It's hard to debate with someone who continually resorts to demeaning stereotypes and refuses to accept facts.
-- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "feste37" <feste37@> wrote: > > > > My objections to your posts on poverty are first that you > stereotype the poor > > (does anyone ask you if you are spending your money on "frivolous" > things?) > > and second that your definition of poverty is out of the > mainstream, useless > > and wrong. > > > > Just to give one example, consider this, which I took from the > Catholic > > Campaign for Human Development at > > http://www.nccbuscc.org/cchd/povertyusa/index.htm > > > > "Since 1999, the number of poor Americans suffering from `food > insecurity' > > and hunger has increased by 3.9 million - 2.8 million adults and > more than > > one million children. In 2002, 34.9 million people lived in > households > > experiencing food insecurity - that is, not enough food for basic > nourishment - > > compared to 33.6 million in 2001 and 31 million in 1999. (U.S. > Department of > > Agriculture, Household Food Security in the United States, 2002, > October > > 2003.) > > > > So much for your notion that no one in this country suffers from a > lack of the > > necessitites of life. > > > > > Sorry, I don't believe it for a moment. > > If you and I went down to the homes of the people in the study, what > do you think we'd find? > > I think we'd find people wasting their money on fast food or > cigarettes or beer. > > The reality is that you can earn minimum wage in this country and > have enough for basic nutritional intake. > > Don't believe everything you read...and start to think for yourself, > feste37. > > Oh, and two more words for you: food stamps. > > > > > > > > Perhaps you have a rosy view of things because Arizona doesn't > figure in the > > top ten "poverty" states, which are > > 1. Mississippi 17.3% below the poverty line > > 2. New Mexico 17.3% > > 3. Louisiana 16.8% > > 4. District of Columbia 16.7% > > 4. Texas 16.7% > > 6. Arkansas 16.4% > > 7. Alabama 16.0% > > 7. Kentucky 16.0% > > 9. West Virginia 15.8% > > 10. North Carolina 15.1% > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" <shempmcgurk@> > > wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "feste37" <feste37@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > I did define it. You must have missed the post, since you > didn't > > > > > respond to it. I don't know offhand what the number of the > post > > > was > > > > > and don't have time to go to it now. > > > > > > > > Here 'tis: > > > > > > > > If your point is that poverty in America is very different > from > > > > poverty in, say, Bangladesh, of course that is true. It's > obvious. > > > > Poverty is a relative concept. if you don't have the things > that > > > the > > > > majority of people in your society have, and therefore cannot > > > > participate fully in that society, you are poor. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > First, thanks to Judy for finding feste37's definition. > > > > > > Okay. The way you define poverty is completely different from > the > > > way I define it. I do NOT define it as a relative concept which > is, > > > of course, the way it is defined by the poverty line > definition. > > > Plus, my definition has NOTHING to do with whether or not you > have > > > the same things as the majority of the people in society have. > > > > > > Nor does my definition include whether or not one > can "participate > > > fully in that society" because they don't have the things that > the > > > majority have. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That's an > > > > approximation of a standard definition, I think, if I remember > my > > > > social science classes from about 15 million years ago. > > > > > > > > You ask about deprivations. Lack of health insurance, for one, > > > which > > > > means that people see doctors less often than they should do > and > > > need > > > > to do, and so lack preventive care. Inability to pay for > needed > > > > medications is another deprivation. Choosing between food and > > > > medication is another. I'm sure there are many more. It's > > > > called "going without," and the poor quietly learn to do this, > but > > > > that doesn't mean they are not poor. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ...and I contend that there is no one that the above applies to > in > > > America...and that is why there are no poor people. There are > > > social programs -- government or otherwise -- that will take > care of > > > those essential needs. > > > > > > Now I'm going to go back and answer the questions you asked me > that > > > I haven't yet responded to. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" > > > <shempmcgurk@> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "feste37" <feste37@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I knew it would get around to this pretty quickly: the > poor > > > > spend > > > > > > their money > > > > > > > on booze and cigarettes and on other stuff that > > > > they "shouldn't" > > > > > > buy. They > > > > > > > should really be more responsible, just like we are (who > do > > > not > > > > > > have to put up > > > > > > > with their privations). And as for the 1,000 dentists > within > > > a > > > > 50- > > > > > > mile radius who > > > > > > > would be happy to treat the "deserving" poor for free -- > > > that's > > > > a > > > > > > good one! > > > > > > > Where on earth do you live, Shemp? Is this another Texan > > > > fantasy? > > > > > > And who > > > > > > > decides who is "deserving"? Do YOU have to prove you > > > > > > are "deserving" when > > > > > > > you get health care? Do YOU have to prove you don't > smoke or > > > > > > drink? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tell you what, feste37, you answer my questions about the > > > > definition > > > > > > of poverty and then I'll get around to answering YOUR > question. > > > > > > > > > > > > And I'm not trying to just play and game of tit-for-tat > with > > > you; > > > > > > the definition of poverty really is at the heart of this > > > debate. > > > > > > > > > > > > I have no idea what you mean by "poverty" whereas you know > > > what I > > > > > > mean (because I've given you my definition). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" > > > > <shempmcgurk@> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "feste37" > <feste37@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Complacent advice given by those who have much to > those > > > > who > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > little, > > > > > > > > > I'd say. I don't buy this romanticized "poor but > happy" > > > > stuff. > > > > > > > > What's to be happy > > > > > > > > > about when your teeth are rotting and you can't > afford > > > to > > > > go > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > the dentist? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Show me a person who can't afford to go to the dentist > and > > > > I'll > > > > > > show > > > > > > > > you a person who is spending his money on beer, > cigarettes > > > or > > > > > > some > > > > > > > > other such thing that should NOT be a priority for > > > > consumption > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > his or her life. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And after you weed out the 99 of 100 "poor" people > that > > > the > > > > > > above > > > > > > > > description applies to and you find the actual 1 of > 100 > > > that > > > > > > cannot > > > > > > > > genuinely afford the dentist, I would suggest to you > that > > > > there > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > 1,000 dentists within a 50-mile radius of that person > who > > > > will > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > more than happy to do pro bono work for that deserving > > > person > > > > if > > > > > > > > they truly need it (and that's assuming there isn't a > > > social > > > > > > program > > > > > > > > by the government that will pay for it). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj > <vajranatha@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Feb 11, 2006, at 10:47 AM, authfriend wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A minister of my acquaintance says there are two > ways > > > > > > > > > > > to be wealthy: One is to have a lot of money, > the > > > other > > > > > > > > > > > is to have few needs. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yep, "live simply". > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
