The cause of poverty is poor people having kids

[Skwidward]

I heard this on the radio, and I'm having a hard time finding any kind of disagreement with it. No matter how cut throat it seems, it's hard to deny.

[Melkor]

I heard this on the radio, and I'm having a hard time finding any kind of disagreement with it. No matter how cut throat it seems, it's hard to deny.

The best argument against that is historical. Americans used to have a billion kids apiece, and quality of life increased rapidly for generations. Now that Americans have started having far fewer kids the quality of life is starting to slow and some economists project the first quality of life decrease in a very long time in America very soon. It's not so much the children as it is the socio-economics/cultural factors. In certain cultures everything the parents have is divided between the children, and when you have 24 acres of land and 12 kids each kid gets two acres. The next generation gets almost nothing. Those are the types of problems that perpetuate poverty in many of these societies.

[paolo59]

The largest segment of the "poor" in the United States is indeed made up of women who have no husbands and children to raise. An 18 year old unwed mother has very little opportunity for higher education, a good job, or decent housing. Needless to say, the children in this situation start life with an incredible impediment to overcome, not that many haven't succeeded despite the obvious challenges. We pay dearly for the decisions that millions make daily. This reality is self-propogating. It is indeed a vicious cycle.

[dr_D]

at least in rural areas, poor households have children because of the labor they provide and at old age the children can take care of the parents. Because of high infant/child mortality households have many children to hedge against risk. The downside is that high birth rates tend to put pressure on limited resources.

[vegeta9000]

I heard this on the radio, and I'm having a hard time finding any kind of disagreement with it. No matter how cut throat it seems, it's hard to deny.

nope

SOMEONE has to work at mcdonalds

if "everyone was rich", someone would still be working at mcdonalds. so that guy would be poor

do you understand how economy and poverty works yet? its like natural selection on a whole other level. kill or be killed.

[DTRG]

There needs to be a top and a bottom economically, the question is how many do we want to live comfortably in between. How polarized do we want the range to be? A large middle class with few rich and few poor or few middle class with more rich and more poor? The greatest welfare for all (including education and likely lower birthrate) or the best for those who have their circumstance BY CHANCE despite not having one ounce of superiority in ability outside what was afforded to them by the environment in which they grew? Leave life to luck or even the playing field?

[EDC]

I wouldn't say poverty has one cause.

Anyway, a large population relative to resources of any kind makes a having high standard of living difficult. But what are the solutions?

1. Limit population growth: Hard to do without infringing on rights. The more benign solutions like handing out condoms are less effective and complicated by religious objections.

2. Mobility: Again hard to pull off. There are a lot of political problems with immigration for cultural and economic reasons. Also some people will claim that they have a right to remain in their poor region and that the government should help them do so such as in the Canadian Atlantic provinces.

Fortunatly there is a general trend as nations develop. There is a population boom as nutrition and healthcare improves and more children survive. This is eventually followed by a levelling off as contraceptives become more available and state run programs lesson the need for people to have kids so that they will be taken care of in old age.

[nonAtlas]

The cause of poverty is...

...Big Government creating and maintaining the Poverty Industry such that it can ensure itself a captive voting bloc. You want to suckle at The Government Teat and be sure your check is in the mail? Vote for the far-left/welfare-state ticket. And you can be sure that such politicians will see to it that your offspring see that as a normal way of life, which means the curse of poverty and twisted thinking continues from generation to generation to generation.

[Heath22]

The cause of poverty is non-whites having kids. Connect the dots fellas.

[nonAtlas]

I wouldn't say poverty has one cause.

Anyway, a large population relative to resources of any kind makes a having high standard of living difficult. But what are the solutions?

1. Limit population growth: Hard to do without infringing on rights. The more benign solutions like handing out condoms are less effective and complicated by religious objections.

2. Mobility: Again hard to pull off. There are a lot of political problems with immigration for cultural and economic reasons. Also some people will claim that they have a right to remain in their poor region and that the government should help them do so such as in the Canadian Atlantic provinces.

Fortunatly there is a general trend as nations develop. There is a population boom as nutrition and healthcare improves and more children survive. This is eventually followed by a levelling off as contraceptives become more available and state run programs lesson the need for people to have kids so that they will be taken care of in old age.

There is no lack or shortage of "resources" in this society or any society on earth where man's fundamental drive to achieve and do well is allowed to flourish. As such it is inevitably true that politicians with wrong agendas are the ones who profit via poverty and therefore want it maintained.

