[lit-ideas] Re: [lit-id] The Poverty of Heritage

  • From: JimKandJulieB@xxxxxxx
  • To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 20:32:23 EDT

I don't know that there is an argument against the U.S. being the "overall"  
richest nation in the world.  I think the point of contention is the Grand  
Canyon size crevasse in the U.S. between the rich and those in true  poverty.
 
But maybe I'm missing the point. Or all the points.  It wouldn't be  the 
first time.
 
Julie Krueger

========Original  Message========     Subj: [lit-ideas] Re: [lit-id] The 
Poverty of Heritage  Date: 5/24/06 7:15:26 P.M. Central Daylight Time  From: 
_lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (mailto:lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxx)   To: 
_lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx (mailto:lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx)   Sent on:    

I don't understand the  reaction.  These results are innocuous.  The U.S. is 
the richest  nation in the world by several orders of magnitude.  Why should 
anyone be  surprised that we are, well, rich?  Why should anyone be surprised 
that our  poor, defined as such by our own standards, are better off than the 
poor of  other nations?  This is a yawn as far as Iâm concerned.  Only those  
with a drum to beat, who want to demonize the U.S. would be disappointed and  
doubtful.  They want the richness to turn to poverty.  They want to  believe 
that the U.S. is the worst nation in the world, that it is the most  unfair, 
the 
hardest in which to live, and to work, etc etc.   
There have been polls  asking various people throughout the world, where do 
you want to live, and of  those who wanted to emigrate, the vast majority 
wanted to live in the U.S.âeven  Middle-Easterners  Why would that be true if 
all 
those Leftist demonizing  stories are also true?   
Lawrence 
-----Original Message-----
From:  lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
On Behalf  Of Carol Kirschenbaum
Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2006 3:36 PM
To:  lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [lit-ideas] [lit-id] The Poverty of  Heritage 
Skewing observable facts to support one's own argument  is hardly limited to  
Conservative think tanks like the Heritage Foundation.  But dear me, this  
report cites the fact that The Poor have color  televisions as testament to  
their relatively opulent lifestyle in  America. 
Find a b&w TV these days. Really. Color TV sounds  opulent, all right, but  
the truth is, color TVs are industry norm. (I paid $50  for mine, last year.) 
 
Along the same lines, the report tells us that a  majority of The Poor have  
air conditioning--up from 36%, I think it was--30 years  ago. Again, look at  
the context--demographic shifts, in the past 30 years,  to the American  
Southwest, thanks to AC. (Would people move back up  north if there were no  
AC in areas that reach 100-plus degrees? With the price  of fuel now, we may  
soon find out.) 
Ditto for cars. Three-quarters of The Poor have  cars, the report says.  
Let's suppose this is true, and let's suppose, for the  sake of argument,  
that The Poor who were interviewed for this report  represents people in  
shelters and such. What's the proportion of The Poor, a  la Heritage, who  
live in congested cities like NY, Chicago, DC,   where The Middle Rich don't  
usually have cars? So they're talking about the  suburban/rural poor, then.  
Not the elderly or disabled, who can't drive. The other  third, without cars, 
 
are working age but don't work--the Idle Class, as this  report implies. 
It seems the Heritage folks are talking about welfare,  specifically, women  
with dependent kids. The focus is on absent fathers and  mothers who don't  
work "enough." Presumably, the report claims, more hours  of work would lift  
this family out of poverty. More hours at minimum-wage  jobs? Who takes care  
of those dependent children? Mom, if only Dad would come  to his senses and  
be a responsible family guy. 
But why doesn't it work this way? Sounds reasonable  enough, right? That's  
the problem with this Heritage Foundation report, in a  nutshell: They had  
the solution before they wrote, they thought, and they  filled in the blanks  
with stats (many out of context) that supported their  conclusions. 
Lawrence, I hope your reading on Muslims  has more power to it than this. 
Carol 
------------------------------------------------------------------ 
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub,  vacation on/off, 
digest on/off), visit  www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html

Other related posts: