Is life is actually more expensive for poor people?

[katya422]

Being poor is a choice for most people in America

The amount of economic mobility here in insane

If you're born poor and die poor you most likely made bad decisions over and over again

Actually the US doesn't have such great economic mobility. Your odds are better in other countries including Canada.

https://www.economist.com/graphic-de...-their-country

Seems like countries with government health care of some kind TBH.

[Rebel012]

So the whole purpose of inflation is to keep the poor, poor?

And with the shortage of full time work according to your post can you explain why work visas are given to people from different countries to work positions that employers have an already hard time trying to fill.

First, I didn't say that the 'purpose of inflation' was anything. I said that a by product of monetary policy designed to combat inflation is unemployment. Any economist will acknowledge this. Secondly, work visas are given to those skilled in narrow areas or, sometimes, by employers who want to get away with higher rates of exploitation than would be possible with American workers.

Do hard work, skill, education and intelligence all play a role in upward mobility? Of course, but so does random chance and luck, as has been mentioned. Also, for every success story of rags to riches, there are cases where members of the working, middle and even upper middle classes fall into poverty, often through no fault of their own (think Enron).

[ashin1]

First, I didn't say that the 'purpose of inflation' was anything. I said that a by product of monetary policy designed to combat inflation is unemployment. Any economist will acknowledge this. Secondly, work visas are given to those skilled in narrow areas or, sometimes, by employers who want to get away with higher rates of exploitation than would be possible with American workers.

Do hard work, skill, education and intelligence all play a role in upward mobility? Of course, but so does random chance and luck, as has been mentioned. Also, for every success story of rags to riches, there are cases where members of the working, middle and even upper middle classes fall into poverty, often through no fault of their own (think Enron).

Damn you and wincel put way too much stake on this thing called “luck”

Those who know how to effectively play the cards they are dealt, come across luck more often then the one who don’t.

[Rebel012]

Damn you and wincel put way too much stake on this thing called “luck”

Those who know how to effectively play the cards they are dealt, come across luck more often then the one who don’t.

Depends how loosely you define luck, and what categories we're discussing. I'll acknowledge that education, hard work and intelligence can often determine the difference between working class and reasonably wealthy. However, when it comes to the difference between say a millionaire and a billionaire? Pretty much all of that can be attributed to luck and timing, as certain billionaires like Mark Cuban have even acknowledged.

[ashin1]

Depends how loosely you define luck, and what categories we're discussing. I'll acknowledge that education, hard work and intelligence can often determine the difference between working class and reasonably wealthy. However, when it comes to the difference between say a millionaire and a billionaire? Pretty much all of that can be attributed to luck and timing, as certain billionaires like Mark Cuban have even acknowledged.

I find it interesting how you and wincel both used these exaggerated examples to prove your it’s all about luck point.

For starters, who gives a **** if you were a multi millionaire vs billionaire, life will be relatively easy and free time is plentiful as working is simply just an option, and buying your way out of time consuming problems isn’t an issue.

But as the thread title states we are talking about the poor.
Poor people need more than just luck to get out of their hole. And I don’t know why you 2 fail to acknowledge this.

[gunshow101]

its hard to monetize stupidity.

[wincel]

I find it interesting how you and wincel both used these exaggerated examples to prove your it’s all about luck point.

For starters, who gives a **** if you were a multi millionaire vs billionaire, life will be relatively easy and free time is plentiful as working is simply just an option, and buying your way out of time consuming problems isn’t an issue.

But as the thread title states we are talking about the poor.
Poor people need more than just luck to get out of their hole. And I don’t know why you 2 fail to acknowledge this.

I don't know why you are ignoring that luck is the primary factor here. I gave reasonable explanations for why that is the case.

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com...n-we-realized/

You don't want to admit the truth for whatever reason. Listen. It is good to be smart, hard working, talented, creative, ambitious, wise with your money, etc. And these things are likely to make you wealthier than someone without these things. But they aren't guarantees of wealth. Luck is a larger determinant.

[Rebel012]

I used that example to illustrate that the accumulation of wealth doesn't always follow a linear logic of hard work=money. The same point holds when discussing lower classes. But ok, let's talk about the poor. I never said that all they need to get out of their position is luck. In fact, if you read my initial post I was pointing out that there are institutional and structural factors at work in society that can serve as barriers to upward mobility, and these barriers primarily affect the poor. So actually the import of my post was that the existence of poverty has less to do with laziness or luck and more to do with the normal functioning of a system.

[ashin1]

I don't know why you are ignoring that luck is the primary factor here. I gave reasonable explanations for why that is the case.

