Interesting report on the poor

[Barbers2005]

The first apartment Dh and I got together was in Binghamton (a smallish city) and I would have to agree that things cost more there than they do in the suburbs. Our car insurance cost a lot more when we lived in Binghamton than when we moved to Endicott (a nearby suburb) even though our driving record was the same. There's really nowhere to buy clothes inexpensively without leaving the city. Target and Walmart are both in a suburb nearby, and even Goodwill is well beyond walking distance from the residential areas. The grocery store near our apartment was a Giant store, which is a pretty common chain in our area. The one near us was so run down, compared to the ones in neighboring towns. At least one of the freezer/cooler cases would break down each week, and the food would be stacked on a cart on the floor while the cases were repaired. My Dh worked there as the dairy/frozen manager for almost a year, and when I would come in to buy groceries, he would tell me which cases to avoid getting food from b/c it had thawed or been sitting at room temperature. He was instructed not to remove expired items from the shelf unless a customer complained about it, and then to only remove the ones the customer noticed. Dh was pretty good friends with the butcher, who told him that they would take expired meat out of the packages and repackage it with a new expiration date as long as it still looked fresh. Meat that didn't look fresh they would use to make ground beef. I don't know if they do similar things in Giant stores that aren't in the city, but I do know that stores in wealthier neighborhoods have newer cooler cases (that don't break down) and the butcher will package your meat in front of you if you ask. After dh stopped working there, we shopped at a different grocery store, but I feel bad for people who can't afford a car to do their shopping in another town. I agree that poor people do suffer because of their lack of access to competitively priced goods and services.

 

[ducklite]

To think that those who are poor cannot pull themselves up by the proverbial bootstraps negates the accomplishments of those who have.

As someone who was at one point in life "homeless" (slept on a friends sofa for three months) and a single mom working two jobs to make ends meet, driving a beat up tewelve year old car with bad brakes and a headlight held in by a two by four, I have been there, done that.

And I'm an example of how someone with the motivation to make a better life for herself succeeded beyond anyone's expectations.

Do I have empathy for someone who has had a blow dealt to their life and winds up "poor"? Absolutely. Do I have a problem with giving someone a hand up so they can get out of that situation? Not at all. Do I have a problem with people who just figure why bother because they'll be taken care of? A big one. Do I accept excuses for anyone to stay in that place? NOT AT ALL.

ANYONE, and I mean ANYONE (outside people with true medical/mental problems) can achieve financial security through hard work. I'm disgusted by families who moan and complain about not being able to pay their bills (and there are more than a few examples of this on these boards), yet the mother refuses to get off her a** and get a p/t job when the father can be home to watch the kids. Or people who keep whining about money after they get laid off over and over. Um, knock-knock, this is your wake up call--find a new, more stable line of work.

I've lived below the poverty line. I KNOW how hard it is, when you've got to decide if you can afford to take your kid to the doctor and hold off the landlord until the next paycheck. It's a terrible place to be. But NO ONE has to stay in that place. Like I said, I worked two jobs, and went to college p/t while raising my son by myself. It's incredibly hard. I'm not denying that. But it's certainly the better choice over resigning yourself to a lifetime of poverty.

Anne

 

[DisneyGirl4188]

There is NO reason anyone should be in poverty in the United States. NO-ONE!

I beg to differ. Take for instance DH's aunt and uncle. They have three kids now. They used to live in a city and the uncle worked as a plumber. He can't drive (bad eyesight, can't be fixed) so he took a bus to work. He made pretty good money; however, their rent was very expensive. No luxury items (no cable, cell phone, video games, etc). The aunt couldn't work full time, because childcare was too expensive and there was no one to watch them for free. They were getting by though. Then the uncle was injured and had to have multiple surgeries. He was not able to work any longer. The aunt tried to work full time, but wasn't making enough. They had to go on welfare, but still couldn't get by. Then, they (kids and aunt) moved to live with the aunts parents.

During this time, the uncle received grants to go to school to become an accountant (he lived with a friend in the city). He graduated top of his class (but after tax season).

He then moved back with his family. He searched for work for months, but couldn't find anything in the new (semi rural) area. They couldn't move back to the city (no money for security deposit, etc). He picked up odd jobs until he was able to find work as an accountant. The aunt was not able to work, because she had to drive him around (since there is no public transportation and he worked crazy hours).

