[lit-ideas] Re: [lit-id] The Poverty of Heritage
- From: JimKandJulieB@xxxxxxx
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 20:55:29 EDT
So, as it has seemed to me for a few years now, the so-called "Middle Class"
in America is rapidly disappearing, leading to a country of vastly rich and
vastly poor. Is this a trend similar in the UK? In other European
countries? In Asia? Must there be a meta-narrative of poor/rich, struggle
economically, establishment of some sort of Middle Class with the extremely
rich and
extremely poor in the minorities, followed by a decline to a point where the
"Middle Class" no longer exists? I realize that's a huge over-simplification,
but I'm not sure I understand the triggers and causes for the trajectory
here, and whether they would apply similarly in other countries.
Julie Krueger
ignorant
========Original Message======== Subj: [lit-ideas] Re: [lit-id] The
Poverty of Heritage Date: 5/24/06 7:36:51 P.M. Central Daylight Time From:
_judithevans1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx (mailto:judithevans1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx) To:
_lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx (mailto:lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx) Sent on:
JK>I don't know that there is an argument against the U.S. being
the "overall" richest nation in the world.
there isn't.
JK> I think the point of contention is the Grand Canyon size crevasse
in the U.S. between the rich and those in true poverty.
It is. We're going the same way as you but here the gap is nowhere near as
massive.
----- Original Message -----
From: _JimKandJulieB@xxxxxxxx (mailto:JimKandJulieB@xxxxxxx)
To: _lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx (mailto:lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2006 1:32 AM
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: [lit-id] The Poverty of Heritage
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
____________________________________
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.392 / Virus Database: 268.7.0/345 - Release Date: 22/05/2006
Other related posts:
