Saturday, March 28, 2009

What's So Bad About Being Poor?

Imagine that you are the parent of a small child, living in contemporary America, and in some way you are able to know that tomorrow you and your spouse will die and your child will be made an orphan. You do not have the option of sending the child to live with a friend or relative. You must select from among other and far-from-perfect choices.

Suppose first this choice: You may put your child with an extremely poor couple according to the official definition of "poor"-which is to say, poverty that is measured exclusively in money. This couple has so little money that your child's clothes will often be secondhand and there will be not even small luxuries to brighten his life. Life will be a struggle, often a painful one. But you also know that the parents work hard, will make sure your child goes to school and studies, and will teach your child that integrity and responsibility are primary values. Or you may put your child with parents who will be as affectionate to your child as the first couple but who have never worked, are indifferent to your child's education, think that integrity and responsibility (when they think of them at all) are meaningless words-but who have and will always have plenty of food and good clothes and amenities, provided by others.

Which couple do you choose? The answer is obvious to me and I imagine to most readers: the first couple, of course. But if you are among those who choose the first couple, stop and consider what the answer means. This is your own child you are talking about, whom you would never let go hungry even if providing for your child meant going hungry yourself. And yet you are choosing years of privation for that same child. Why?

This article is from The National Review back in '88... I think it pretty much sums up Conservative Values and the values of the commenters on the previous post.

....

11 comments:

janice said...

Chris, you said;

"Freaking-A, Tsofah... You weren't poor... You were destitute.

What happened? Were you thrown out of your home? Did you leave home? Were your parents poor?"

I've got to tell you, I'm STILL laughing at that comment!

And, I'd like to hear the rest of Tsofah's story too.

Grammy said...

In my family there is a young couple who lives in a 10,000 square foot, two bedroom, one bath home. He makes about $35,000 a year. She is a stay at home Mom. They drive two rattle trap cars. They have two beautiful girls ages 7 & 10. They are deeply committed to Christ and to raising their kids to know and love him as their Lord and Saviour. They struggle, but here's the interesting thing...they don't even know they're poor!!!

On the other hand, my manager is about the same age. He told me they can't afford to have kids yet until their interior decorator figures out how to get their decor right. His wife is a lawyer. His attitude tells me that in a way, he thinks they're poor! They go to church regulary and they're all confused about religion. There's a lot about my manager that I love and I'm not being judgemental about him and his values because I don't know what weird pressures in his background led him to have that values system. But I don't want it perpetuated in my children.

In a heartbeat, I'd want my children raised by the first family, and it wouldn't take them a heartbeat to accept the responsibility.

Tsofah said...

Janice, Chris, all:

My family was poor, I guess. When I was 17 and graduated from high school I decided to leave home stay with some relatives elsewhere while looking for a job so I would be able to live on my own. Once on my own, as I said, this salaried job was not enough, hardly, to live on.

My first home, on my own, was at a dorm at the Y. After a couple of months there, I moved into an efficiency apt., and then shared a two bed-room apt., then decided it was easier and cheaper in a different efficiency apt., then - met my husband in my late twenties.

During all this time, many people thought I was doing well, etc. They thought I walked as a part of being a "health nut".

When I finally left my job due to pregnancy complications, I was making $15,000/year. My take home pay was less than $1100 a month. Yes, a MONTH.

My husband isn't wealthy by any means. But we are better off than I was alone.

I know a lot of people like me. They just don't have affordable homes available near enough to work to walk; or mass transit; and can't afford a car. Some just can't find a job because there aren't any jobs to find right now.

Transportation is so much needed in order to get and hold onto a job. With gas prices so high last summer, some people near here sold off wedding rings, etc., to be able to afford gas to work.

Scripturally, it says to "give", it's doesn't say "judge", or "ask". There were people who did that for me. Now I pay it forward.

janice said...

I'm not speaking of Tsofah's testimony, only from my own.

I know from personal experience, if I was given (from the government or charity) all I needed to survive ie food, a home and paid utilities ect., I wouldn't have worked harder to propel my son and me forward, there would have been no incentive to do so. Not to live a more comfortable life, but to eat and keep a roof over our heads. There's also a level of self-respect and pride that comes with being self-sufficient.

How one uses governmental welfare, the lack of oversight, tends to anger folks. It does me. If a class on personal responsibility and budgeting were mandated when one accepts help from the government it may give the additional helping hand that person needs to be independent.

Just my opinion....

janice said...

And I would ask the first couple to care for my son. A strong, moral foundation can overcome poverty. I would want him to be rich in knowing God, our Lord Jesus Christ.

ChuckL said...

Ephesians 4:28 (NIV) He who has been stealing must steal no longer, but must work, doing something useful with his own hands, that he may have something to share with those in need.


2 Thessalonians 3:10 - 15 (NIV) For even when we were with you, we gave you this rule: “If a man will not work, he shall not eat.” We hear that some among you are idle. They are not busy; they are busybodies. Such people we command and urge in the Lord Jesus Christ to settle down and earn the bread they eat. And as for you, brothers, never tire of doing what is right. If anyone does not obey our instruction in this letter, take special note of him. Do not associate with him, in order that he may feel ashamed. Yet do not regard him as an enemy, but warn him as a brother.

ChuckL said...

We have discussed whether or not to help the poor & which poor to help. In doing so, we lose track on another issue: should we be seeking & implementing the means to reduce poverty, or should we perpetuate & most likely worsen poverty?