He worked all through tax season, but after a couple of months the company did lay offs. Again, he tried to find accounting work, but couldn't. He did find work in an accounting dept. (making MUCH MUCH less than before). Everything was going OK. The aunt had a part time job, two of the kids had jobs (one kid is too young to work). Recently, the uncle had two heart attacks (he's 40). He doesn't have medical insurance (too expensive) so now they have those bills. Two weeks after the second heart attack, there house was burglarized. They lost pretty much everything (the robbers took anything of value, destroyed furniture and clothes).

So, they are now even worse off before. They can't get welfare, they have pretty much no possesions and have to buy everything again.

Things do happen to people and so it's not fair to say that no one should be in poverty. No one deserves to be, but sometimes things happen and it is really hard to overcome them.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Second, no one knew Katrina was headed for New Orleans until late on Fri., 60 hrs before landfall. Just a few hrs shy of 168 (# of hrs in a week). Want some proof? How about the NOAA forecast loop?

First NOAA Forecast graphic showing Katrina directly hitting New Orleans area
http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/archive/2005/graphics/AT12/15.AL1205W.GIF
And even that image doesn't have the storm directly hitting NOLA and has the worst part (the NE quadrant) well the east.

On Sat., Nagin issued an evacuation (voluntary). On Sunday morning the FIRST EVER mandatory evacuation was issued for New Orleans. In Nagin's own words, over 80% were evacuated which far exceeded any best estimates the planners had put together.

Third, a storm the size of Katrina quickly overpowers local and state agencies which is why FEMA is needed.


BTW, my pic is posted in my sig but yet you call me "lady"?

I can totally vouch for you--way back in Katrina...I posted the full time line of events that week and while a tragedy of this nature was foreseen as being possible--this particular hurricane as you say was not known until Friday prior to be "the one". I cannot stand it when comedians (like the one on Last Comic Standing) poke fun at the lack of knowing this event would happen that week...b/c it was true. In fact one week prior, Florida was the one that was going to get nailed again. Anything else said is a complete and utter fabrication and nothing by hindsight crystal ball readings.



And while those who received cards abused the system--most recently it was discovered that even FEMA employees did as well.

There are dishonest people everywhere unfortunately. While most of those who accept FEMA aid would be more on the lower income side, integrity knows no class.

 

[ducklite]

I beg to differ. Take for instance DH's aunt and uncle. They have three kids now. They used to live in a city and the uncle worked as a plumber. He can't drive (bad eyesight, can't be fixed) so he took a bus to work. He made pretty good money; however, their rent was very expensive. No luxury items (no cable, cell phone, video games, etc). The aunt couldn't work full time, because childcare was too expensive and there was no one to watch them for free. They were getting by though. Then the uncle was injured and had to have multiple surgeries. He was not able to work any longer. The aunt tried to work full time, but wasn't making enough. They had to go on welfare, but still couldn't get by. Then, they (kids and aunt) moved to live with the aunts parents.

During this time, the uncle received grants to go to school to become an accountant (he lived with a friend in the city). He graduated top of his class (but after tax season).

He then moved back with his family. He searched for work for months, but couldn't find anything in the new (semi rural) area. They couldn't move back to the city (no money for security deposit, etc). He picked up odd jobs until he was able to find work as an accountant. The aunt was not able to work, because she had to drive him around (since there is no public transportation and he worked crazy hours).

He worked all through tax season, but after a couple of months the company did lay offs. Again, he tried to find accounting work, but couldn't. He did find work in an accounting dept. (making MUCH MUCH less than before). Everything was going OK. The aunt had a part time job, two of the kids had jobs (one kid is too young to work). Recently, the uncle had two heart attacks (he's 40). He doesn't have medical insurance (too expensive) so now they have those bills. Two weeks after the second heart attack, there house was burglarized. They lost pretty much everything (the robbers took anything of value, destroyed furniture and clothes).

So, they are now even worse off before. They can't get welfare, they have pretty much no possesions and have to buy everything again.

Things do happen to people and so it's not fair to say that no one should be in poverty. No one deserves to be, but sometimes things happen and it is really hard to overcome them.

