Living The Dream: What Do You Own – Really?

[Scribbly]

Wow, this thread really exploded.

I would like to say - all communication happens in a context.

As you're fond of pointing out, Nigel, this is a 'white' board. The people who post here have the luxury of time to piss away on the internet in the comfort of places set up to allow them to do so.

Therefore, my comments on 'choice' were aimed at an audience with that basic level of survival pretty well met. If I'm wrong, and we have a surfeit of people living on or below the poverty line then I'll go back and start qualifying all those statements.

Otherwise, I think the notion of choice and being forced to make decisions is wildly overblown amongst the majority of individuals. It very rarely becomes anything so dramatic as 'I must do X or I will starve', but it is very often used as a trap to stop people start taking decisions that require effort in order to better their lot. That can mean going back to school, or just looking for another job to replace the one they complain about all the time.

I still maintain that believing you have no way to make your life better is ultimately one of the most insidious behaviours that modern society can instil in a person. I think that applies right across the cross-section of society. It is an attitude rather than a situation, and it is a self-defeating one which I despise.

Pretty sure at least two of us are below the poverty line. But it doesn't matter what the board demographics are when you're making general statements that would seem to include the majority of the population. If you want to refer to the options available to the board population only, then you need to be more specific.

Furthermore, while most people in the US do have access to options that would improve their lives, many people in the US are unaware of those options. Your final paragraph smacks quite a lot of victim-blaming, and while it skirts the edge of a valid point, it's a little too Tea Party style for my tastes.

I'm pretty sure - though I could be wrong, I admit - that I used the word 'you' constantly, in order to refer pretty much exclusively to The Rev. I thought that would be enough. Since all general statements are wrong (except this one, probably, except when it isn't), you're pretty much moving towards e-prime territory.

The poverty line seems like a fairly useless measurement that pretty much proves my point if you have the cash to maintain regular internet access and the time to use it whilst under it.

And I'm not going to claim to be an expert on American welfare procedure, but if that's the case, then informing people is a very important step.

I don't see how hating an attitude which says 'all free will has been taken away from me, I have no option other than to keep doing what I'm doing' is victim blaming. I don't hate the victims. I hate the attitude, and I would like to see it gone.

But maybe I'm a tea bagger in disguise and secret hate all poor and black people. 

[The Rev]

Wow, this thread really exploded.

I would like to say - all communication happens in a context.

As you're fond of pointing out, Nigel, this is a 'white' board. The people who post here have the luxury of time to piss away on the internet in the comfort of places set up to allow them to do so.

Therefore, my comments on 'choice' were aimed at an audience with that basic level of survival pretty well met. If I'm wrong, and we have a surfeit of people living on or below the poverty line then I'll go back and start qualifying all those statements.

Otherwise, I think the notion of choice and being forced to make decisions is wildly overblown amongst the majority of individuals. It very rarely becomes anything so dramatic as 'I must do X or I will starve', but it is very often used as a trap to stop people start taking decisions that require effort in order to better their lot. That can mean going back to school, or just looking for another job to replace the one they complain about all the time.

I still maintain that believing you have no way to make your life better is ultimately one of the most insidious behaviours that modern society can instil in a person. I think that applies right across the cross-section of society. It is an attitude rather than a situation, and it is a self-defeating one which I despise.

Pretty sure at least two of us are below the poverty line. But it doesn't matter what the board demographics are when you're making general statements that would seem to include the majority of the population. If you want to refer to the options available to the board population only, then you need to be more specific.

Furthermore, while most people in the US do have access to options that would improve their lives, many people in the US are unaware of those options. Your final paragraph smacks quite a lot of victim-blaming, and while it skirts the edge of a valid point, it's a little too Tea Party style for my tastes.

I'm pretty sure - though I could be wrong, I admit - that I used the word 'you' constantly, in order to refer pretty much exclusively to The Rev. I thought that would be enough. Since all general statements are wrong (except this one, probably, except when it isn't), you're pretty much moving towards e-prime territory.