I do not know anyone participating here who would choose the latter. If I'm wrong, you can let me know. Assuming that we are agreed on the former, then we must seek to discover what reduces poverty.

More than anything else, it comes down to individual choices. I have read motivational books by those who have "lost it all" once or multiple times and entered into dire financial straits (ie, poverty) but decided that they would not remain there. And they don't. I have worked with others (as mentioned in a previous thread) who refuse to change any part of their behavior and remain in poverty - or pretty doggone close.

I left college with about $200 in a checking account, no debt, and a commission in the military. My choice was to enter military service, and it worked out well. I left active duty military service to enter pastoral ministry. I spent three years in school again and did not have a full-time job that whole time. My wife worked min wage in a campus office until we had our first child. After that, she did not work again until our second (last) child was almost through with high school. Except for the opportunity to serve on active duty again for 4 years, I have served in small churches. Financially, that translates to low pay - a lot less than many of my secular peers with equivalent education. Yet, we have been able to save & invest for both our future and for current contributions. How? By making choices that allowed us to accomplish that.

Now, however, I am being penalized by a wicked market and, probably, higher tax margins for the irresponsibility of others both poor and rich. I am not happy about it, and I am certainly not happy with the decisions imposed upon me by this administration and Congress. The best empirical evidence of economics demonstrates that the policies they are proposing and implementing leads to more, not less, poverty. Does this make any sense whatsoever? Did I mention that I am not happy about it?

In the first place, it threatens the plans that my wife and I worked and sacrificed so long for. Second, it has wrecked a lot of the charitable contributions we used to make. Just last October, I heard a missionary speak of the tribes in northern Thailand where he serves. For a loan of only $2,000.00, a tribal family can secure the means to earn a living for themselves. I sat there and thought that I can fund all or part of a loan like that. That was then and this is now. In that short time, that picture has changed. Why? Because the actions of the just finished and the current administrations and Congresses insist on implementing policies that reduce wealth, and even extremely responsible people have to suffer the consequences.

A free market economy is not what we might call perfect, but it has been proven many times over to be many times better than any type of collective economy. But since we are moving away from a free market toward collectivism, expect the following: more hunger; more homelessness; more poverty; and fewer people of compassion to respond to the needs of others.

From Genesis to Revelation, the Bible is filled with lessons of responsibility and accountability. When irresponsibility swayed the day, bad things happened. Still does. That is why Ameirca's Founders created the government - a Constitutional Republic - that they did. The fact that it is being dismantled should be of grave concern to us all.

Malott said...

Chuck said: "...since we are moving away from a free market toward collectivism, expect the following: more hunger; more homelessness; more poverty; and fewer people of compassion to respond to the needs of others."


Chuck, I'll add: In an effort to build support for the Democrat Party, disguised as an effort to help the poor... We will all become poorer. Inflation will cause a problem for the elderly from which they will never recover...As the nest egg that they would have used to enjoy their retirement becomes only enough for survival.

Inflation and higher prices (to offset new taxes) will leave the poor in worse shape along with the rest of us.

Liberals never learn.

Grammy said...

Ironically, I just got this message in an e-mail today from a person who is heading up our local branch of a charity called "Family Promise". Here's a link to it if you want to see what it is about:
http://www.familypromise.org/About-Us

It's mission is as follows: "Our mission is to help homeless and low-income Americans achieve sustainable independence."

We have many families in our area in need of every life sustaining thing and the program is not finding enough takers. I suppose one could ask whether the program is just way off base on what it offers, but here is what she says in her message:

"One of the challenges we face is finding families in need of our program and willing to commit to it. While we know there are many Beaufort County families in need, we have to find them. I have met with numerous agencies and service providers to publicize the program and generate more referrals.
Another challenge that we did not foresee is the culture of nearsightedness in the population we serve. I have had countless interviews with families who qualify for Family Promise but decide not to enter the program. Many families only seek emergency care in desperation and do not look down the road to the next obstacle. When someone is not able to pay their electricity bill, often their only concern is getting enough money to keep the electricity on with no thought of what they will do in 28 days when the next month’s bill is due. We are grateful for the irreplaceable emergency care providers that faithfully serve our neighbors in these times of crisis. "


Something is terribly wrong.

By the way...in my earlier message, I meant that the home of the family I was describing was 1,000 sq ft, not 10,100. Just goes to show that a zero is not nothing!

ChuckL said...

"Liberals never learn."

Actually, I think that liberals do learn - very well. This is why they are in the position they are in today - ruling the world.

It is conservatives who haven't learned. We haven't learned, at least politically speaking, that when we have the majority to rule as a majority. I'm not advocating totalitarianism, but the types of compromises made over the past few years crippled conservatives' abilities to be able to point out the benefits of conservative ideology.

We haven't learned how to maintain courses of instruction in the school systems that openly and honestly evaluate the results of conflicting ideologies.

We haven't learned how to express ourselves both rationally and emotionally in a manner that captures the hearts and minds of people.

And, in all honesty, I do not know that we will. I do not know if it is possible because the type of free society advocated by conservative ideology ironically paves the way for deceptive ideologies to arise and flourish.

In the end, your post of March 31 applies.

Oh, and you are no doubt correct about the looming inflation. Unfortunate.

Delta R. Vines said...
This comment has been removed by the author.