Nothing for nothing but it seems she could have worked a night shift. My dad had crazy hours and my mom worked nights so someone was always home with the kids. We have family friends who do the same thing, dad lost his job due to the company closing and is taking classes during the day under a state grant for a new career and mom works as a night auditor. I know a single mom who lives with her parents, she puts her kids to bed and then heads off to tend bar from 9:00pm until 4:00am, and is home to get them off to school. With the low unemployment rates in much of this country these days, there ARE jobs to be had, they might not be the best paying or the most glamorous, but they are there. Heck, a lot of McDonald's are paying $15/hour for opening and closing shifts!

People with low incomes and catastrophic medical bills are eligible for a variety of medical assistance programs, he needs to talk to the billing department at the hopital to inquire.

Anne

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Yes, but people living in poorer neighborhoods *do* respect this kind of thing. And subconsciously, *many* wealthier Americans do as well. If I were to pull up to a red light in my nearly 10 year old Toyota 4-Runner right next to a person in a brand new Porchse Boxer and you were to poll the nation as to who was more successful.....guess who the majority would choose? The guy driving the Porsche....many without even thinking about it.

They wouldn't take into account that the man driving that Boxster very well may have leased it, while my 4-Runner was paid for in cash those ten years ago. And they wouldn't know what our savings/investment accounts looked like. Everything is about appearances in this country.

Funny you mention this--I was peeking in a magazine..I think US Weekly and want to say it was David Spade--the car he drives is an old hunk of metal. Very old. Probably about 20 years old or more. And the comment was...he has a nice house, he doesn't care what he drives. Yet I'm sure someone driving past him think he's some poor chap to drive such a crappy car.

 

[MyGoofy26]

There are dishonest people everywhere unfortunately. While most of those who accept FEMA aid would be more on the lower income side, integrity knows no class.

Anything there's something for "free" there will be a subset of people figuring out how to abuse it. But I can't imagine wanting to make other people suffer and fend for themselves because of the immoral behavior of the few. Sure, there were thousands of people who scammed the system, but what about the hundreds of thousands who didn't? I guess they are just expected to suck it up and live with the stigma created by the relative few.

 

[ducklite]

Funny you mention this--I was peeking in a magazine..I think US Weekly and want to say it was David Spade--the car he drives is an old hunk of metal. Very old. Probably about 20 years old or more. And the comment was...he has a nice house, he doesn't care what he drives. Yet I'm sure someone driving past him think he's some poor chap to drive such a crappy car.

The TOyota Prius is also a car of choice among a lot of HOllywood types these days. It's nto old or cheap, but very fuel efficient, and if you don't buy it "loaded" it's under $25K--hardly a luxury car.

Anne

 

[barkley]

for those who feel 'protected' from adverse financial conditions by virtue of having 'rainy day savings', long term disability insurance and the like-i advise that you strongly invest in establishing a people based support system as well.

we too felt that we were well prepared for an unplanned event in our lives that could prevent one of us from working (had the savings, had the ltd plan-even have the added security of living in a state that pays disability pay for up to a year)-but when it happened several years back we were knocked for a loop. while between the state coverage and the ltd we were still getting around 70% of my lost earnings we did'nt anticipate that the spouse of an ill or injured person will likely have to take significant periods of time off work to help with care, recovery, and navigating through the piles of paperwork to get the financial/insurance benefits paying-so unless you have enough sick leave to cover it as paid time or plan on saving enough to cover both spouses out of pay status. most ltd policies have a waiting period of at least 90 days before kicking in-what they don't tell you at the sales presentation is even if your illness or disability is deemed from day one to be long term you can't even apply until that 90th day-and processing time for your application, the stuff they send to the doctors, the medical review....can keep you from getting that first benefit for 6 months or more from your last paid working day.

fmla is a great program-but if you have an employer who follows it line and verse they may not consider that the time you need to take off to help your spouse get to and from eligibilty appointments with the insurance company, social security or the like is covered (so you end up out of pay status and endangering your continued employment) let alone to address issues your child is having at school because of what they are experiencing due to a parent's illness (my son freaked out big time because i had a stroke while he was at school-in his 1st grade mind he thought he could have done something to help me had he been with me-so for 6 months we had a child that had to have a parent in the classroom for the first hour or more reassuring him that 'mom' was o.k. without him ).