The poverty line seems like a fairly useless measurement that pretty much proves my point if you have the cash to maintain regular internet access and the time to use it whilst under it.

And I'm not going to claim to be an expert on American welfare procedure, but if that's the case, then informing people is a very important step.

I don't see how hating an attitude which says 'all free will has been taken away from me, I have no option other than to keep doing what I'm doing' is victim blaming. I don't hate the victims. I hate the attitude, and I would like to see it gone.

But maybe I'm a tea bagger in disguise and secret hate all poor and black people. 

You are aware that there are in today's society many reasons that would require a person to have the internet, aren't you? But I suppose poor people should just sit quietly in the dark with their hands folded until they decide to make themselves better producing members of society.

My personal physical comforts have been met, no doubt. That doesn't mean that I am incapable of understanding what a person with a different perspective is going through.

Right now I am unhappy about 50% of the time, and have plans in effect that will alter this in such a way as to improve my happiness index to above 80%, which could be the upper band of such a thing.

I wonder if you have the capacity to understand exactly what constant pounding to a persons self esteem, their feeling of personal value (not talking about the kind where one doesn't get the pretty red shoes) can suffer from. Constantly being knocked down. Turning on the television and hearing politicians and would be politicians say to America that you aren't their problem and never should have been their problem.

Pretty much what you said here, if you are poor then it's your own fault and you need to do something about it. While you are competing with college graduates for those exact same jobs in this economy.

[Scribbly]

Yup. That's exactly what I said. Fuck the poor. Fuck your self esteem - having spent six months out of work, I have no conception of what it is like to have low self esteem issues brought on by unemployment and a lack of funds.

I think I'm out of this thread. Somewhat tired of being misrepresented - and maybe that is an issue with my communication, but I think it is more an issue of people reading what they want to read rather than what I wrote.

[Dysfunctional Cunt]

I have regular access to the internet, from work.  I also access from my cell phone which I choose to have as opposed to a house phone and while not considered a "necessity" considering where I live, a phone for me is.

You can't judge people by their internet access, how many may be on at a library or coffee shop between interviews or while studying?

And yes, there are times when people have to decide to do "X" or else they may not have food in their home for a given amount of time.  While they may not starve to death, they will go hungry, their children will go hungry.

As for looking for a job.  Do you have any idea how many people are looking for jobs right now?  I do, and it is insane.  You suggest school.  When one works 60 hours a week between two jobs, just when are they supposed to find the time and the money to go to school when every cent they make is paying their bills?

One does not get to the point of feeling that there is no hope from the get go.  It gets beaten into you by life, by your situation, by the continuous rejections you get from a variety of organizations who, while they should be unbiased and non-judgemental, they aren't.  You wake up every morning and you know you are going to do the same damn thing you did yesterday because you have too.  Your family has to eat. You have to pay the utilities, the rent, buy clothes and shoes, put gas in the car to get to that job you complain about so you can get up tomorrow and do it all over again.  

Yes, people get caught in a rut, but to accuse it of being a rut of their own making is extremely judgemental, especially as you do not seem to have any working knowledge of what it means to be poor.

As someone who knows what it means to live in poverty, what I have now is a real luxury compared to where I have lived in my past and what I've had to do to survive.  Yet I am sure there are many who would see where I live and my circumstances as deplorable in comparison to their own. It still doesn't  mean I'm happy or content.  I am, for the most part, ok with surviving another day.  When the luxuries in your life include 2-ply toilet tissue, it's hard to see the world the same way as others.

[The Rev]

Yup. That's exactly what I said. Fuck the poor. Fuck your self esteem - having spent six months out of work, I have no conception of what it is like to have low self esteem issues brought on by unemployment and a lack of funds.

I think I'm out of this thread. Somewhat tired of being misrepresented - and maybe that is an issue with my communication, but I think it is more an issue of people reading what they want to read rather than what I wrote.

