Brad Wardell's views about technology, politics, religion, world affairs, and all sorts of politically incorrect topics.
Poverty is the result of poor choices
Published on December 2, 2006 By Draginol In Politics

A long time ago I wrote "the value of working hard".  One of the comments I made is that in my experience, having grown up around genuinely poor people that most of them are poor because, frankly, they're losers. Show me a consistently poor American and I'll show you someone who is either disabled, or more commonly a fool.

Joe Knowledge followed this with an article called "poor people are stpuid" as a response to what I had written arguing that most poor people are poor becaues of circumstance and bad luck and that I lacked compassion.

Most bleeding hearts for the poor, like Joe Knowledge, have never done very much research into the causes of poverty in America.  We have 40 years of research on the subject and time and time again the same statistics show up -- overwhelmingly, people who live in poverty are idiotic. There are exceptions but they are just that -- exceptions.

Once in awhile, someone wants to prove that if a poor person is just given a break, they can be just as successful as someone else.  Remember the moving Trading Places?  Well, in real life, everytme they run such an experiment the same result happens.

There have been numerous social examples of philanthropists giving money to the abject poor to help them only to discover it ends up squandered.

I recently came across a show called "Reversal of Fortune". In it, Showtime gave a homeless man $100,000.  The qualification was that they picked a man without any overt mental illness or drug addiction. The idea was to show that many homeless people are just victims of circumstance and that if given a break will make something of themselves.

Alas, to their surprise the Homeless man soon sqaundered the money and was back on the streets.

Which underscores what many of us have known -- taking property from people who earn it and giving it to people who don't is not just immoral but it is a waste of time.  Overwhelmingly, 1st world citizens who are living in consistent poverty are doing so due to their own faults that can't be remedied by throwing money at the situation.

That doesn't mean every single person living in poverty ended up there due to poor choices. There are disabled people. There are genuinely people who have gotten incredibly bad luck (but they won't stay in poverty). But the reality is, poverty in the United States is not something that can be cured -- not with money anyway.

 


Comments (Page 2)
3 Pages1 2 3 
on Dec 02, 2006
I can trace every serious financial situation in my short life back to a poor choice. Buying a car that I really can't afford the note on, going out drinking to chase the latest piece of tail or even spending my last few bucks on something frivolous that I just had to have. I have made some whopper poor choices in my lifetime. At the end of the day I have no one else to blame but myself. Sure, I could blame my parents for setting a poor example. I could blame the world for not giving me more but in the end it was my choice that put me it whatever pickle I got myself in.

Somewhere along the line everybody has that crucial decision to swat one way or another. I'd like to think that when it comes to the big stuff I am getting it right these days but I know that if I screw up ... I'll have no one to blame but myself.
on Dec 02, 2006
Interesting article ...

It does raise some tricky questions, however, about inherant human capacity. Are willpower, determination, and the other qualities generally needed for financial success in our society something we can work to achieve, or something that is predetermined at birth or early childhood development? And if these qualities are truely out of our control, would it not be 'right' to provide more help to the 'losers' in/of our society?

adnauseam Posted: Saturday, December 02, 2006
"Brad, your post comes across as smug and uncharitable"

He's said that himself repeatedly, you know. Didn't you see his "I'm not very nice" article?

I do agree that the solution is by no means to throw more money at them (although microlending IS a rising method for controlling poverty in developing societies, but I suppose that's a different issue).
on Dec 02, 2006
I repeat, enquiring minds wanna know...

I wonder how the experiment would go if it were reversed?
I mean, take away a random wealthy person’s wealth and see if he could make it back?


on Dec 02, 2006
If you gave me $100,000 I'd spend most of it on wine, women, and song, but I have to admit I'd squander the rest.
on Dec 02, 2006
Shovelheat: I imagine it wouldn't take long. They'd just need to open up a consultancy firm and they'd be set.
on Dec 02, 2006
I agree with this.

My mother (who I don't know well) lived on Welfare for most of my life. No one understood her apathy because BOTH her parents were hard workers and acquired much wealth in their lifetime.

They retired early, moved to Florida and built their dream home. My grandma died, then a few years later my grand father died. My mom has one sister.