then you have issues with increased expenses during recovery-med copays, perscriptions, child care because the parent that normaly watched the children when they got off school not being able to do so/child care for the times when one parent has to take the other for treatment to a place children are not permitted-it adds up very quickly.

we were lucky in some respects-both of us had worked extensivly in eligibilty so we knew what we might be asked for and prepared our doctors to provide at quickly, we were also able to more easily navigate some of the forms and reams of paperwork the ltd and insurance companies requested. but they were still time consuming and the last thing we needed to be focusing 'recovery time' on. we were/are unlucky that we cannot rely on family to provide any type of support re. assisting with any personal issues.

i guess what i'm saying is-it's great to prepare for that 'rainy day'-but remember that when it rains on one spouse it rains on the other and drips down onto the kids-so if you can establish a life-line outside your immediate household do so-it may be the only thing that keeps your head above water.

 

[mickeyfan2]

for those who feel 'protected' from adverse financial conditions by virtue of having 'rainy day savings', long term disability insurance and the like-i advise that you strongly invest in establishing a people based support system as well.

we too felt that we were well prepared for an unplanned event in our lives that could prevent one of us from working (had the savings, had the ltd plan-even have the added security of living in a state that pays disability pay for up to a year)-but when it happened several years back we were knocked for a loop. while between the state coverage and the ltd we were still getting around 70% of my lost earnings we did'nt anticipate that the spouse of an ill or injured person will likely have to take significant periods of time off work to help with care, recovery, and navigating through the piles of paperwork to get the financial/insurance benefits paying-so unless you have enough sick leave to cover it as paid time or plan on saving enough to cover both spouses out of pay status. most ltd policies have a waiting period of at least 90 days before kicking in-what they don't tell you at the sales presentation is even if your illness or disability is deemed from day one to be long term you can't even apply until that 90th day-and processing time for your application, the stuff they send to the doctors, the medical review....can keep you from getting that first benefit for 6 months or more from your last paid working day.

fmla is a great program-but if you have an employer who follows it line and verse they may not consider that the time you need to take off to help your spouse get to and from eligibilty appointments with the insurance company, social security or the like is covered (so you end up out of pay status and endangering your continued employment) let alone to address issues your child is having at school because of what they are experiencing due to a parent's illness (my son freaked out big time because i had a stroke while he was at school-in his 1st grade mind he thought he could have done something to help me had he been with me-so for 6 months we had a child that had to have a parent in the classroom for the first hour or more reassuring him that 'mom' was o.k. without him ).

then you have issues with increased expenses during recovery-med copays, perscriptions, child care because the parent that normaly watched the children when they got off school not being able to do so/child care for the times when one parent has to take the other for treatment to a place children are not permitted-it adds up very quickly.

we were lucky in some respects-both of us had worked extensivly in eligibilty so we knew what we might be asked for and prepared our doctors to provide at quickly, we were also able to more easily navigate some of the forms and reams of paperwork the ltd and insurance companies requested. but they were still time consuming and the last thing we needed to be focusing 'recovery time' on. we were/are unlucky that we cannot rely on family to provide any type of support re. assisting with any personal issues.

i guess what i'm saying is-it's great to prepare for that 'rainy day'-but remember that when it rains on one spouse it rains on the other and drips down onto the kids-so if you can establish a life-line outside your immediate household do so-it may be the only thing that keeps your head above water.

I agree. This is why we have LTC insurance as well as LTD insurance. The LTC would have allowed the working spouse to keep working while the injured spouse had a caregiver around. Also since we pay 100% of the premiums our LTD and LTC insurance is not taxable income. If your employer pays the premiums then it is taxable income.

 

[sandy6879]

I was 17 when I had my daughter. Graduated high school in the top 10% and went straight to college. Due to the financial aid package offered initially, I chose an expensive private college because the end result would have been less student loans for me to take out. Had to move out of my parents house for various reasons so I found a 2 bedroom apartment in CT for $550/mo. I worked part time at a bank - bankers hours, I had to pay daycare because no one else was around and her father signed over his rights so it was JUST ME. No one else could help me with childcare. I found out about mystery shopping (this is 8-9 years ago, well before it was a common knowledge thing) and picked up an extra $300-400 a month doing it, as well as giving us the opportunity to go see movies, go out to dinner, etc. I did accept medical benefits from the government because, since I was only working part time, the cost of the benefits through my employer was actually just about what I made. The apartment, while at a great price, had a leaky roof to the point that the ceiling in my 2 year old's bedroom opened up and leaked through the attic to her bedroom, spewing lead paint chips throughout (old old house). I fought with the landlords to fix this, called the health department, but the landlords were on the town council and knew everyone in town so no action got anywhere further than a bucket to catch the water. I needed to move. Went to an apartment that was $250 more a month, but included some utilities. I did graduate from college, and the rest is irrelevant at this point.

