Poor People

[Dagoth Ur]

All right, somebody explain this to me:

1) Are poor people lazy?
2) Do poor people choose to be poor by working in low-paying jobs?
3) Is salary or wealth a good measure of genetic fitness (including such measures as intelligence)?
4) Is it inevitable in a capitalist system that some people will always be at the bottom, no matter how much you inflict genocide/eugenics on the poor?
5) Suppose the minimum wage was eliminated. Employers would be able to afford to hire more workers. Would that increase or decrease the amount of people who are poor?

 

[Barb]

The answer to the first two questions is 'no' as far as I'm concerned. I know people who work two (and sometimes three jobs) just to make ends meet. That's hardly lazy by anyone's definition. Nobody wants to be poor, but some do fall into poverty through the death of their spouse (the primary breadwinner) or through catastrophic illness or injury.

 

[Mozz]

All right, somebody explain this to me:

1) Are poor people lazy?
On average, moreso than middle class folk.

2) Do poor people choose to be poor by working in low-paying jobs?
Most of them choose to be poor by making bad financial/life decisions.

3) Is salary or wealth a good measure of genetic fitness (including such measures as intelligence)?
I'd say it's a combination of salary and profession. But salary alone should have a decent correlation with intelligence.

4) Is it inevitable in a capitalist system that some people will always be at the bottom, no matter how much you inflict genocide/eugenics on the poor?
Some people will always be at the bottom, but that bottom will have it much better and will contribute more to society.

5) Suppose the minimum wage was eliminated. Employers would be able to afford to hire more workers. Would that increase or decrease the amount of people who are poor?
Decrease. More people would be employed, and the prices of goods would drop, giving people more purchasing power than before.

 

[Girafarig_Magcargo]

All right, somebody explain this to me:

1) Are poor people lazy?
On average, moreso than middle class folk.

2) Do poor people choose to be poor by working in low-paying jobs?
Most of them choose to be poor by making bad financial/life decisions.

3) Is salary or wealth a good measure of genetic fitness (including such measures as intelligence)?
I'd say it's a combination of salary and profession. But salary alone should have a decent correlation with intelligence.

4) Is it inevitable in a capitalist system that some people will always be at the bottom, no matter how much you inflict genocide/eugenics on the poor?
Some people will always be at the bottom, but that bottom will have it much better and will contribute more to society.

5) Suppose the minimum wage was eliminated. Employers would be able to afford to hire more workers. Would that increase or decrease the amount of people who are poor?
Decrease. More people would be employed, and the prices of goods would drop, giving people more purchasing power than before.

But if the wages decrease, then the poor still have a very limited option in what they can purchase. Course, any job is better than none.

 

[Roses Ablaze]

Without minimum wage, wouldn't companies hire workers for like $.02 a day? I know workers could just quit their job if they have poor conditions, but then if one company treated their workers like crap and made a good profit wouldn't all coperations have an incentive to do that?

Sorry, I only know a limited amount about the economy.

 

[Dagoth Ur]

Decrease. More people would be employed, and the prices of goods would drop, giving people more purchasing power than before.

Why would the prices of goods drop? Would supply increase that much?

 

[Mozz]

Why would the prices of goods drop? Would supply increase that much?

The price of labor drops, thus competition drives down prices.

 

[Murgatroyd]

The price of labor drops, thus competition drives down prices.

Only for products whose production involves primarily minimum-wage workers. Given that most manufacturing jobs pay significantly better than minimum wage, it seems to me that the effect would be less than you claim.

 

[Mozz]

Only for products whose production involves primarily minimum-wage workers. Given that most manufacturing jobs pay significantly better than minimum wage, it seems to me that the effect would be less than you claim.

Noted.

 

[The Dude]

1) Are poor people lazy?
Sometimes. Often poverty has nothing to do with how hard people work, though. Other conditions play a much greater role in what a person makes.
2) Do poor people choose to be poor by working in low-paying jobs?
The high paying jobs often require a college degree. Poor people rarely go to college because it is so expensive nowadays.
3) Is salary or wealth a good measure of genetic fitness (including such measures as intelligence)?
Maybe. But it would be hard to prove a correlation. Often people are poor merely because they were born in a poor neighborhood.
4) Is it inevitable in a capitalist system that some people will always be at the bottom, no matter how much you inflict genocide/eugenics on the poor?
Absolutely. It is human nature to crush others in pursuit of power. Someone must be trodden upon. Someone has to do the grunt work. And the grunts get low wages.5) Suppose the minimum wage was eliminated. Employers would be able to afford to hire more workers. Would that increase or decrease the amount of people who are poor?
It is impossible for someone who is not a practicing economist to answer this question. I'd like to think it would increase poverty, but I honestly have no clue.

 

[ChaosRocket]

1) Are poor people lazy?

I would say they're often LESS lazy than others, because many have to work 2 jobs just to make ends meet.

2) Do poor people choose to be poor by working in low-paying jobs?

Very few people *choose* to work in low paying jobs. Many people either aren't smart enough to work in higher paying jobs, or they can't afford the school/training it would take to work in high paying jobs.