My aunt gave my mother her share of the grandparents dream home (which was paid for) because my mom had 4 kids and was unwed, though shacking up. She also received two brand new paid for vehicles and half the savings account, which was enough to support her and the 4 kids, pay taxes etc for at least ten years (a lot more if frugal).

Within four years she lost everything.

She pissed away the money, took a mortgage out on the house to put in a pool, then couldn't meet the mortgage and lost the house, but not before making it almost totally worthless with filth and trash first.

I don't mind helping people who have problems, like LW's previous neighbor. But I think it is foolish to throw good money after bad. If someone is irresponsible with a little, they will be irresponsible with a lot.

I don't care how much money I have in life, I will never have enough to just throw it away.

on Dec 02, 2006

I repeat, enquiring minds wanna know...

I wonder how the experiment would go if it were reversed?
I mean, take away a random wealthy person’s wealth and see if he could make it back?

Well, in my case, I started with nothing and am considered pretty wealthy now.

In fact, I had to do it twice!

I started Stardock Systems in 1991 and it did really well. By 1996 it was making millions of dollars a year.  But then the OS/2 market collapsed.  By 1998, the company was in debt and all but 2 employees had been laid off. I had less than zero at that point.

Then I rebuilt the company as a Windows software company from scratch. No assets from the OS/2 market could be used since OS/2 was a different OS and the code couldn't be ported. It until 2002 to get back to where we were in 1996.  If I had declared bankruptcy in 1998 (which I should have really) I could have probably been back to 1996 levels by 2000 instead but I didn't want have any bed debt.

It's not very hard to make money. You just have to actually do something.

on Dec 02, 2006
It's not very hard to make money. You just have to actually do something.


So true.

I don't consider myself all that "smart" per se, but I've always been a worker. My home is paid for, I have three cars and a old Harley paid for and no debt, a son in college with tuition and room and board all paid for and so I guess I haven't done too badly. But...jeez! I'd really, really hate to start over! And by "starting over" I mean without a degree and without the conections I've made and without this white skin and male body I inhabit.

But I do appreciate your answering my question.
on Dec 03, 2006
But...jeez! I'd really, really hate to start over!


I've been forced to start over more than once. I am in the midst of a start over now. It really sucks.

It's not very hard to make money. You just have to actually do something.


You left out a point. You have to do the right something.
on Dec 03, 2006
How else should one express concern over the homeless man's plight. It will not do to assum,e that the man is homeless because he refuses to work. In these days of outsourcing people are loosing their jobs without much ado.
on Dec 03, 2006
Brad,

Dunno if you caught this one, but it's food for thought in the same vein:

http://gideon-macleish.joeuser.com/index.asp?AID=137651
on Dec 03, 2006
I've been forced to start over more than once. I am in the midst of a start over now. It really sucks.


I've been forced to start over a few times, too. Had to reinvent myself as a factory worker, middle management, retail sales (not that hard a transition), miner, writer, politician, IT pro. Don't know where the road goes from here, but it seems like I'm on a good path.
on Dec 03, 2006
But wouldn't it be cool to plop a waelthy person down in some far distant city with nothing and see how he'd do? I mean, he can't use ANYTHING from his former state to give him a leg up, like his/her degrees or people they know.
I'd like to see if they could go from homelessness to dishwasher to busboy to wait person to...on and on until they make another fortune. Or would they find that, hey! This shit's a lot harder than it looks! and fail and lve in a cardboard box.

Yeah, that would be a cool experiment
on Dec 03, 2006
What's really sad is when this happens in real life. Link
on Dec 03, 2006
But wouldn't it be cool to plop a waelthy person down in some far distant city with nothing and see how he'd do? I mean, he can't use ANYTHING from his former state to give him a leg up, like his/her degrees or people they know.
I'd like to see if they could go from homelessness to dishwasher to busboy to wait person to...on and on until they make another fortune. Or would they find that, hey! This shit's a lot harder than it looks! and fail and lve in a cardboard box.

Yeah, that would be a cool experiment


I've wondered that myself, shovel. Being a person who has worked his way up basically from zero to lower middle class on several occasions (TWICE in the past four years!), I've wondered if the wealthy could do that.
3 Pages1 2 3