Here's my point - I was able to get us by in those times because I had the access to the information I needed. I had internet access - I needed it for school so I took out a Dell credit card to get the computer. I was able to find mystery shops in my area that paid well or gave us good shops to do. I was smart, having had a good education, and creative enough to come up with ideas on ways to get by. I actively looked at the laws regarding lead paint. The poorest of the poor do NOT have access to this information and many times, don't even consider that this might be available to them. They wouldn't know where to begin looking. I had friends who were in the same situation and they honestly had no idea that any of this existed. I'm not saying that there is no way to help oneself, but I will say without the information I knew how to find, I don't know that my life would be where it is today.

No, I don't agree with people milking the system. But I am not one to say x amount of months and you need to be off the system. There are extenuating circumstances and if the country would spend less money on frivolous things (legislation about making an official state cookie comes to mind) and move those funds to allow people to acquire information to help themselves using the skills they have, maybe less people would need to be dependent on the system. If information about how to get certain jobs was available through social services such as mystery shopping or even how to start little side work jobs, maybe it would give people in various situations an opportunity to improve their lives while working around their own personal circumstances.

 

[MrsPete]

I guess I was thinking of the truly poor, not the ones who can afford to go out to eat regularly or afford to buy new clothes regularly. I think choice comes into play again here. Like you said earlier, why are people going hungry when rice and beans cost next to nothing? Because they choose to eat at McDonald's instead.

When I stand on hall duty before school every morning, I can't help noticing that a large percentage of my free-lunch kids come into school EVERY DAY wolfing down the last of a Bojangles biscuit and trying to sneak the large soda into the academic halls. It's a status thing in high school: to buy your breakfast on the way to school every day.

As for jeans, my DD's current wardrobe (3 pairs, I believe) all came form the Goodwill store for $4.99 each, and all are name brand/designer brands. The poor you speak of buying jeans at Wal-Mart are spending twice as much for the cheapo ones than we spend for the good quality ones. Plus, when DD outgrows them, which doesn't take long, we donate them back to Goodwill and get a tax deduction.

Yep, we shop the same way; I'd rather buy slightly used Lee jeans than new Walmart jeans. The thing is, though, we both realize that minimizing the cost of short-term purchases (kids clothes, groceries) is a CHOICE. The poor don't see this as an option -- they tend to see it as, "Spend it while you've got it, do without when you don't."

 

[Kay7979]

As someone who was at one point in life "homeless" (slept on a friends sofa for three months) and a single mom working two jobs to make ends meet, driving a beat up tewelve year old car with bad brakes and a headlight held in by a two by four, I have been there, done that.

And I'm an example of how someone with the motivation to make a better life for herself succeeded beyond anyone's expectations.

Like I said, I worked two jobs, and went to college p/t while raising my son by myself. It's incredibly hard. I'm not denying that. But it's certainly the better choice over resigning yourself to a lifetime of poverty.

Anne

I can relate to your scenario, and to the motivational drive to get ahead. I was a widow in my early 20s, without a lot of job skills, and life has not always been easy for me. I worked my way through a series of jobs and took opportunities that opened, got more education, and for awhile was working as an independent contractor for four companies at once. I had no children to support, so that made things easier. I have heard others point out, and it may be true, that some people inherently lack the drive or confidence to do what you and I have done. It seems to people like us that everyone is capable of pushing themselves to achieve. I still feel that way to some degree, and it is frustrating when I see people wallow in bad circumstances rather than bust their butts to better themselves, but maybe there are people whose psycological make-up, or intelligence level, isn't adequate to do what we have done. I have a feeling that few people are actually incapable; most simply won't make the effort.