There's also the problem of the "cycle of poverty." Remember that schools are paid for by property taxes. That means if your parents are poor and living in a poor neighborhood, then the property taxes are lower, which means the school in that district won't have much money and won't be a good school. So basically if you have poor parents, you're not going to get a very good education, and also your parents can't afford to send you to college, so really how much chance do you have to get out of poverty?

3) Is salary or wealth a good measure of genetic fitness (including such measures as intelligence)?

I'd say it's true that a lot of poor people have low IQs, and I remember reading a statistic saying that most people on welfare have borderline IQs. But obviously it's not true in every case. I'm considered to be living below the poverty line myself, and I have a genius level IQ.

4) Is it inevitable in a capitalist system that some people will always be at the bottom, no matter how much you inflict genocide/eugenics on the poor?

Obviously someone has to be at the bottom. We obviously need someone to pump the gas and work the cash registers.

5) Suppose the minimum wage was eliminated. Employers would be able to afford to hire more workers. Would that increase or decrease the amount of people who are poor?

Increase. It would lower unemployment of course, but everyone at the bottom would be getting paid less than they are now.

 

[Archaic]

All right, somebody explain this to me:

1) Are poor people lazy?
2) Do poor people choose to be poor by working in low-paying jobs?
3) Is salary or wealth a good measure of genetic fitness (including such measures as intelligence)?
4) Is it inevitable in a capitalist system that some people will always be at the bottom, no matter how much you inflict genocide/eugenics on the poor?
5) Suppose the minimum wage was eliminated. Employers would be able to afford to hire more workers. Would that increase or decrease the amount of people who are poor?

1. Given the large incidence in developed countries of what we call "dole bludgers" in Australia, I'd say that a significant proportion of poor people in the developed nations *are* lazy.

2. Very few would, excepting perhaps people with ideological motivations (some teachers, for instance). I do know of cases however where people have effectively made that choice by refusing to work at a high paying job in a sewerage plant, opting instead to live on government handouts. Bastards.

3. It cannot be used as the only factor, however it is true that statistically, those in the upper-middle class and up tend to have higher levels of education.

4. Loaded question ("inflicted" = word with bad connotations), but yes. And this is not a bad thing. If no one's on the bottom, then everyone is on the bottom. Frankly, I'd rather some be rich and some be poor than everyone be poor together.

5. False dilemma. Employers would only be able to hire more workers if the market rate for workers was actually below the existing minimum wage. If, however, it is, then this should decrease the amount of people who are poor, as more people will be able to earn an income. You will get some people paid less, of course, but that doesn't create more poor people, that's only making existing low-income maybe slightly poorer, while lifting others out of poverty.
As mentioned earlier too, the prices of goods and/or services in industries which would currently pay minimum wage would decrease due to competitive forces.

 

[Zeta]

The price of labor drops, thus competition drives down prices.

Most goods sold in America aren't made in America. Only service-providers would experience a large enough drop in prices to make a difference. The price of goods would problably remain largely ineffective.

 

[GrnMarvl14]

All right, somebody explain this to me:

1) Are poor people lazy?
2) Do poor people choose to be poor by working in low-paying jobs?
3) Is salary or wealth a good measure of genetic fitness (including such measures as intelligence)?
4) Is it inevitable in a capitalist system that some people will always be at the bottom, no matter how much you inflict genocide/eugenics on the poor?
5) Suppose the minimum wage was eliminated. Employers would be able to afford to hire more workers. Would that increase or decrease the amount of people who are poor?

1. That's a hard question. Historically the poor have been the hardest working people. Most are BORN poor, and work multiple jobs (thus, they likely AREN'T lazy) for minimum wage. If you throw in other factors like lack of health care, you see them CONSTANTLY amassing debt with no real way to pay it off. To a degree the debt could be their fault, but not in all cases. They CAN be lazy, but that's likely not the case. Usually people that think the poor are lazy are, at least, upper-middle class. Usually how you view the poor is related to your own status (which makes sense).

2. MOST poor people are BORN into poverty. Working UP from poverty is almost unheard of. If you're LUCKY, you'll become middle class. But when college isn't an option, working as soon as you're legally able to (since your parents are poor, and thus you're most likely a burden), and other factors make it very hard to get the necessary advantages that the higher classes have ready access to. You CAN rise in class, but it usually doesn't happen.

3. It CAN be, but isn't necessarily. Usually the higher of a class you are, the more health care you have, which means you're less susceptible to long-term damage from various maladies. You also have more time to work out, have access to better foods, and can spend more time working on your appearance.

4. Yes. It IS inevitable. Capitalism is built on the foundation of some rising above the majority. Otherwise, it's most likely socialism.

5. I don't know enough about economics to take a guess. But, historically speaking, prior to the minimum wage, you had people working up to 16 hour days for enough money to BARELY afford to feed their families. Would that happen again? It's impossible to accurately say. You'd like to THINK that the leaders of the corporations are better people, and would treat their employees fairly WITHOUT restraint, but...I doubt it.