Do you think the poor are lazy?

[roxiejules]

Poor is "bad," wealthy is "good"


http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/Opinion/2011/0404/Do-you-think-the-poor-are-lazy - via CS Monitor


It’s no accident that we routinely refer to the wealthiest as the “top” and the rest as the “bottom.” In English, good is up and bad is down. That’s why we say, “things are looking up” and “she’s down in the dumps.” No wonder we pull ourselves up (not forward or along) by our bootstraps. Calling certain folks upper class implies they are worth more not just materially but also morally.

If being rich or poor is understood as the result of differential effort, then we can conclude each category is simply a lifestyle choice. Inequality is then a sign that our economy is doing exactly what it should – rewarding the deserving and motivating the lazy. And the line of reasoning continues: Since there’s nothing wrong with this, there's nothing anybody should do about it.

We use this “gap” language all the time. And then we wonder why the statistics we cite, the graphs we generate, and the examples we offer of widening inequality don’t raise the eyebrows, let alone the ire, of many in our audiences. Using this language tacitly degrades individuals and makes current conditions seem natural. By employing it, we blind the public to the fact that inequality isn't an individual choice. Rather, it’s the direct result of the rules financial and political elites have crafted for their own enrichment.

Instead of a “gap between rich and poor,” we’re far better served calling it a “barrier.” A barrier connotes a big, imposing wall behind which a few can hoard the goodies, while those on the other side are left wanting. When you barricade yourself in, you keep others out. Instead of asking to “bridge the divide,” let’s insist on dismantling the obstacles that keep too many from the gains produced of their own hard work.






This is America. Don’t fence me in.

[LeftishBrit]

1. k&r

This attitude is an increasing problem in the UK too, with our new Tory government. Right-wingers tend to use the terms 'feckless' and 'workshy' for poor people; you never hear them use such terms for idle rich people!

[Enthusiast]

11. Apparently they used similar

language in the days of Charles Dickens.

[roxiejules]

15. and such language was common in Upton Sinclair's days

as you can read in his book, The Jungle.

The poor immigrants in the factories were treated as badly as the animals being slaughtered....and the wealthier were ripping them off through a number of schemes, including 'rent to own' a home with hidden penalities that enabled the landlord to repossess after one late payment. The judges and lawyers were part of the protection plan that kept the wealthy from losing in court if anyone tried to protest.

[texshelters]

26. Right, good point

and Grapes of Wrath... The Okies, and the dirty sub-humans, etc.

Peace,
Tex Shelters

[Cal33]

44. I think the sociopathic super-rich are super-greedy and also

out and out crooked swindlers. I've read that the super-wealthy were paying 30% of the national taxes in the !950s,
and only 9% of the taxes in recent years. They not only use loopholes to avoid paying taxes, some of the big
corporations even have received subsidies from our government in addition to not paying their taxes. They are
making the middle-classes and the poor bear most of the burden, while they go scot free. Some of the poor die of
malnutrition and neglect as a result. Are the well-to-do bothered by this? No. They are trying to find someone
else to blame. These are sick people whose maturity development had been arrested at an early infantile age. They are
the main cause of the financial mess we've been in the past 4+ years, but they're trying to pass the blame onto
everyone else.

[Prophet 451]

29. Our Tory government

I'm on disability benefits. If I told you my views of our current government, my post would be (rightly) pulled. When IDS says it's a "sin" to be unemployed, we have a serious fucking problem. It's becoming clear that the Tories think there are only three kinds of citizen: A) Children, B) Employed (at minimal wages) or C) Dead. They'll shove you into one of those categories and aren't very picky about which one you end up in.

I'd been a lifelong LibDem voter until Clegg chose to prop up our most radical government in modern history. I'll be voting Labour from now on.

[Duer 157099]

2. But "going down" on someone is considered good right?

Had to think of at least one counter-example.

And "stuck up" is not a compliment.

[reggie the dog]

8. uppity

yuppie

i thought those words were insults



my girlfriend likes it when i go down on her but she can be a real downer when we talk politics because she votes right wing.... oh well, no one is perfect....now when she goes down on me on the other hand :)

[reggie the dog]

9. x

x

[southernyankeebelle]

3. Hell no they aren't. Some are working 2 and 3 jobs to make ends meet.

[WatsonT]

4. Some are, most aren't

then again the "rich" are often assumed to be lazy but a great many (particularly the self-made types) work incessantly and have no personal lives.