I know one woman for example who I like very much but she frustrates me to no end. She reminds me of myself 25 years ago: afraid to try new things, take chances, not very self-confident. But I made myself change. She remains the same. She's locked in a low paying dead end job at 51 years old. Her kids are in their teens. Her husband and she separate every few years but never divorce, and they constantly have money problems. I suggest she get another better paying job because her teenage daughter makes more than she does, and she tells me she doesn't like paperwork, doesn't want to have to think too much, doesn't want any job that is stressful, doesn't want to give up what few benefits she has aquired with her seniority. When she had broken up with her husband the last time and was about to apply for public assistance, I suggested career retraining, but she was sure no government agency would offer it for free, and she had no money to pay for it on her own, was too old at 51 to do something else, yada, yada, yada. I asked her how she would live 10 years from now if she is divorced and has no savings, minimal retirement, etc. Her answer is she will live in government subsidized senior citizen housing. She is perfectly content with that idea, and that's the scariest part. Some people have no motivation. They are content to have nothing and to let the government help supply a meager existance.

 

[MyGoofy26]

Yep, we shop the same way; I'd rather buy slightly used Lee jeans than new Walmart jeans.

We have a chain of stores regionally (Gabriel Brothers) that basically buys excess stock, closeouts, damaged, etc from major retailers and sells them seriously discounted. You have to be patient, but you can find some great deals. I'd never consider buying used jeans when I can get name brand, new for cheap (of course I know that not all areas have the same chance to buy new for this cheap). I bought 7 pairs of Levis for $6.99 each - I bought all of the ones they had left in my size and only have a couple pair in "rotation" at a time, LOL - this way I have new jeans for the next few years - that was last summer and I still have 4 pair that haven't been worn yet, waiting for the others to wear out. And I bought an couple pair of $90 Seven jeans for $9. But it amazes me the people around here that are struggling for money and yet they'll go to the mall and buy things for full price or the small sale they're running when they can have the name brand for cheaper than the Walmart ones!

Heck, Gabe's even sells Walt Disney World clothes! WDW tags and everything - while they're still selling in the parks! They've had 2006 shirts for months! Last year before our trip mom bought a zip up hoodie for $6 that was in nearly every shop for about $50!

 

[MrsPete]

The poorest of the poor do NOT have access to this information and many times, don't even consider that this might be available to them. They wouldn't know where to begin looking. I had friends who were in the same situation and they honestly had no idea that any of this existed. I'm not saying that there is no way to help oneself, but I will say without the information I knew how to find, I don't know that my life would be where it is today.

I don't think so. My mom works in Welfare, and she says that everyone who comes in knows "the lines to use" to get the maximum from the system -- I think that's the people-grapevine at work. When I go into her office, I do see moms with fancy hairstyles and acrylic nails waiting to pick up their checks; someone's talking about how to use the system!

All of my students -- regardless of income -- have internet access at school. It's free at the public library too (and anyone living in the low-income part of our town could walk/bike to the public library). Some of my very poor kids have turned in plagarized work to me, so I think they all have access somewhere -- maybe not everyday, anytime they want, but they have internet access.

And if they don't, there are other ways to find opportunities. When I was in college, no one had internet, yet I constantly found little opportunities to save or make more money.

 

[crisi]

As someone who was at one point in life "homeless" (slept on a friends sofa for three months) and a single mom working two jobs to make ends meet, driving a beat up tewelve year old car with bad brakes and a headlight held in by a two by four, I have been there, done that.

And I'm an example of how someone with the motivation to make a better life for herself succeeded beyond anyone's expectations.

Do I have empathy for someone who has had a blow dealt to their life and winds up "poor"? Absolutely. Do I have a problem with giving someone a hand up so they can get out of that situation? Not at all. Do I have a problem with people who just figure why bother because they'll be taken care of? A big one. Do I accept excuses for anyone to stay in that place? NOT AT ALL.

ANYONE, and I mean ANYONE (outside people with true medical/mental problems) can achieve financial security through hard work. I'm disgusted by families who moan and complain about not being able to pay their bills (and there are more than a few examples of this on these boards), yet the mother refuses to get off her a** and get a p/t job when the father can be home to watch the kids. Or people who keep whining about money after they get laid off over and over. Um, knock-knock, this is your wake up call--find a new, more stable line of work.

