Poverty Creates More Poverty

OldTrapper

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2010
Messages
792
Location
Central Oregon South of Bend
http://www.nbcnews.com/health/poor-people-arent-stupid-just-overwhelmed-study-finds-8C11030890
IMO, the Founders understood this far better then most today which is why they were “egalitarians” in philosophy. Adam Smith, in his “Wealth of Nations” also understood this as did Thomas Paine in his “Rights of Man”. One thing they all shared in common was their distaste for, and distrust of, corporations which they believed led to more poverty.

http://www.nbcnews.com/health/poor-people-arent-stupid-just-overwhelmed-study-finds-8C11030890

To check out this theory in a real-world situation, the researchers went to rural India, where sugarcane farmers are paid just once a year for their harvests. They are flush with cash right after the harvest, and pretty broke the last month before the harvest.

The farmers made more poor decisions in real life when faced with a financial crunch – they pawned more items – a truly awful financial decision – and were twice as likely to borrow money.

“This cannot be explained by differences in time available, nutrition, or work effort,” Shafir’s team wrote in their report.

“Nor can it be explained with stress: Although farmers do show more stress before harvest, that does not account for diminished cognitive performance. Instead, it appears that poverty itself reduces cognitive capacity.”

There’s no question that many poor people make poor decisions, the researchers add.

“The poor use less preventive health care, fail to adhere to drug regimens, are tardier and less likely to keep appointments, are less productive workers, less attentive parents, and worse managers of their finances,” they write, citing studies that support all their statements.

“These behaviors are troubling in their own right, but they are particularly troubling because they can further deepen poverty.”

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/07/27/status-and-stress/?_r=2

What’s the difference? Scientists have settled on an oddly subjective explanation: the more helpless one feels when facing a given stressor, they argue, the more toxic that stressor’s effects.

That sense of control tends to decline as one descends the socioeconomic ladder, with potentially grave consequences. Those on the bottom are more than three times as likely to die prematurely as those at the top. They’re also more likely to suffer from depression, heart disease and diabetes. Perhaps most devastating, the stress of poverty early in life can have consequences that last into adulthood.

Even those who later ascend economically may show persistent effects of early-life hardship. Scientists find them more prone to illness than those who were never poor. Becoming more affluent may lower the risk of disease by lessening the sense of helplessness and allowing greater access to healthful resources like exercise, more nutritious foods and greater social support; people are not absolutely condemned by their upbringing. But the effects of early-life stress also seem to linger, unfavorably molding our nervous systems and possibly even accelerating the rate at which we age.

http://www.slate.com/articles/busin...study_shows_money_troubles_make_decision.html
 
Werbung:
Corporations Work is evil. It's healthier to sit on your butt and let Uncle Sam take care of you.
 
Corporations Work is evil. It's healthier to sit on your butt and let Uncle Sam take care of you.


Obviously you did not read the article, and as sch you are the perfect example of the mentally deprived referenced to in the two articles I posted in the other thread.

http://forward.com/articles/129678/are-corporations-evil/

Imagine if these corporate entities really were people, what kind of people they would be. Enormously powerful, and richer than the wealthiest billionaire. Nearly omnipresent, with outposts of information gathering and product distribution around the globe. And yet, totally, animalistically greedy, with the single focus of profit maximization. If corporations were people, they would be massively powerful ogres, direly in need of religious or moral instruction.

Yet, mainstream religion fails to provide it. While every priest and rabbi rails against individual greed, individual ethical failure and individual transgression, few do so when it comes to the most powerful “persons” on the planet. Maybe to preach in this way, to demand that the world’s most powerful “persons” be ethically accountable the same way you and I ought to be, feels too political, or perhaps just too abstract, for the masses in the pews. But by opting out, religion becomes a kind of sideshow to the events that truly shape our time, like a quaint old chapel dwarfed by the surrounding strip malls.

What are the consequences for the rest of us? Left untouched by religious and moral reasoning, corporations have indeed run amok — again, not because villains staff them, but because the system itself is, according to the traditional Jewish definition, evil; it is yetzer hara by law.