[The_Big_E]

No, the problem is poor people(regardless of race) having kids and perpetuating that it is OK to be poor. Several of todays richest people were born into poverty but were pushed to strive for better things.

[frankenstein]

Social Darwinism is definitely flipped on its head. ALL the upper middle class people I know want 0-2 kids, while the people I know that are struggling want a minimum of 2 kids.

Poverty is more than just having kids. It's a state of mind also. There will always be poor people and rich people, no matter the era or country in question.

[Heath22]

Several of todays richest people were born into poverty but were pushed to strive for better things.

Yes, and they are all white.

[saloman]

If being poor were a genetic limitation, then sure... I think it is false because if all of the current poor were wiped away, they would be replaced by the next most poor who would then be "the poor". The poor will always be with us.

[The_Big_E]

Yes, and they are all white.

Not 100% true. Look how many minorities go from rags to riches in the sporting world alone. Granted some "skate" through but look at Lebron James, for instance. He had virtually zero a few years ago now he is banking close to 50mil a year due to smart business choices OUTSIDE sports.

He, Tiger Woods, Michael Jordan and many others haven't relied on their talent as a sole source of income but as a method to build an empire. (some of them may not have been "Welfare Babies" but they were nowhere near what they are today.)

While it may be true the "whites" have more money in general... I'd guess if you added it all up minorities have an edge on covering the gap based on pure numbers of those who went from ghetto to having money.

[frankenstein]

Yes, and they are all white.

chip, meet shoulder. Oh that's right. They already know each other very well. I have no idea which variety you hate or love white people, but then again I don't care.

[Poofy Nesbit]

Finally, someone who recognises the fact that poor people should not reproduce beyond their means (serious)

[RIKTER]

The cause for most of Americas social problems are young uneducated woman making poor life decisions mostly in the form of having children out of wedlock and young men not taking responsibilty for their actions.

[KRANE]

nope

SOMEONE has to work at mcdonalds

if "everyone was rich", someone would still be working at mcdonalds. so that guy would be poor

do you understand how economy and poverty works yet? its like natural selection on a whole other level. kill or be killed.

Incorrect. In fact, being poor and poverty are two different. Being poor in the United States takes on a whole different meaning when you go to a Third World country. Even our homeless--our nations poorest--have a relatively better life than someone in those countries. The true cause of poverty is in fact greed!

The cause for most of Americas social problems are young uneducated woman making poor life decisions mostly in the form of having children out of wedlock and young men not taking responsibilty for their actions.

That's not the cause, that's the antecedent.

[vegeta9000]

Incorrect. In fact, being poor and poverty are two different. Being poor in the United States takes on a whole different meaning when you go to a Third World country. Even our homeless--our nations poorest--have a relatively better life than someone in those countries. The true cause of poverty is in fact greed!

that makes no sense

the cause of poverty is society itself. society HAS to have poor people who are homeless, and the ladder goes up from there to the current elite.

the ladder will always get larger.

300 years ago, the ladder went from homeless bum at the low end to owning horses, servants, and castles at the high end

300 years from now, the ladder will go from being a homeless bum at the low end to owning spaceships and mines on other planets and galactic bases at the high end

as we increase in technology, the ladder will always lengthen to a higher possible standing, but the lowest level of the ladder will still always be "homeless bum"

greed is not the cause of poverty. people are poor / homeless because they had the least amount of luck on their looks, brains, genetics, upbringing, attitude, environment, and life events compared to every other human in the world

if "all poor people stopped having children", then the stupidest of the rich children would become the new "poor people"

its natural selection. kill or be killed.

[OatsandSteak]

If I ever get to the point where I am living in poverty, homeless or just have no money, I'm going to hop on a bus, go up North and work on the oil rigs. For real.
It's a good solution for anyone

[Beatitude]

If I ever get to the point where I am living in poverty, homeless or just have no money, I'm going to hop on a bus, go up North and work on the oil rigs. For real.
It's a good solution for anyone

And not a terribly bad idea. Doesn't working on an oil rig have a pretty nice pay?

[run213]

Incorrect. In fact, being poor and poverty are two different. Being poor in the United States takes on a whole different meaning when you go to a Third World country. Even our homeless--our nations poorest--have a relatively better life than someone in those countries. The true cause of poverty is in fact greed!That's not the cause, that's the antecedent.

You sir are correct. Our poorest people would be relatively well off in most countries. A recent study showed that Many Americans who are classified as poor actually live in bigger houses,own more personal items IE tv's, cars, cell phones etc than even well to do European countries. A fact judging by this thread and the way politicians talk that few people are aware of.