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com...n-we-realized/

You don't want to admit the truth for whatever reason. Listen. It is good to be smart, hard working, talented, creative, ambitious, wise with your money, etc. And these things are likely to make you wealthier than someone without these things. But they aren't guarantees of wealth. Luck is a larger determinant.

Persistence is the largest determinant.

You can’t win the lotto if you aren’t buying tickets.

Same goes with landing good jobs.

This luck thing you are trying to push so hard is getting old.

The majority of the people, that I know personally, who are still poor, are in that situation due to dumb purchasing/life decisions.

Perfect example:

An old roommate of mine from back in the day was 28. He worked as a mechanic for cash under the table, and probably brought home 400ish a week. His brother was my primary roommate, and only charged him $200 a month for rent, no utilities. He didn't pay taxes, he drove a car that was uninsured, and he did not have healthcare. Even though he had plenty of excess cash each month, after rent, he was still without food the majority of the time, due to stupid purchasing decisions. He bought a 12-24 pack a day, he smoked 2 packs a day, spent money on scratch offs, and I'm positive he was spending money on other substances.

Nearly every night, while I was cooking/eating, he would groan about how hungry he was, and beg for food. At one point a neighbor came by to ask if these 2 pups she had found were ours. They weren't, but this guy decided he needed to "save" one of them. That poor dog probably only ate 1 meal a day, never got it's shots, and never left the house.

This guy would literally go hungry, and let his dog(that he had no business taking in) go hungry, so he had cigarettes and beer. Then he would cry and complain about how unfair life was, and how everyone was trying to chit on him.


The same applies to people who have kids before climbing out of poverty, put themselves in positions to pay fines constantly for things like moving violations/driving without a license/etc, spend the entirety of their paychecks on decorative basketball shoes, etc, etc, etc.






To answer the op plainly, no, for most folks out there, unless you are factoring in for idiotic purchasing/spending habits.

Your first sentence and your last sentence contradicts each other.

How can you disagree with the OP stating poor people do not have more underlying expenses(assuming time is given a form of monetary value).

You say most poor people you know are poor because of bad habits and uneducated choices. But then you go and say op is incorrect, yet you try to tie it to people who are more than likely your average wagies, who have full time jobs and steady income.

I used that example to illustrate that the accumulation of wealth doesn't always follow a linear logic of hard work=money. The same point holds when discussing lower classes. But ok, let's talk about the poor. I never said that all they need to get out of their position is luck. In fact, if you read my initial post I was pointing out that there are institutional and structural factors at work in society that can serve as barriers to upward mobility, and these barriers primarily affect the poor. So actually the import of my post was that the existence of poverty has less to do with laziness or luck and more to do with the normal functioning of a system.

But enabling abusers of the system and pandering votes from them has nothing to do with the existence of poverty?

[CommonPheasant]

This sounds just as bad as the “poor people can’t afford to eat healthy and exercise” myth.

[wincel]

Persistence is the largest determinant.

You can’t win the lotto if you aren’t buying tickets.

Same goes with landing good jobs.

This luck thing you are trying to push so hard is getting old.



Your first sentence and your last sentence contradicts each other.

How can you disagree with the OP stating poor people do not have more underlying expenses(assuming time is given a form of monetary value).

You say most poor people you know are poor because of bad habits and uneducated choices. But then you go and say op is incorrect, yet you try to tie it to people who are more than likely your average wagies, who have full time jobs and steady income.





But enabling abusers of the system and pandering votes from them has nothing to do with the existence of poverty?

Persistence is important, but it is not sufficient. You basically have to be lucky. Persistence helps.

I get it. You have your narrative to spin. You want to validate the idea that you are somehow better than some others. I don't even know if you are wealthy, but you probably aren't. Not sure what we are arguing as you have acknowledged the role of luck, but you want to minimize it and pretend it isn't the largest factor. Whatever. You do you. Believe what you want to believe. If it makes you feel better to think poor people deserve exactly where they are in life and that they are somehow less persistent, talented, intelligent, or whatever else than you or the wealthy, be my guest. But you're wrong, and your head is up your ass.

One day, hopefully you will pull it out of your ass and recognize the role random chance played in your existence.

[ashin1]

Persistence is important, but it is not sufficient. You basically have to be lucky and persistent.

Being persistent puts you much more above someone who is just purely banking on luck. As the person who is persistent for the sake of never giving up will be exposed to more opportunities.

Now we are talking about odds.