Granted they aren't digging ditches, but they also don't get to relax with their buddies and enjoy a beer at the end of the day.

But in general I'd say the upper middle class is the ideal place to be. You don't have so little or so much money that your life revolves around that one issue.

[roxiejules]

6. Some of the wealthy may work incessantly

but they are being rewarded with a big paycheck.

Think of the difference between depositing $10K after a week's work rather than $250.00?

Poverty wears you out. It can cause stress, anxiety and depression.

The guy who works at the gas station I go to is 55 yrs. old and is working 3 jobs. He gets paid minimum wage at all of them. He never has a day off.

[Enthusiast]

12. The gas station guy will never

strain the social security system.

[roxiejules]

14. No he won't live long enough

to collect. He already looks like a beat up old tire...that is what poverty does to you.

[Drale]

5. No I think the rich are lazy

[provis99]

10. and vicious.

[roxiejules]

13. and well subsidized

While the poor get social programs worth $365 billion, the rich get more.

Subsidies to help the prosperous build wealth added up to $384 billion last year.

The top 1 percent got an average $95,000 in federal help. Upper-middle-income families making $100,000 got $1,600. The poor got less than $5.



http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/David-R.-Francis/2010/1018/Is-the-US-system-rigged-for-the-rich

[texshelters]

27. Right you are

Take the Rich off Welfare outlines the welfare the rich get. And hey, no poor person ripped me off, or created mortgages that failed for a buck, or spilled oil in the gulf for millions, etc.

Peace,
Tex Shelters

[dmallind]

7. About the same ratio as the rich or middle class I would guess

People seem to want to assign irrelevant characteristics to groups on a subjective meritocratic scale. It makes no sense when applied in any direction. There are doubtless many many thousands of lazy welfare recipients who have no interest in work and prefer to game the system and sponge off others instead. We make ourselves ridiculous if we try to deny that, just as freepers are ridiculous when they claim the rich all made it by hard work and intellect, because obviously there are thousands of lazy trust fund babies too who are simply sponging from a relative instead of society at large.

If anything I would probably concede that a slightly larger percentage of the very poor are lazy than the lower middle class, simply because effort at work, including finding it, is more likely to be rewarded than the lack of it. But this is by no means universal. Not all people who put in great effort succeed and not all who don't are cast aside but it is one factor that might make a difference. But the wider view you take the less distinction between groups exist.

We also have to remember that causation is not axiomatic. Laziness certainly exists with poverty just as with great wealth, but neither causes the other.

[Moostache]

17. Clarification of one of you points....

First off - well said and nicely articulated. I enjoy a well written post and yours is one of the better of the day.

My only contention is with your assertion that some of the wealthy trust fund types are sponging off of relatives instead of society at large. Thanks to the current absence of the inheritance tax and the drastic cuts to in previous years, those people ARE INDEED sponging off of society at large. The money that they use to finance lives of luxury and comfort through absolutely nothing more that winning the birth lottery should be used to rebuild and maintain the one thing that allowed their parents or benefactors to make the initial money in the first place - a stable society with a (formerly) first rate infrastructure built and maintained largely through taxation.

The people who inherit their wealth are absolutely sponging off of the rest of us in every budget cut, service job reduction and government program eliminated to allow them to "keep 'their' money".

Aside from that small nit, I liked the post very much.

[dmallind]

31. a nicety, but a true one I agree. nt

[Guilded Lilly]

16. This is a country/world of comparisons.

Either or. Either rich or poor, either good or bad. Down to the smallest, pettiest comments. Wealth does not make a person rich in anything but currency. And in this life, currency rules...and judgment is fierce. It is the defining stupidity of the human race.

Until a human being is judged on the content of their soul and not the amount of money/ shape of body/ color of skin/ gender/ age/ heritage...we all lose and end up with very little of substance, anywhere, ever.

[roxiejules]

20. Amen!

Well said, guilded lilly.

[truedelphi]

18. I certainly think that sometimes being poor can led to a person

Becoming "lazy."