[KRANE]

that makes no sense

the cause of poverty is society itself. society HAS to have poor people who are homeless, and the ladder goes up from there to the current elite.

the ladder will always get larger.

300 years ago, the ladder went from homeless bum at the low end to owning horses, servants, and castles at the high end

300 years from now, the ladder will go from being a homeless bum at the low end to owning spaceships and mines on other planets and galactic bases at the high end

as we increase in technology, the ladder will always lengthen to a higher possible standing, but the lowest level of the ladder will still always be "homeless bum"

greed is not the cause of poverty. people are poor / homeless because they had the least amount of luck on their looks, brains, genetics, upbringing, attitude, environment, and life events compared to every other human in the world

if "all poor people stopped having children", then the stupidest of the rich children would become the new "poor people"

its natural selection. kill or be killed.

On the contrary, it makes a lot of sense--you're just looking at it from the wrong point of view--there's more than enough money to solve the poverty problem in this country. As long as there's greed, and selfishness they'll be poverty.

It's not a question of what we have, it's about what we're willing to share.

If I ever get to the point where I am living in poverty, homeless or just have no money, I'm going to hop on a bus, go up North and work on the oil rigs. For real.
It's a good solution for anyone

Doesn't it cost money to "hop on a bus?"

[bassing68]

I heard this on the radio, and I'm having a hard time finding any kind of disagreement with it. No matter how cut throat it seems, it's hard to deny.

Thank you for the enlightful information, Captain Obvious. That is almost as good as the jerk weed doctor I heard on the radio who said lack of sleep was the leading cause of fatigue. Sometimes people just need to shut up and let the obvious be obvious on its own.

[SYRIANKID]

The matter is more complex than that.

Having many children (and wives) is often a sign of wealth. Many people have fewer children because they can't afford to raise them or don't want to incur the loss to personal comfort and luxury by investing in a child.

On the opposite end of the spectrum, people have many kids because they are poor and need help with their family business and paying a family member for their work is far cheaper than paying strangers. (Because the money/food stays within the family)

I think the more influencing factor is the family's perspective on large families rather than wealth.

[kcomico]

The reason there is poverty in the states at least (for the most part) is that the word "work" is a bad word in America. People don't want to work its not that they cant get a job its that they cant get the jobs they want.

thats just my 2cents.


(My family was poor and it was me and my brother now were in "middle America" so there is already proof that having at least 2 kids wont make you poor forever.)

[OatsandSteak]

And not a terribly bad idea. Doesn't working on an oil rig have a pretty nice pay?

Depends on your overtime and job but I've known a few people who have made 90k-120k annually. In lots of the places you stay in camps, which is perfect. Another good job is a B-Train driver, plus some companies will pay for your class 1 license.

And to answer your question Krane, it sure does. About 150$ to make it to Edmonton, plus some companies will fly you out there.

I'm not saying this is a reliable solution for everyone but if it came down to living on the street or actually making something out of my life, I would go make some money. You could seriously go work up there for a year or two and put a large down payment on a house.

[Beatitude]

Depends on your overtime and job but I've known a few people who have made 90k-120k annually. In lots of the places you stay in camps, which is perfect. Another good job is a B-Train driver, plus some companies will pay for your class 1 license.

And to answer your question Krane, it sure does. About 150$ to make it to Edmonton, plus some companies will fly you out there.

I'm not saying this is a reliable solution for everyone but if it came down to living on the street or actually making something out of my life, I would go make some money. You could seriously go work up there for a year or two and put a large down payment on a house.

If your motives were income, you could go even more extreme and do Alaskan crab fishing.

I heard you can make 250,000 (or even more) in a summer. Of course, the death rate is extremely high, which tends to deter people from it.

[Beatitude]

The matter is more complex than that.

Having many children (and wives) is often a sign of wealth. Many people have fewer children because they can't afford to raise them or don't want to incur the loss to personal comfort and luxury by investing in a child.

Statistics rebuke you.

On the opposite end of the spectrum, people have many kids because they are poor and need help with their family business and paying a family member for their work is far cheaper than paying strangers. (Because the money/food stays within the family)

I think the more influencing factor is the family's perspective on large families rather than wealth.

Now this is the main reason, which rarely does anything to solve the issue. They have more children in order to have the extra help, but as a result the children rarely have a chance to get much of an education (since they were conceived in the first place for the extra help) and so they don't go anywhere and end up having to repeat the pattern that their parents did, thus creating another relatively poor (or even impoverished) family.