Is Poverty a Choice?

Post Reply New Topic

Some People believe that Poverty is a Choice. That you can escape Poverty is you only work hard enough. But is that really true? Is Poverty really a Choice, or a state of Mind? Can you really achieve anything if you work hard enough? Or is that aimply a lie, especially if you are disabled? Ehat do you personally think? Do you believe everyone can make it? Do you believe that everyone can become someday rich if they work hard enough, and smart enough? Or will some People always be poor, no matter how hard they try? Do you personally think Welfare is wrong because it makes Peoplr lazy and should be completely abolished? Or do we need more Welfare for the Poor?

Many, but not all people make choices that lead them to poverty -- I doubt that very few people actually "choose" poverty (unless they're taking religious vows). I escaped both poverty and homelessness through hard work. Had I known back then that I was supposed to be disabled due to having an ASD, I might still be living on the streets, if not dead. Disabled people would have a harder time of it, if they are capable at all.

Some people have become wealthy through hard work; others remain poor no matter how hard they claim to try -- it depends on the individual. Welfare helps; sometimes too much, and sometimes not enough -- again, it depends on the individual.

Poverty and homelessness are both complex issues, but if a person is capable of working to support themselves, then they should do so, whether or not they actually want to.

You would never been homeless with welfare.

Many homeless people get welfare or some sort of Social Security payment in the US.

I didn't qualify. Something about being capable of working, and not being an addict, an ex-convict, or a "mentally disabled individual".

A schizophrenic pedophile junkie who had just been released from prison had a better chance of receiving Welfare than I.

Yes thats because the US has next to no welfare.

That really isn't true. There's quite a bit of "welfare," "SSI," etc. being dispensed in the US.

I don't believe poverty's a "choice," per se----though neglect of responsibilities could easily lead a person to poverty.

As kraftiekortie suggests, this is far from always being the case. Many people here in the UK receive welfare payments (or "benefits" as we call them here), yet are homeless, for a variety of reasons; for example:

- Many people with disabilities, particularly psychological and developmental conditions, receive financial benefits, but insufficient practical support for their disability, such that their handicaps are a barrier to the social interactions necessary to find a home.

- The UK currently has a shortage of housing. When there are insufficient homes to go around, it's unavoidable that some people will miss out because they are at the back of the queue for whatever reason.

- Some people are homeless because they do officially have somewhere to live (e.g. with parents or a legal partner), but fear living there because it is a place where they receive mental, physical, or sexual abuse.

But the right wing media portrays poor people as lazy bums.

Obviously, it's more complicated than that.....

Of course, there are some people who are truly "lazy bums."

But many who are homeless are homeless because of circumstances at least somewhat beyond their control.

If that were true, every woman in Africa would be a millionaire.

A person is more likely to become homeless and/or impoverished if he or she is a "lazy bum" than if he or or she is a hard worker.

Of course, there are "lazy bums" who are wealthy, but they either inherited their wealth or worked hard for it so that they could spend the rest of their lives being lazy.

There's nothing remotely new about that. The concepts of the "deserving poor" and the "undeserving poor" have a very long history. In terms of welfare provisions, it can be traced at least as far back as the English "poor laws" of the 16th century, and probably much further.

In psychological terms, it plays into well known cognitive biases, called the "actor-observer bias" and "fundamental attribution error". Almost all people see the good things in their life as due to their own hard work, and the bad things as due to forces beyond their control; but when considering other people, they are biased towards seeing it exactly the other way around. So people with social/financial advantage can very easily perceive people who have less than them as "undeserving", as it makes their own position seem "fair" and they can perceive themselves as a "good" person. That is not to say that they are always wrong, just that it is a very common bias.

But pure capitalism is hurting everyone. Because countries without welfare have the most poverty problems.

Now, if a person is fearful of getting their first job, or they're afraid of what might happen to them when they do get their first job, and they choose to submit to that fear and not even try to find that first job, then the resultant poverty would most certainly have arisen from their choice to not overcome their fears and seek work.

"Ooo ... but what if someone doesn't like me? What if someone yells at me? What if I actually have to work?

Tough. People are not hired to be liked, people will raise their voices, and people actually have to work to earn their pay.

Every day, people choose to get up, go out, and work to earn their living. They also choose to earn respect. People who turn their backs on the thought of having money and respect out of fear should consider how fearful they would be to sleep outdoors surrounded by criminals, junkies, and the "mentally disabled" -- with each one carrying a shiv and looking for a little fun at someone else's expense.

No, capitalism hurts only those who choose to not become part of the capitalistic system -- i.e., those who choose to not work for wages.So do countries without exploitable natural resources. So do countries without a viable education system. So do countries with poor health care systems. So do countries without Democracy. So do countries where the people have chosen to avoid "Western" science and ideology.