Persistence puts the odds in your favour, therefore increasing the likihood of your precious luck

[wincel]

Because I don't consider booze/lotto tickets/tobacco to be necessary expenses. I consider those things to be frivolous things that idiots waste money on. Those also aren't things that only the poor waste money on, but they end up much more significant to the poor in relation to their overall income.

To put it simply, being poor does not, imo, make life more expensive. But poor people tend to waste money on really frivolous purchases, which keeps them in poverty.

Being poor certainly does make life more expensive. Consider the opportunity cost of public transportation, preparing your own meals, eating unhealthy food (because healthier food is generally more expensive), needing to work multiple jobs just to get by (which means less free time to develop new skills or search for ways out of the situation), etc.

[wincel]

Being persistent puts you much more above someone who is just purely banking on luck. As the person who is persistent for the sake of never giving up will be exposed to more opportunities.

Now we are talking about odds.

Persistence puts the odds in your favour, therefore increasing the likihood of your precious luck

I never said one shouldn't strive or hope to be hard working, creative, intelligent, talented, opportunistic, etc...all these things help you make slightly more money on average. My point was that you cannot guarantee yourself a route out of poverty. The single most important factor is luck.

[ashin1]

Because I don't consider booze/lotto tickets/tobacco to be necessary expenses. I consider those things to be frivolous things that idiots waste money on. Those also aren't things that only the poor waste money on, but they end up much more significant to the poor in relation to their overall income.

To put it simply, being poor does not, imo, make life more expensive. But poor people tend to waste money on really frivolous purchases, which keeps them in poverty.

I don’t think you are wrong by any means. But lettuce beef cereal, some poor people will choose to live that way till they die, and in turn never getting out of their self created pit, will result in more expenses needing to be paid out in order to live.

[wincel]

I don’t think you are wrong by any means. But lettuce beef cereal, some poor people will choose to live that way till they die, and in turn never getting out of their self created pit, will result in more expenses needing to be paid out in order to live.

Sure. Some will. A lot of rich people have the same habits. A lot of rich people gamble, do drugs, etc. So, if you want to say those decisions are why their lives are where they are, you would be incorrect. Doing drugs and being irresponsible is more likely to ruin your finances than help them, but the spread for drug users is pretty all over the place. For some reason, people tend to forget that.

[cman1787]

there is no such thing as 'luck', but there is 'cause and effect'. each of our present circumstances in life are entirely due to the effects of our past actions.

[ashin1]

I never said one shouldn't strive or hope to be hard working, creative, intelligent, talented, opportunistic, etc...all these things help you make slightly more money on average. My point was that you cannot guarantee yourself a route out of poverty. The single most important factor is luck.

Fine.

Luck is very important determant for success and a good life. And we shouldn’t be so judgemental of others.

Spoiler!

however, it is up to one’s own effort to increase their probability of jumping on opportunities therefore individuals are actually in control of how lucky they truly are

[wincel]

there is no such thing as 'luck', but there is 'cause and effect'. each of our present circumstances in life are entirely due to the effects of our past actions.

What I mean by "luck" is the string of outcomes due to random chance. I don't mean some inherent trait that makes one obtain favorable results. I am not superstitious.

[wincel]

Fine.

Luck is very important determant for success and a good life. And we shouldn’t be so judgemental of others.

Spoiler!

however, it is up to one’s own effort to increase their probability of jumping on opportunities therefore individuals are actually in control of how lucky they truly are

Certainly. Being opportunistic helps, and it is good advice to anyone to be persistent. I won't argue with you there. It's just that guy working 3 minimum wage jobs to get by probably is persistent. He is probably trying really hard and not giving up. But he is stuck poor. Don't tell him he isn't trying or that he is somehow inferior. That's all I am saying. Poverty is often a kind of trap too. Most humans live in poverty. That's something to think about.

Ofc being poor in America still puts you way ahead of most other places on this Earth. The fact that we have obese poor people and people who fight to come here with absolutely nothing and take the lowest tier jobs should tell you that life here is actually pretty good. In other countries, the poor literally starve to death. We have such an abundance of food here that starvation is not very common. There are some abused elderly and children who starve to death, but for the most part, we have social programs in place dedicated to preventing the starvation of others. If you live in a city, you can go around and if you really look ill and look like you are wasting away, people WILL buy you a sandwich. It's not like India or China where people will step over your rotting body and continue on with their day like nothing happened. Most Americans who have lived in poverty still know that it is better here than parts of Africa or Asia. I see a lot of homeless in my city, and they all appear well fed in spite of living in poverty.