It was not my intention to misrepresent you. I am not talking about the 6 month kind of thing here, but the long term thing. Being born or dragged into horrible circumstance for years. Years that slowly eat onto the core of every aspect of a life.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Wow, this thread really exploded.

I would like to say - all communication happens in a context.

As you're fond of pointing out, Nigel, this is a 'white' board. The people who post here have the luxury of time to piss away on the internet in the comfort of places set up to allow them to do so.

Therefore, my comments on 'choice' were aimed at an audience with that basic level of survival pretty well met. If I'm wrong, and we have a surfeit of people living on or below the poverty line then I'll go back and start qualifying all those statements.

Otherwise, I think the notion of choice and being forced to make decisions is wildly overblown amongst the majority of individuals. It very rarely becomes anything so dramatic as 'I must do X or I will starve', but it is very often used as a trap to stop people start taking decisions that require effort in order to better their lot. That can mean going back to school, or just looking for another job to replace the one they complain about all the time.

I still maintain that believing you have no way to make your life better is ultimately one of the most insidious behaviours that modern society can instil in a person. I think that applies right across the cross-section of society. It is an attitude rather than a situation, and it is a self-defeating one which I despise.

Pretty sure at least two of us are below the poverty line. But it doesn't matter what the board demographics are when you're making general statements that would seem to include the majority of the population. If you want to refer to the options available to the board population only, then you need to be more specific.

Furthermore, while most people in the US do have access to options that would improve their lives, many people in the US are unaware of those options. Your final paragraph smacks quite a lot of victim-blaming, and while it skirts the edge of a valid point, it's a little too Tea Party style for my tastes.

I'm pretty sure - though I could be wrong, I admit - that I used the word 'you' constantly, in order to refer pretty much exclusively to The Rev. I thought that would be enough. Since all general statements are wrong (except this one, probably, except when it isn't), you're pretty much moving towards e-prime territory.

The poverty line seems like a fairly useless measurement that pretty much proves my point if you have the cash to maintain regular internet access and the time to use it whilst under it.

And I'm not going to claim to be an expert on American welfare procedure, but if that's the case, then informing people is a very important step.

I don't see how hating an attitude which says 'all free will has been taken away from me, I have no option other than to keep doing what I'm doing' is victim blaming. I don't hate the victims. I hate the attitude, and I would like to see it gone.

But maybe I'm a tea bagger in disguise and secret hate all poor and black people. 

"You" sounds pretty general, unless you specify whether it's a specific "you" or a general "you".

As for the "all free will has been taken from me" attitude, that's something YOU have chosen to project as a result of people pointing out that not everyone has so many viable options available to pick and choose from. Nobody said that anyone was espousing a victim mentality; it's a straw man. Pointing out that not everyone has as many choices and options is not victim mentality, it's recognizing reality. If you simply blind yourself to it, stick your fingers in your ears and go "lalalalala they're only missing out because of the bad choices they make" then you can't really do anything to change things... in fact, you're then falling into the trap of supporting evil through banality.

[The Rev]

Until now I never realized exactly how sensitive this subject could become. It is interesting to see the ones who kind of came after me and the ones who had the same opinion. No DP, I am anything but new here.

[Salty]

Until now I never realized exactly how sensitive this subject could become. It is interesting to see the ones who kind of came after me and the ones who had the same opinion. No DP, I am anything but new here.

Ooh sounds so mysterious. I, for one, am shocked.

[The Rev]

Until now I never realized exactly how sensitive this subject could become. It is interesting to see the ones who kind of came after me and the ones who had the same opinion. No DP, I am anything but new here.

Ooh sounds so mysterious. I, for one, am shocked.

Liar! 

