You should probably come on over here to the US and see all the programs available for the poor and the children.
It is our middle class which is disappearing. Also, our middle class whose back is being broken by taxes to support those people who choose not to work, yet continue to have children.
Many of the middle class whose taxes go to medicaid (for the non-working poor and their children) do not themselves have healthcare.
Time to stop encouraging shiftless poverty and focus on the working poor.
EDIT: We also have hundreds of non-profit, non-governmental entities whose sole function is to provide charity to the poor. We middle class American Christians are givers. We just do not subscribe to the notion that the proper role of government is charity.
2006-12-12 05:15:48
·
answer #1
·
answered by ? 7
·
3⤊
0⤋
Using the standard definition of the word poor: The answer
to the why part of the question would be, they don't make
enough enough money.
The poverty level is just under 20,000 dollars a year. At that
amount you are qualified for food stamps and section 8 housing.
This will suffice until you can advance yourself to a higher
pay rate.
This means that not all of the 37,000,000 people classified as
poor are in fact poor. They just don't make enough to afford
luxuries.
The truly poor people do not have jobs, they live on the street
or in shelters. Some of them do make an attempt to better themselves. Some do not.
For example: Most larger areas have day labor offices. These
places pay the same day you work.
The one thug that both levels of poor have in common is the
attitude that they can not do better. Nothing could be further from
the truth.. Legal opportunities arise on a daily basis, but because
of the attitude they do not recognize them. Or worse, they
believe they will lose something if they do take advantage of
an opportunity.
As for the Christian right, we hold all life precious, not just the
unborn. However, the unborn have no voice of their own.
I actually didn't mean for this to go on this long. Oh well!
MERRY CHRISTMAS and have a nice day.
Thank you very much, while you're up!!
2006-12-12 05:15:39
·
answer #2
·
answered by producer_vortex 6
·
3⤊
1⤋
First of all, let's define "poor".
When I got married almost 39 years ago we moved into a one bedroom unfurnished apartment in the attic of a very old house. We got some hand-me-down furniture and put a borrowed mattress on the floor. I made $350 per month in the USAF and my wife didn't work. Our food budget was $18 per week. We had one rotary dial black telephone and we went to a movie about once a month. I got hold of a broken B&W TV and tested the tubes and fixed it myself. It got 3 fuzzy channels. We had one radio and some books.
Oh yeah...we also opened a savings account. When we needed a toaster, we saved $5 per month until we could pay cash for one. Two years later we had $250 in that savings account. We got our first credit card three years later and paid the entire balance every month. We still do. It took us ten years to save $5,000 to make a down-payment on our first house.
Were we "poor"? I think not. We were young. And we lived VERY simply, and always within our means. That's why today, we live well. It's not because we were "lucky" or had rich parents or stole from the less fortunate. We succeeded because we worked hard and had common sense.
The other day I was in a discussion with a very liberal and very good friend. He said that "today, the working poor have no chance. They can't live on an entry level blue collar paycheck".
I disagreed. The problem is that many of those starting out think "getting by" requires two cell phones, a computer and a color TV with 120 cable channels. They have a car payment (or two) and tons of credit card debt on which they make the minimum monthly payment.
I'd suggest that they try my method. Live as simply as my wife and I did and NEVER spend a nickel you don't have. And when somebody tries to patronize you and tell you that you're "poor" you can tell him that a person who works hard, has no debt and puts food on the table cannot be defined as "poor".
I’m not alone. Most of the well-off people I know can relate similar stories about starting out with nothing. They never felt sorry for themselves and they damned sure didn’t want some bleeding heart giving them a handout.
(A job, maybe… but a handout, NEVER).
Think about it.
2006-12-12 14:46:44
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
i agree with one point in all these answers alot of people are ;azyand want to use the goverment by just having children but put into play this when you people who have do not have anything to to look forward to when our goverment oasses laws like no child left gehind are when our companys move and go over seas have anyone of you ever been to a poor communtiy where everywhere you look people are suffering or where i live people are spending hundreds and thousands on light bills because a company can charge what they feel but we are free to day if we do not make enough because as a country we do not give a damn and the Christians right is mostly all talk we Jesus was here he helped and talked to the poor he did not go to the rich so many Christians are all talked no substance
2006-12-12 07:41:37
·
answer #4
·
answered by connerkent06 2
·
2⤊
1⤋
As of 2004 there were 37 million people below the Federal poverty threshold. This was 12.7% of the population.
When you factor out recently-arrived immigrants, college students, and the handful of other types of folks who one expects to be poor the numbers drop to 23 million and 7.9%.
Your points are valid but I would remind you that being poor isn't what it used to be. As an example, some 20-odd percent of the poor own their own homes.
The truly poor are living in small rural communities with little or no services, very poor housing conditions, and, typically, just enough to eat. There are approximately 4.2 million people living in those circumstances and I suspect that if politicians decided to focus on them first and foremost there would be little complaint from either side.
2006-12-12 04:54:52
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
0⤋
your argument is exactly what the lazy have figured out. "well if I keep having kids then they cant deny me money so I can continue to be lazy." are there some that this is not the case? ofcourse. but we have opened the door and they are flooding to the govt coffers. where do you draw the line? You cant tell them what to do but you have to help them when they make bad or purposeful decisions.... the beginning of it was worth wild but it has gotten to the obscene and it needs to stop. call me selfish or greedy I dont care but there are example after example of people that have gotten out of the situation and a majority of them can if they really wanted to...
2006-12-12 04:54:27
·
answer #6
·
answered by CaptainObvious 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
Because some people are laaaazy. Others had a few bad breaks, but those are the ones who won't be poor forever.
2006-12-12 04:53:29
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Sounds like you answered your own question. Lazy leaches that won't get off their butt and work. But satistics say the number is going down. Check this site out. http://www.acf.hhs.gov/news/stats/6097rf.htm
2006-12-12 04:58:54
·
answer #8
·
answered by jay r 2
·
2⤊
1⤋
A lot of poor, but IMHO they are the lazy ones who would rather sit at home on their fat butt and collect a check than work, the ones who said they didn't need an education etc.
2006-12-12 04:42:23
·
answer #9
·
answered by zombiefighter1988 3
·
2⤊
2⤋
Having visited some countries in Africa, There are areas in the southern states of America that make those villages look like a stay in the Hilton. All this from the 'supposed greatest nation on earth'.
Sometimes I wish Americans travel more.
2006-12-12 04:47:49
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
4⤋