You might even look into why the Founding Fathers hated corporations:

http://blogs.hbr.org/fox/2010/04/what-the-founding-fathers-real.html

But then, people such as yourself would have hated the Founding Fathers:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/harvey-wasserman/hey-teagop-ben-franklins-_b_746364.html
 
Its possible that religions seldom address corporations because they, like animals, have no souls to save. Dogs I've owned are rather greedy. They are quite willing to steal the food of the others and will when the opportunities present themselves. Cats even moreso in my experience.
 
Its possible that religions seldom address corporations because they, like animals, have no souls to save. Dogs I've owned are rather greedy. They are quite willing to steal the food of the others and will when the opportunities present themselves. Cats even moreso in my experience.


And yet you think you are better then the dogs, or cats? Not really. You just have the ability to be so, and the choice to decide not to be so.
 
And yet you think you are better then the dogs, or cats? Not really. You just have the ability to be so, and the choice to decide not to be so.
hmmm... am I better than dogs or cats ? I have abilities dogs, cats, clams or rhinos do not, God seems to have decided that I am supeior and gave the animals to mankind for our use. That being said I prefer the company of my dog far more than that of a great many people I have met. Its not really so much a value judgement like you are so fond of but an acceptance of truth that you claim to support.
 
hmmm... am I better than dogs or cats ? I have abilities dogs, cats, clams or rhinos do not, God seems to have decided that I am supeior and gave the animals to mankind for our use. That being said I prefer the company of my dog far more than that of a great many people I have met. Its not really so much a value judgement like you are so fond of but an acceptance of truth that you claim to support.


Even Christ was "fond of value judgements" as were the Apostles. All one has t do is read the Bible to see that. However, you said nothing that contradicted what I said, as usual. Besides that, you have not abilities that dogs, and cats, etc., do not have. You have only the abilities your particular physical structure, opposing thumbs for example, allow you to have. Then you have the intellect I referred to in the place of instinct.

Of course, the next step is the ability to use that intellect.
 
Even Christ was "fond of value judgements" as were the Apostles. All one has t do is read the Bible to see that. However, you said nothing that contradicted what I said, as usual. Besides that, you have not abilities that dogs, and cats, etc., do not have. You have only the abilities your particular physical structure, opposing thumbs for example, allow you to have. Then you have the intellect I referred to in the place of instinct.

Of course, the next step is the ability to use that intellect.
judge not lest ye be judged. need to work on your reading comprehension when you pick up the Good Book or anything else for that matter.
 
Liberals create poverty. Did yall know Martian Luther King was a republican?
255250_10150992128642740_1659064199_n.jpg

High rise housing and public education was not his idea.
 
I believe Christians like myself are falling short..But I believe that the idea of true “social justice” can only exist as a result of righteousness. As far as social equality is concerned, there are two elements of righteousness that must exist for it to take place. First, mankind must learn to put off selfishness and develop true charity. With charity, the pure love of Christ, in his heart, man will look upon those who stand in need of assistance and give to them willingly, out of a sense of compassion and love. A charitable person is not compelled to do for others, he does so as a byproduct of the Christ-like attribute he has developed within. Yet I am a Conservative

Second, social justice cannot be achieved until men are righteous to the degree that each exercises self-sufficiency to the full measure of their ability. There are some in our society who are content to live off the labor of others. Whether this comes as a result of laziness, a misplaced sense of entitlement, or any other reason, it is an obstacle to achieving equality and justice in our society and it is a WRONG. When possessions are taken from he who earned it and given to one who did not earn it, but was capable of doing so, justice is not present.
Yet I am a Conservative...

The presence of these two elements of righteousness, charity and self-sufficiency, are essential to real justice and equality in society. We read in the scriptures of two examples where Zion societies were achieved; the City of Enoch and the Nephite nation described in Fourth Nephi. In both of these cases the society that was achieved was the direct result of righteousness. I say that the righteousness of these peoples included both the element of charity and self-sufficiency. It was not the product of government intervention.

I believe that real social justice can only attained by following this pattern. Efforts to achieve social justice through any kind of redistributive measures cannot succeed. There is a serious problem with government and social policies enacted to achieve social justice and universal equality. Since righteousness cannot be legislated or forced upon man, neither then can the fruits of righteousness be enjoyed as a consequence of government. There are several problems that arise when a government attempts to force equality in society.
 
Werbung:
MLK idea was everybody gets a fair chance to make in in this world. Democrats idea is give em everything. Everything for free.
 
Back
Top