Remember "Me and Roger Smith" Michael Moore's first documentary? The movie has a scene where a former auto worker comes up to MM and shows him the prescriptions in his medicine tray that he now takes daily. One to control stress, one to control anxiety, one to control depression, twelve others to control the side effects of the first few - and so on.

Your health starts to go, your ability to think straight, and since you can't ever make enough when you are at minimum wage jobs to support yourself, then it begins to dawn on you - what does it matter.

Outright suicide is frowned on, but drinking too much etc is a way to prevent yourself from living to be eighty while begging on the streets and while being toothless, in pain and eating
just enough to stay alive.

And once you are at that stage, why would you attempt to be working three jobs and spending all your free time driving between one and the other?

[raccoon]

21. This post should be the start of a thread. nt

[The Philosopher]

19. Why else

aren't they greedy?

[Faygo Kid]

22. Some poor people are lazy. So are some rich people. Then there are rich "others."

About whom I cannot even describe as "people." Lazy? For sure.

[louslobbs]

23. I've worked with quite a few "lazy" wealthy people, but the people who I employ to do my landscaping

maintain my pools who I know are not rich, are some of the hardest working people I have ever met. I've watched the landscapers out in 118 degree temperatures trimming trees, bushes and the lawn, while I've watched guys who make $20 million per yr, feet up on the desk in an air conditioned office, yelling and screaming orders, while someone brings them their lunch. The "poor" are not lazy, calling them lazy is simply a Republicon dog whistle and code word to their crazy, out of touch, I got mine crowd.
Lou

[The Green Manalishi]

24. False distinction(s)

Someone who is lazy is probably more likely to be poor, unless they are born with wealth and somewhat educated in how to maintain it.
Someone who is insanely hard working is probably more likley to get rich, but might weell end up a broken mess regardless of how hard and smart they work.

The outliers at both extremes screw up any and all generalizations; there are extremely rich lazy folks and people who work 3 jobs and are still poor.

One friend from college is quite wealthy. From well before I ever knew him (we both come from middle class families, college was a public state university) it was *VERY* importatnt to him to be rich.
He's busted his butt for 25 years, invested everything he's made, and is worth many times my net worth. If he'd put the same effort into being a musician or painter he'd be an excellent painter or musician I have no doubt.

The problem is with the definitions. As much as many of us hate the cliche, it is sometimes about working 'smarter' rather than harder.

In my case, food on the table and the heating bill paid and I'm "rich"; I've got my musical instruments and plenty fo books and a good wife

[grasswire]

37. I disagree with your contention that someone who works hard is more likely to "get rich"

Yesterday I sat in a cafe and watched a waitress who is about sixty years old work the lunch rush. Staff has been cut, and she was the only wait staff in this working class joint. She worked like a dog. Back and forth, back and forth, pouring, carrying, smiling, cutting, serving. Obviously developing some problem with her feet or hips or something, but still very fast. She's been waiting tables for forty years. She'll never get rich or nothing near rich. As I left, I said to her "You must be exhausted at the end of the day." She smiled, as if to say "You don't know the half of it." She walks home after work.

Many many millions of people work like dogs and will never get rich.

[The Green Manalishi]

38. I didn't say 'would get rich'

Like I said, I know plenty of hard working poor people.
But I don't know anyone who has *gotten* wealthy without hard work.

[texshelters]

25. Rhetorical question, eh

Blaming people for their poverty when there are wealthy tax cheats, robber barons, those on the government TARP dole, those living high on the hog betting against your mortgages is ridiculous. It's an attempt to distract from the thievery of many of the wealthiest Americans.

Let's talk about the wealthy, not all but far too many, that make money off of disasters and foreclosures and suffering, and low/starvation wages in factories overseas, who make money off of those dying in mines and on oil rigs, who pollute the planet for profit...

How about we discuss and a address that, and offer people jobs. Then I will address the question of the lazy poor.

Peace,
Tex Shelters

[txlibdem]

33. It's not betting against mortgages that are designed to fail from the start

Tex, you are so right about the real "welfare queens" (the rich).

When you pay mortgage brokers more to put someone into an adjustable loan and then set the wolves loose among the sheep, what do you think the outcome will be? Then the wealthy a-holes who set this train wreck in motion got a special deal going with the investment crooks to create junk "securities" and then bet against them. Then when everything finally hit the wall only those who got "in" made money; the investment house and IIRC 4 rich a-holes who each made a billion dollars off the collapse of the house of cards they created. Oh, I didn't mention the "best" part: they sold those crap securities, the ones they knew darn well would fail and they had placed bets against, they sold them to institutional investors as "highly rated" safe investments.

