|
| quote: | Originally posted by jerZ07002
Thank you for pointing those out. you certainly raise real issues for the extremely poor. And, it is important that your clarified that you meant people in extreme poverty can't climb the ladder (i agree that it is much more difficult for them than it is for a working class kids, of which I was one).
|
I think I see what you mean now as well when you talk about personal choices trumping the structural nature of some of these, but I would still argue that even in matters of "personal choice" the deck is stacked in favor of a particular outcome.
| quote: | | I get the structural aspect of this argument, but there really isn't a way to avoid this other than direct government funding. A private enterprise is not going to lend money to an un-creditworthy borrower just to satisfy a social goal. |
Unfortunately, this is true in the US, but in the developing world we've discovered ways to circumvent the role of government in this equation.
http://www.microfinancegateway.org/...le/detail/25590
| quote: | | i read a good article on this. Unlike some of the other arguments, this is much less structural than a consequence of poor choices by people utilizing these services. |
I agree that this is a result of poor choices in some segments of society, but you have to take into account that 22 million Americans don't even have a bank account. Pawn Shops and places where you can trade in car titles for loans become the only way of securing funds in times of economic shock - with no savings and no means of securing a loan, people can be forced into bad financial decisions.
Another thing that plays into this is another trap altogether - The Institutional Knowledge Trap - when a family is poor chances are that education is low and the resources available (internet, books, etc.) to learn about opportunities are scarce. The social network is largely in the same boat, so this is a reason why we see poor people not even knowing about the opportunities that are available to them or how to secure them (such as Medicare, microfinance loans, etc.). Their lack of knowledge becomes a trap. This is why community organizers often focus on community education programs.
| quote: | | i agree in concept, but i would like to see support with solid numbers. i'm not asking you to provide it, i'm just saying that i'm uncertain of the extent to which this goes on and whether it could actually be a structural element holding down a large portion of the population. It very well could be a real part of the rural culture that i'm unfamiliar with. |
This is indeed more common in the agricultural sector, where laws governing child labor and mandatory schooling aren't adhered to as closely. It's very common in the Midwest to hold back students in Middle School and High School from attending class in order to help out at home with harvests. Eventually many of these students drop out - some rural public school districts have much higher drop-out rates than the most "ghetto" neighborhoods in urban centers.
That said, I watched an interesting independent film this weekend about immigrant families in the Bronx and their propensity to have children forgo education in order to help earn enough money to put food on the table, so I assume it does happen.
| quote: | | i dispute that this is a structural issue. this is simply poor personal choices that have economic consequences. |
This is a bigger issue in the developing world, but it isn't really correct to view it as a poor personal choice on behalf of the parents. They're viewing it in a coldly practical way - the more children, the better off they will be in the future. That's more children able to contribute to household income in the near future, and a higher likelihood that someone will be able to take care of them when they can no longer work. It's like blindly rolling a dice 12 times to ensure that you roll at least one 6. The unintended economic consequence of course is that by bearing more children into poverty who will likely go on to make the same fertility choices, you're substantially increasing the number of people in poverty.
| quote: | | what's the trap? Did you mean to say that historically the poor have been voiceless? If so, I see this as a consequence of personal choices not to mobilize. |
Yes, I didn't phrase this in terms of a trap. Collective action is a problem, because most people are more concerned with securing food and shelter than taking steps that are available to them through collective action. It's mostly a time and energy concern, though lack of institutional knowledge is also key.
| quote: | | again, this is only a structural issue if you disregard the fact that it is entirely dictated by personal choices. With other issues, like the health care trap, families aren't consciously decided to forgo health care. |
I can't remember the economist who writes about it, but this is more a case of economic coercion, where economic choices are dictated by circumstances. If you had a choice between working as a janitor for 5.15/hour or joining an organized crime group where your food and shelter for your entire family was covered, which would you choose? If we view opportunity cost as important, the only "smart" economic decision is to become a criminal. Much higher returns. And gangs are about the only groups in most poor communities to collectively share risks in an effective manner.
___________________
|
($11.2 trillion..off the chart, lol)