[cman1787]

What I mean by "luck" is the string of outcomes due to random chance. I don't mean some inherent trait that makes one obtain favorable results. I am not superstitious.

there is no such thing as random chance either, but since we can't remember or trace the cause we call it 'luck' or 'chance'

[MediocreGains]

Of course. Small increases in the cost of living, such as gas, food, and rent, will have a much higher impact on people who don't have a lot of money in the first place. Beef, for instance, has basically doubled in price in the last 10 years or so. Wages haven't gone up at the same rate.

I know poor people, they are all poor because they spend their time unwisely as well as their money. so no I don't think so, I think poor people just make poor decisions in almost every aspect.

like having kids when you can't afford them. and on top of that while you're paying off the loan that you took out to have your first kid you have another kid. and then you need an expensive big vehicle to haul these kids around and then you need a nice garage to store said car... so on and so forth

A poor person who saves money is still going to be poor, just a bit less so. And that depending on if he's even able to save money in the first place.

You've heard the phrase "Being poor is expensive," yes? It's true.

You can't afford quality products (necessities like a car, shoes, decent computer) that will actually last you a while, and maintenance replacements end up occurring more often and costing more in the long run. You probably live in a food desert and in a lower socio-economic neighborhood where you buy things at convenience stores that are far more expensive than say, Kroger or Wegmans.

It's easy to save money when you have money. It's easy to get to the cheaper store. It's easier to buy a lot of what is cheap to save for the future. It's easy to cook because you have the appropriate tools and appliances. Its easy to choose because you can still get the other thing if necessary. Man, I remember going to an actual grocery store would literally take me half a day, and even then could only bring back what I could carry myself on the bus. Being poor is not only more expensive but it is littered with hidden obstacles that are invisible from the glorious heights of middle class American security, and those are usually the same people who essentially have the Paris Hilton "Stop Being Poor" condescending attitudes. The same people here saying "Well you're just using your time unwisely." Yeah. I used my time suuuuuuper unwisely by working full time while getting my MBA. Fuk outta here.

I do very well for myself now, but years ago I was in the chit. It sucks.

This.

Saving money is particularly easy when you have money, especially because poor and rich people have the same basic needs. If basic needs take up all your funds or more, then saving money is impossible.

People always talk about how the poor deserve to be poor and the rich deserve to be rich and so on, but the reality is that there very few self-made people who raised themselves up from poverty.

[ashin1]

Certainly. Being opportunistic helps, and it is good advice to anyone to be persistent. I won't argue with you there. It's just that guy working 3 minimum wage jobs to get by probably is persistent. He is probably trying really hard and not giving up. But he is stuck poor. Don't tell him he isn't trying or that he is somehow inferior. That's all I am saying. Poverty is often a kind of trap too. Most humans live in poverty. That's something to think about.

So now we have common ground, explain to me how is luck actually luck if you have control of amount of opportunities you are exposed too?

“Oh he is so lucky to have that opportunity to get such a good job”

Takes credit away from the fact that he may have in fact did night classes to upgrade employable skills/knowledge, spend 12 hours a day for weeks and months getting his resume out and getting good at being interveiwed etc

This is why i think luck is not the most appropriate word to use.

[wincel]

there is no such thing as random chance either, but since we can't remember or trace the cause we call it 'luck' or 'chance'

There actually is if you bring quantum theory into it. But if we want to be technical about it, you are right that for macroscopic processes we attribute these outcomes to chance even though the entire system is approximately deterministic and we do not have the models or data to make the predictions. Actually, if you scrutinize it, the random chance played major roles. After all, when traced back far enough in time to the initial conditions, quantum randomness played a huge role in what we see now in the universe. So, even if the system now seems approximately deterministic at large scales, it was fundamentally the outcome of randomness.

[wincel]

So now we have common ground, explain to me how is luck actually luck if you have control of amount of opportunities you are exposed too?

“Oh he is so lucky to have that opportunity to get such a good job”

Takes credit away from the fact that he may have in fact did night classes to upgrade employable skills/knowledge, spend 12 hours a day for weeks and months getting his resume out and getting good at being interveiwed etc

This is why i think luck is not the most appropriate word to use.

Because the outcomes of those opportunities are not in your control. For every guy like the one you described there are like 5 who do not get the job or perhaps even any job in that field and end up trapped in a wagecuck life.

[ashin1]

I assume you don't mean $ for $, because that's likely not even close to accurate. How many poor people live how they please, and utilize the ER for their healthcare, with 0 intent to ever pay a medical bill in their lives? They may end up spending money on more frivolous things, but I don't see how they could end up spending more money in the long run, than someone who is not poor. Public transit is also far less expensive than the running costs of a car.

