*Warning* Wall of Text below
Great post redstring. I guess my position is more of a perspective issue. It doesn't surprise me that only the exceptional or the intelligent that grow up poor make it. I don't find it unfair that the unexceptional poor would have remedial jobs. On the flip side, it's slightly unfair that if you grew up rich but are unexceptional you can at least get a job pushing papers in an office somewhere through connections and knowing how the process works. That's reality though.
Solution? You can't tell a father that his dumb kid can't get a job in his office because that's not fair to the poor kids. The way I dealt with this at my work was by printing up papers explaining to them how to make their money grow and work for them. Unfortunately none of them listened. I offered free English classes. None of them took them. So the only thing left for me to do as an employer was to give nice bonuses and raises so that they were making more money than they might have been worth but could possibly save it and get out of the "poor" bracket. They all bought new cars with the money. I just sighed at that point. They're nice guys but if I lead a horse to water I can't make it drink.
I'm not insisting at all that the unexceptional poor kids should get anything more than what they are fit to do. Can't expect them to be given a job because they're poor, if you're not qualified for the job - then you shouldn't get it. That's reality, just like you said. And we can't hate on the dumb rich kid for being born in a situation where he can get a better job than the poor. Good for him I say. The way I see it, he could have very well been born into poverty - so I'm glad he had some sort of a chance.
I'm just saying that the unexceptional poor guy who can only work jobs he is fit for, his only chance is to raise his child differently than he was so his child won't fall into the same category (though that can be challenge, especially if the kid is born with bad genes to work with.) But proper teachings as a small child and things like that can go a long way to turn things around. I'm not sure how to really get that across to them though. Only time and more research and educating people will help us find the best course of action.
The horse to the water analogy is a perfect example of the problem. No matter how much educating we do, or programs we give, where we've hit a wall is the getting them to drink. Some do but most, like you point out, 'go buy a new car'. But how much can we blame them, they're a product of the way they were raised - they just don't have the mental capacity to understand what they need to do, or at least if they do - they don't have the drive to follow through.
As I've also grown up in poverty, I can understand that many may feel utter hopelessness. Luckily I was born with decent intelligence, but I can't imagine getting myself out of this slump if I was dumb. If I had willpower I'd probably be left to resort to what many men without exceptional intelligence, born in poverty do; they break their back in manual work their whole life just so I can try to give their child a better opportunity. Spending so much time working would in turn would take time away from properly giving their child the emotional development they
should get. Of course we have the mother, maybe, but perhaps she may work as well, or if she is home - she may try her hardest, but stress during pregnancy, stress afterward - this
does affect the child emotionally, and as been shown in research, it also affects their brain development.
Of course, I'm in no way saying this is the norm for people in poverty, as we all know some are satisfying pulling a check and ditching their children. I'm merely giving an example of the vicious cycle some are stuck in. Just imagine if it was instead the
much more common situation - a single mother being the one trying to raise the child. I've read just the other day that new research is showing something around 80% of children born to a single mother is under the poverty line. This statistic had a pretty powerful affect on me, but how can we possibly change this. I don't have the education or knowledge to begin to fix it. I can only hope to raise my child as good as I can when I get the chance.
Just curious what your thoughts would be in this regard. If we were able to fully educate everyone and pull everyone out of poverty, who would be "digging ditches, picking grapes, and laying traffic cones"?
You've earmarked those as jobs suited for the uneducated and less fortunate. Would those then become middle class jobs?
If we raised everyone up through whatever means, would the poor disappear? Or would those at the bottom of the pay scale still be considered poor? If so, what would we do to then pull them up - again?
If all was truly equal, pay, lifestyle, etc., the work of society would still need to be done. Someone has to run the city and someone has to inspect and repair the sewer lines running under the streets. Someone has to design our homes, businesses and factories and someone has to deliver the cement to build them. Someone has to fly the airplane and someone has to put the luggage in the cargo hold.
If I had the choice of sitting on the beach with a cell phone at my disposal making a few calls a day to earn a living or to work on the floor of a hot, smelly, dangerous factory - for the same pay mind you, I know which I'd choose. I know what the majority would choose. How would the work of society be accomplished?
Can we truly make everyone equal or is the human condition such that there will always be those at the top and those at the bottom?
Referring to the first question, this would be a problem best solved by the new massive addition of engineers and similarly suited individuals to create technology to fill those needs. Humans are better suited in other areas than sitting down cones and digging ditches. The man working those jobs would have a wasted life if it wasn't for the fact that it is necessary for food, raising his child, etc.. Those are the only things that give those jobs purpose. In comparison to more purposeful work like sciences, research, education, etc...
& I don't think the bottom class would become the 'poor', at least by definition. I guess unless we're talking about a completely uniform society, there is bound to be someone who is 'at the bottom'. But as far as those people being 'poor', I'd imagine their standard of living would be rated no lower than the middle class today, if not much higher than that. It's hard to predict. I can say though, theoretically I'd think things would get better and better for the bottom class due to technologically developments. I think technology pretty much answers much of the conflicts you're imagining with this sort of society. Which would be hard now, but with a massive influx of engineers, it is most certainly do-able. We probably have the technology to replace many of the manual jobs today, we merely need designs, and we obviously couldn't implement them now due to loss of jobs and the uproar that would cause.
Of course this is all very idealistic and will take time and a lot of work to accomplish - but that doesn't mean it isn't a possibility.
edit: I just wanted to add, in case some have the idea that poor are given chances but they are only lazy and that's why they stay poor for generations. The best way I can explain it is simliar to how darkness is really the absence of light. Laziness is more properly defined as an absence of drive. When is the last time you've seen a baby and thought 'that's a lazy ass baby'. It's because you're not born lazy, you become lazy by influence. It is a lack of being taught drive either by not getting something they needed to develop it, or getting something that hindered the development of it.
Facebook
Twitter