I've lived below the poverty line. I KNOW how hard it is, when you've got to decide if you can afford to take your kid to the doctor and hold off the landlord until the next paycheck. It's a terrible place to be. But NO ONE has to stay in that place. Like I said, I worked two jobs, and went to college p/t while raising my son by myself. It's incredibly hard. I'm not denying that. But it's certainly the better choice over resigning yourself to a lifetime of poverty.

Anne

I personally think success is a combination of four things - hard work, skill, talent and luck. It takes more than any single one to be successful at anything, but sometimes you can skip having something.

Let's say, to change our definitions of success, that I want to be a musician (not terribly successful, good enough to get some gigs). I can work hard at it. I can take some guitar lessons and develop the skills. But I have no musical talent, so no matter how hard I work at it and how much I spend on lessons, it will take a lot of luck (maybe having a friend who is much better who lets me be in the band) to make it as even a semiprofessional musician.

There are some things you can learn, but unless you have a talent for them, you'll never be any good at them. I've taken a lot of golf lessons and played a lot of golf - and on a REALLY good day I break 100. Much as I enjoy it, not exactly where my talent lies. Maybe had I started younger, I'd have developed more skills - since skills acquired young almost seem to become talents.......

And one of those talents/skills is the ability to think ahead. If I do X, what will happen next? And not only next, but after that, and after that? Chess players have this as a talent - you don't go far in competative chess without it. Most people have some talent for it, but develop it as a skill. If you grow up poor, you often don't even develop it as a skill since no one around you plans ahead, it has to be something you just "do" or you won't "get it." And that ability to think ahead is really needed to pull yourself out of poverty. Hard work alone won't do it, you need to be able to understand opportunities, take risks - and that takes the ability (at least learned as a skill, but the people who do it well have a talent for it) of being able to see ahead.

Luck is, of course, the wild card. All the planning in the world may not keep you from getting ill, having your accountant embezzle your safety net, or being the victim of a war or disaster. Likewise, all the planning in the world won't make some Ford agent walk up to you in a club and offer you a modeling contract, or have you find the winning lottery ticket on the street.

Hard work is the one thing that is most in your control, but it isn't sufficient for success.

 

[MrsPete]

But it amazes me the people around here that are struggling for money and yet they'll go to the mall and buy things for full price or the small sale they're running when they can have the name brand for cheaper than the Walmart ones!

We don't have that particular store here, but I can relate to the concept. However, many of the poor don't buy into it because 1) They don't recognize it as a choice. I've said it before: failure to recognize that you have choices is one of the main things that keeps people in poverty. 2) They don't want to wait for the right thing to pop up -- they know that if they don't spend that money today, a need will arise, and they'll have to use the money for something else. It's "safer" or "easier" to just go buy what's at the mall today.

 

[malificentsman]

Here in Tennessee, anything you buy is taxed. That includes groceries and clothing. It's awful. And the tax rate here is 8 or 8 1/2 percent.

Come on over to NC and you can pay 7 1/2% sales tax on everything PLUS State Income Tax

 

[disneysteve]

I bought all of the ones they had left in my size and only have a couple pair in "rotation" at a time, LOL - this way I have new jeans for the next few years

So often personal finance and weight management issues run together.

The vast majority of my patients, probably about 80%, are overweight or obese. Why do I bring that up? Because that means they frequently need to buy new clothes to replace the ones that no longer fit as they get heavier and heavier. It isn't unusual for me to see people who month after month for years now gain 3-5 pounds. I have many patients who are at least 100 pounds overweight, including children, and quite a few who are over 200 pounds overweight. They live on junk food, which costs them a fortune, worsens their health conditions resulting in higher medical care costs, and keep outgrowing their clothes, which creates an additional added expense.

So again, the choices people make really impact their financial situation. You can't go out and take advantage of a great sale on jeans if you can't expect what you buy today to still fit 6 months from now.

 

[mickeyfan2]

As someone who was at one point in life "homeless" (slept on a friends sofa for three months) and a single mom working two jobs to make ends meet, driving a beat up tewelve year old car with bad brakes and a headlight held in by a two by four, I have been there, done that.

Did you grow up "homeless"? If not, then you probably were shown a different mindset than hopeless poverty, so you had a helping hand from your parents that you used to get educated and out of poverty. You did a great job at it, but not all learn that lesson learned by most children of the non-poor.