many in the top 1% get bumped down too.

Paris Hilton makes money via her branding/marketing. She used her notoriety and sexcapades to increase her name recognition which she leveraged to start a perfume line and make $275k per event as a celebrity DJ. I'm no fan of Paris Hilton but she's certainly producing goods/services that people are buying. A google search on Paris Hilton perfume reveals 2 billion dollars of fragrance sold over 10 years.

So the question is this... if a supposedly vacuous blond with multiple sex scandals can generate a 2 billion dollar business, why can't a hard working minority leverage focused labor and education into a decent life and modest wealth? Spoiler - they can and often do.
There is only so self-reliant you can become when you can't really ever own anything without fear it will be taken away. Black americans are more aware than any other group that property rights are an illusion. Its a necessary illusion that holds society together, but still just an illusion.
Sigh - the wealth a.k.a property rights is an illusion narrative meant to placate underachievers and convince them that working hard for $$ has no benefit. What is wealth? Per Merriam Webster: abundance of valuable material possessions or resources; abundant supply; all property that has a money value or an exchangeable value; all material objects that have economic utility; especially : the stock of useful goods having economic value in existence at any one time national wealth. So by that definition property rights, albeit an illusion, has real value because it can be exchanged for goods/services.

Here is an article by The Economist that may add to the conversation in this thread: Middle-income blacks are downwardly mobile. Why?

A word on diminishing household incomes in the article above. As income levels rise, the ability to live independently increases so that a household of 4 can now become a household of 3 or 2 as others move away to enjoy living separately. This trend can be erroneously interpreted as a drop in the standard of living when in reality it could be a sign of increasing wealth since a household of 2 wage earners would have less money than a 4 person household where the individual residents earns less per person, i.e., 2 people earning 70k vs 4 people earning 45K.
Last edited by Campitor on Thu May 25, 2017 12:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.

IlliniDave
Posts: 3837
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2014 7:46 pm

Re: "The opposite of poverty is justice"

Post by IlliniDave »

ThisDinosaur wrote:
Thu May 25, 2017 9:09 am
IlliniDave wrote:
Thu May 25, 2017 8:51 am
So wealth is an illusion?
Kind of. Robert Shiller talks about how different financial products are "inventions" by humans. They are just different sorts of contracts, and a contract is only as good as the government that enforces it. If enforcement is unreliable, or there is a class of citizens who are subject to different rules, then no resource or instrument has an owner. There's a scene in Schindler's List where he's telling his jewish workers he wants to pay them in pots and pans. One of them says,"money is still money," and Schindler says, "no its not. That's why we're here."
Okay, I see what your saying. I would tend to say it more like wealth can be transitory. The possibility of it being temporary doesn't make it an illusion while it exists. The illusion would be a belief in its permanence since it may or may not be permanent on a timescale relevant to a person.

ThisDinosaur
Posts: 997
Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2015 9:31 am

Re: "The opposite of poverty is justice"

Post by ThisDinosaur »

Well, I guess I know less about Paris Hilton than I thought I did. That's my prejudice showing.
Campitor wrote:
Thu May 25, 2017 11:05 am
Sigh - the wealth a.k.a property rights is an illusion narrative meant to placate underachievers and convince them that working hard for $$ has no benefit.
Not exactly. The Declaration of Independence says all people are "endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights." Right there is where I call bullshit. Rights are a made up set of rules set up by a governing body. Some people had the right to own other people in this country 160 years ago. The governing body subsequently decided that that should no longer be a right. The form taken by property rights defines how an economy can function. If there is no legal justification for you saying you "own" something, then there is no legal consequence to someone else taking it without your permission. Someone could show up to your house better armed than you, and say its where they live now. No one would buy it from you if they could just take it. Fortunately, there is a police force, a court system, a system of electing people to vote on new laws.

Now, consider redlining, buying a home "on contract," jim crow, and voter intimidation practices. These all add up to the title of this thread: "The opposite of poverty is justice."

ThisDinosaur
Posts: 997
Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2015 9:31 am

Re: "The opposite of poverty is justice"

Post by ThisDinosaur »

@IlliniDave
Its not the resources/materials or even the money that is an illusion. It is the right of ownership that is an illusion. Wealth is the combination of the two.

Campitor
Posts: 1227
Joined: Thu Aug 20, 2015 11:49 am

Re: "The opposite of poverty is justice"

Post by Campitor »

Now, consider redlining, buying a home "on contract," jim crow, and voter intimidation practices. These all add up to the title of this thread: "The opposite of poverty is justice."
The prior existence of jim crow and voter intimidation is a red herring used to justify underachievement and empower witch hunts that do nothing to resolve poverty while creating incentives for bad economic behavior. Not sure what you mean by buying a home "on contract" - do you mean a mortgage? Everyone has to pay a mortgage yet many create tremendous amounts of wealth on property that isn't even paid off. Property rights have always existed prior to the Constitution via implied violence. But is that any different than the implied aggression inherit in any market which can strip you of your capital just as quickly? You can be rich today but a stock market crash or a new product can bring your business to its knees overnight - look at Kodak and Blackberry.

I'm not saying there isn't racism and I'm not saying minorities aren't discriminated against but in aggregate we (i'm a minority) currently have everything that is needed to excel but many choose to remain poor by adopting beliefs that discourage diligent effort and encourage waiting for a monetary handout that most likely will never come or be seen in their lifetime. If I had $20 for every time I was called an Uncle Tom by my fellow minorities for working hard, I'd probably be a majority owner of a basketball franchise. Hard work and preparation, in America today, will do a better job of addressing poverty than any government handout. Handouts = being given a fish for today. Self reliance = learning how to fish. Hard work and Preparation = turning a 1 dollar fish into 10 Sushi rolls and selling them for $1.50 each.
Last edited by Campitor on Thu May 25, 2017 1:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Locked