Just one example of "transfer of wealth complete."

[texshelters]

39. Have you read

It Take a Pillage by Nomi Prins?

You know some of the story already.

Peace,
Tex Shelters

[txlibdem]

40. Thanks, I'll put it on the list (n/t)

[saras]

28. Nope - less lazy

I think the poor and the rich start out, on the average, just as lazy.

Lazy poor people die, lazy rich people don't.

By adulthood, the remaining poor people are less lazy.

Of course, there are always anecdotal exceptions.

[Prophet 451]

30. A very, very few maybe

If you have a system, there will always be a few who abuse that system. Human nature, I'm afraid. But cutting a single dollar from those programs is not the solution. The tiny number who abuse those programs are just the excuse that politicians use to cut off funding to the "dirty workshy" that they don't want to be paying for anyway.

[999998th word]

32. Are you talking cradle to grave -never would work a day in their lives?

I'm someone who had worked over 30 years A confluence of unfortunate physical events not of my control
coupled with my lifelong learning disability all scripted by a hostile insurance company 'DR.'my former
employer utilized to suit their purpose.Now myself and a coworker coincidentally on the same date 4 the same
basic reasons are now deemed unemployable +were terminated.Company was 'targeting'older workers with seniority
and disabilities,didnt want to deal with xtra health care costs and ADA+higher wages.Younger>cheaper pt no bennies.
This was several years ago.I had documentation but NO idea how to fight this.Now it will be so much worse for others.
People should NEVER prejudge,when they dont know the particulars.

[Prophet 451]

36. Yes, I am

I think there are a very, very few who will never work, will actively avoid work and abuse the system but I also think they are a miniscule number and that politicians inflate their numbers to give an excuse for cutting social programs.

[txlibdem]

34. Whenever they say the rich got there by working hard

That is the biggest lie ever told. The rich got their wealth by lying, cheating, conning people, skirting the law and breaking the law. To a man or woman, there has never been a "successful" person who hasn't lied, stabbed someone in the back, took credit for someone else's work (lied), cheated on their taxes, snookered someone during of a deal, etc., just to "get ahead."

The wealthy are nothing more than the best sociopaths, those that knew how many lives to ruin and how to break laws but not "take the fall" for it (that's what underlings are for).

Our society puts these psychopaths up on a pedestal when they should rightly be institutionalized and all of their assets seized just as we do with drug dealers today.

[OnionPatch]

35. The poor are not lazy any more than the general population.

In fact, they probably understand that they have to work harder than the average person just to get ahead. I've known quite a few poor people and can honestly say that a very tiny percentage of them are losers and lazy bums. Most of them are poor because of situations that they have very little control over.

The whole problem is that hard, honest work is no longer valued in our society. If you're doing unskilled labor, no matter how hard, well, you're a chump who couldn't think of some scam to rake in the bucks easier. Republicans say that people shouldn't expect "something for nothing." I hear that meme all the time from them. Well, I have news for them, that should go for employers as well.

[Demeter]

41. Grease Floats on the Top of the Stew

and is bad for your arteries.

[NothingRight]

42. Divide and conquer favors the haves over the have nots

It is, it would seem, human nature to create classifications for people to fit in, whether they are religious, racial, socioeconomic, etc. It enables the fragile mind to compartmentalize and not have to address each person as individuals, and rate people one at a time by their character and actions.

The other aspect to it is it is far easier to overwhelm people when you can divide them. This goes equally for political battles as well as in military conflict. When people unite against a cause, even the meek become mighty, so it is in the best interest of the power brokers to divide the meek into as many categories as possible, and then to pit them against each other.

The Bill of Rights is a clear example of this. All of the rights we are "given" by the Bill of Rights did not exist in the Constitution. It was only when the decision was made that not giving something to the "lesser" man could create a unified outcry that would jeopardize the entire system they had worked to create.

This tradition has continued throughout our history, and will continue until such time as we see the needs of others as at least as important as those of ourselves.

[Dj13Francis]

43. no,

But I do believe that republicans are assholes.

davidjamesfrancis.com