[BabylonHoruv]

In my experience, moving closer to the middle actually gives you less ability to control where you want to be one the spectrum. Most shitty jobs, in part because they're shitty, offer a lot of flexibility as to how much you work, especially if you're good at the job. And if a shitty job doesn't allow you the flexibility you need, it's usually not hard to move on to another shitty job (well, maybe not these days, but up until recently). More "respectable" jobs almost all require that you trade away a minimum of 40 hours a week, during specified times, and sometimes require you to make lifestyle adjustments (you need to follow the dress code, be able to pass the drug test, get a haircut, whatever) in return for the paycheck. When I drove a cab, I could work 2 or 3 days a week if I wanted, as long as I was willing to deal with the consequences (eating once a day, not being able to do anything that cost money, occasionally getting utilities shut off because I misjudged how much I'd make on the nights I worked), and there were a lot of times when I did just that to so I could work on personal projects. Now that I have a "real" job, I don't have that option. I'm expected to be here 40 hours a week even if I'd rather have the time to myself instead of the money.

It's not so much "get a better job, you bum." More "re-assess what constitutes 'necessity.'"

But that assessment only works if you have a certain amount of leeway to begin with.

If you are a young single person, it's not that hard to survive on a shitty part-time job. Add kids to the equation and see what happens. And don't give me some facile solution like "then don't have kids" because that's glib bullshit.

Not so bad in the US currently, we still have a fairly robust welfare system.

I doubt that will continue much longer, but it is the case at the moment.

It doesn't if you don't have an address.

I'd be shocked to discover that Oregon is doing worse than Ohio in that respect and here if you have children and do not have a home, or cannot afford one, you can live in government subsidized housing, thus getting an address.

There are some restrictions on who can get in, and there is a waiting list, but it's not that long, and aside from the requirement of children the restrictions have to do with drug sales, so if you haven't been convicted of selling drugs you're alright.

Mind you it's not a nice place, and you have to put in nearly a full time work week to qualify for the benefits (that covers medicaid and food stamps too though) but it is a roof over your head and an address so that you can qualify for medicaid and food stamps.

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAA

Wait

You're talking about OREGON, right? AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAA

Yes, honey, that's why Oregon doesn't have any homeless people.

As an aside, one of the things I find troubling about your input in this thread is that you act as if being on welfare is somehow not the very thing so many people are fighting to avoid.

Things get a LOT worse than being on welfare, ask anyone in a country that doesn't have a welfare system. 

An American, on welfare, is still doing far far better than a Nigerian at the mean income level for that country.

Yes, it is unpleasant, humiliating, and fucked up, and I am not trying to deny that Oregon has an abundance of homeless.  I don't know Oregon's welfare system at all,  I've only dealt with Washington and Ohio, I assumed Oregon's was better than Ohio's because it's a generally mroe liberal state. California and Washington both have better welfare systems than Ohio and more homeless, I'm sure there are several reasons for this but the one that stands out to me is that you can survive without a house on the West coast much more easily than in the midwest because the winters are so much milder.

There are also a lot of homeless by choice people on the west coast.  I am not saying anywhere near the majority, but a sizeable enough portion of the population that they make a big difference in the amount of people being counted.

[BabylonHoruv]

I think where we're butting heads here is that I never suggested (or meant to suggest) that you have the poverty is a choice and you have the choice to not be poor.

I didn't say that because what the fuck does that say?

Let's try:
I think where we're butting heads here is that I never suggested (or meant to suggest) that poverty is a choice and you have the choice to not be poor.

Ah, OK. Because that, along with whether you can choose to be happy when impoverished, is a significant element of the conversation.

There are so many aspects to this part of the conversation. Is a mother who is unhappy because a child of hers needs (not wants) something that cannot be provided deliberately being unhappy? No, I don't think so. Some ITT are saying there is a choice to be happy regardless. I say that is a very large brushstroke that is fundamentally unfair.

A choice between living in a home in a bad neighborhood and living under a bridge is not a choice at it's core is it?