Transit for example, yes it is cheaper to get a bus pass, but the amount of extra time you spend waiting at bus stops, waiting for other people to get on/off it all cumulates over years.

It may not be $ to $, but I think despite our difference we can both agree time has a high value than money as you can always make more money but never generate more time.
So In a sense that’s why I think being poor is expensive.

As another poster mentioned, poor health is also a result of poverty. And medical bills add up and so does all the treatments and all the time spent waiting in hospitals, making it to different appointments. And just the extra hindrance being sick plays on someone slows them down even further so now more time is being spend.

[ashin1]

Because the outcomes of those opportunities are not in your control. For every guy like the one you described there are like 5 who do not get the job or perhaps even any job in that field and end up trapped in a wagecuck life.

So if the outcome is not favourable why not try again.

Persistence is key

[wincel]

Transit for example, yes it is cheaper to get a bus pass, but the amount of extra time you spend waiting at bus stops, waiting for other people to get on/off it all cumulates over years.

It may not be $ to $, but I think despite our difference we can both agree time has a high value than money as you can always make more money but never generate more time.
So In a sense that’s why I think being poor is expensive.

As another poster mentioned, poor health is also a result of poverty. And medical bills add up and so does all the treatments and all the time spent waiting in hospitals, making it to different appointments. And just the extra hindrance being sick plays on someone slows them down even further so now more time is being spend.

I completely agree about the time thing too, and it's something a lot of people don't understand. For example, videogames turn out to be one of the most expensive hobbies. Why? Because they sink away HOURS of your time. While, when you play sports, you can get tired and naturally stop, you can easily piss away 16+ hours in a gaming marathon session. I have about a year played in world of warcraft, and that's not even that much compared to other people I know. W T F? That's an entire year of real life time wasted in the game. I got some entertainment out of it, but most of the time, I was just going through the motions. The hidden cost is in the time we waste. It's the same with misc. I spend way too much time on here. It brings me some satisfaction socially discussing ideas that I am not allowed to talk about IRL, and the value of that seems to trump the costs, but it is a costly hobby.

[wincel]

So if the outcome is not favourable why not try again.

Persistence is key

Some do. Some try over and over and over again and don't make it.

Now, in my case, I know I don't try hard enough and I sort of gave up to an extent. I would say I somewhat deserve where I am at in life...I don't deserve the things that happened to me, but I could have made some better decisions and been better off. I wasn't as opportunistic as I should have been, and I chose the wrong career paths. But there are a lot of others who do not deserve where they are. They try, but can't get out. I don't think you should write off the poor entirely is what I am saying. Judge the individuals. And don't judge them unless you really know them well because otherwise you don't know the life they have led.

[MediocreGains]

Sure. Some will. A lot of rich people have the same habits. A lot of rich people gamble, do drugs, etc. So, if you want to say those decisions are why their lives are where they are, you would be incorrect. Doing drugs and being irresponsible is more likely to ruin your finances than help them, but the spread for drug users is pretty all over the place. For some reason, people tend to forget that.

I actually agree with wincel for once. I've known a lot of incredibly wealthy people in my life, and this idea that that the poor splurge while the rich know how to save is ridiculous. I'm guessing it's because most of the posters here haven't known a lot of rich people. If anything, most of the rich and successful people I've known make even more frivolous purchases. Many also drink excessively, gamble, etc. These habits can even be bigger because they are fueled by more money. The difference is that a $300 bottle of whiskey isn't a big deal to a millionaire or even a guy who makes six figures. Even a cheap bottle of malt liquor, on the other hand, is a big deal to someone who makes $12 an hour. Of course, you can say buying that bottle was a frivolous purchase. Same with lottery tickets. Let's say a poor person spends $20 a month on lottery tickets. Let's say that money is saved instead. That results in a grand total of $240 saved in a year. It's better than nothing, but that's a minuscule amount of money in the end. What exactly can be done with that? Buy 1 stock of Apple? Put it in savings so it can earn a penny a year?

The vast majority of people stay within the class they were born in. Even this thread mostly consists of posters who were born in middle class families and stayed middle class. If you happen to be the rare exception who was born to drug addicted trailer trash but somehow raised yourself up through your own efforts, then good for you, but you're the extreme rarity. If you were born in a chit family that taught poor values, went to a chit school, and was born of middling intelligence, how exactly are you going to learn to not be poor? That's the case with most truly poor people.