Not much of a choice, although for a childless person I can definitely see some advantages to the bridge, depending on how bad the neighborhood and the other occupants of the house are. 

[Scribbly]

Wow, this thread really exploded.

I would like to say - all communication happens in a context.

As you're fond of pointing out, Nigel, this is a 'white' board. The people who post here have the luxury of time to piss away on the internet in the comfort of places set up to allow them to do so.

Therefore, my comments on 'choice' were aimed at an audience with that basic level of survival pretty well met. If I'm wrong, and we have a surfeit of people living on or below the poverty line then I'll go back and start qualifying all those statements.

Otherwise, I think the notion of choice and being forced to make decisions is wildly overblown amongst the majority of individuals. It very rarely becomes anything so dramatic as 'I must do X or I will starve', but it is very often used as a trap to stop people start taking decisions that require effort in order to better their lot. That can mean going back to school, or just looking for another job to replace the one they complain about all the time.

I still maintain that believing you have no way to make your life better is ultimately one of the most insidious behaviours that modern society can instil in a person. I think that applies right across the cross-section of society. It is an attitude rather than a situation, and it is a self-defeating one which I despise.

Pretty sure at least two of us are below the poverty line. But it doesn't matter what the board demographics are when you're making general statements that would seem to include the majority of the population. If you want to refer to the options available to the board population only, then you need to be more specific.

Furthermore, while most people in the US do have access to options that would improve their lives, many people in the US are unaware of those options. Your final paragraph smacks quite a lot of victim-blaming, and while it skirts the edge of a valid point, it's a little too Tea Party style for my tastes.

I'm pretty sure - though I could be wrong, I admit - that I used the word 'you' constantly, in order to refer pretty much exclusively to The Rev. I thought that would be enough. Since all general statements are wrong (except this one, probably, except when it isn't), you're pretty much moving towards e-prime territory.

The poverty line seems like a fairly useless measurement that pretty much proves my point if you have the cash to maintain regular internet access and the time to use it whilst under it.

And I'm not going to claim to be an expert on American welfare procedure, but if that's the case, then informing people is a very important step.

I don't see how hating an attitude which says 'all free will has been taken away from me, I have no option other than to keep doing what I'm doing' is victim blaming. I don't hate the victims. I hate the attitude, and I would like to see it gone.

But maybe I'm a tea bagger in disguise and secret hate all poor and black people. 

"You" sounds pretty general, unless you specify whether it's a specific "you" or a general "you".

As for the "all free will has been taken from me" attitude, that's something YOU have chosen to project as a result of people pointing out that not everyone has so many viable options available to pick and choose from. Nobody said that anyone was espousing a victim mentality; it's a straw man. Pointing out that not everyone has as many choices and options is not victim mentality, it's recognizing reality. If you simply blind yourself to it, stick your fingers in your ears and go "lalalalala they're only missing out because of the bad choices they make" then you can't really do anything to change things... in fact, you're then falling into the trap of supporting evil through banality.

Yup. That's exactly what I said. Fuck the poor. Fuck your self esteem - having spent six months out of work, I have no conception of what it is like to have low self esteem issues brought on by unemployment and a lack of funds.

I think I'm out of this thread. Somewhat tired of being misrepresented - and maybe that is an issue with my communication, but I think it is more an issue of people reading what they want to read rather than what I wrote.

It was not my intention to misrepresent you. I am not talking about the 6 month kind of thing here, but the long term thing. Being born or dragged into horrible circumstance for years. Years that slowly eat onto the core of every aspect of a life.

I've been thinking about it. I realize this conversation has pretty much died, but I would like to apologize for getting self-righteous above. On reflection, I was arguing semantics and a point which was in no way based in reality, rather than what I'd like it to be.

I was wrong. Sorry for the bullshit.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Oh look, someone stood on two legs. What a refreshing change.

[LMNO]

I can't find an emote that says, "thank you for showing yourself to be a biped," so I'll just have to say it.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]