Amazed how people just don’t want to work

MusicalBuzz

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
226
Here’s an anecdote for you….I have an elderly friend who is perhaps one of the largest commercial real estate developers in Georgia. You would perhaps recognize his name if I mentioned him. He and his wife live in a 1200 sq ft cabin on a creek in north Georgia. There is nothing about his lifestyle that would give away that he is worth millions.

Oh, and he went to Tech. 😀

Would love a teaser about the person — not to out the family — but because I have a second-home 850sqft place in Young Harris .. am not worth millions but identify with living in that way.
 

Northeast Stinger

Helluva Engineer
Messages
10,805
Would love a teaser about the person — not to out the family — but because I have a second-home 850sqft place in Young Harris .. am not worth millions but identify with living in that way.
When I retired, my partner and I got rid of over 5000 pounds of stuff, downsized and moved in our 1400 sq foot vacation home that we have owned for about 20 years.

I want to be careful not to our my friend so let’s just say he and his wife live in the same county as I. We are roughly on the same latitude (not the same town) as your second home.
 

Northeast Stinger

Helluva Engineer
Messages
10,805
😳😳 You might consider a class-action lawsuit for your loss.

Sorry for that.
I just mean to say at some point one has to acknowledge laziness and inherent unwillingness to even TRY. I think that’s what we’re facing now vs real institutional challenges in the past.
I’m sure laziness exists but it is very rare compared to the number of times it has been mentioned throughout our history. At some point one has to ask themselves who is gaining by always blaming the poor and who’s economic Interest is being served.

I would rather look at the research and see if there are structural inefficiencies in our system that could be addressed. Blaming the poor for being poor has never worked out well.
 

LibertyTurns

Banned
Messages
6,216
I’m sure laziness exists but it is very rare compared to the number of times it has been mentioned throughout our history. At some point one has to ask themselves who is gaining by always blaming the poor and who’s economic Interest is being served.

I would rather look at the research and see if there are structural inefficiencies in our system that could be addressed. Blaming the poor for being poor has never worked out well.
You’re absolutely right there are inefficiencies in the system. They need to be addressed. How can we be spending as much more on education than the rest of the world and have such poor results?

Secondly, the poor are to blame for being poor. We do not owe them an outcome, only an opportunity. I have dozens of millionaires work for me, all making less than $30/hr. They were responsible over a long time. I have about 12-15 retirements a year, about half are likely millionares the others barely able to survive. Worked their whole life and have nothing to show for it. They have role models all around them, but they bought the expensive new car every 4-5 year, always seemed to have the new things before anyone else,etc. At the end of their life they will subsist on the back of the government and the charity of family.

We cannot guarantee outcomes for a whole population of people. It’s the bell curve of life, you will have people at the extremes but for people that should be in the middle but ended up at the bottom: Who’s responsible for their life’s failure other than themselves? Not me.
 

Northeast Stinger

Helluva Engineer
Messages
10,805
You’re absolutely right there are inefficiencies in the system. They need to be addressed. How can we be spending as much more on education than the rest of the world and have such poor results?

Secondly, the poor are to blame for being poor. We do not owe them an outcome, only an opportunity. I have dozens of millionaires work for me, all making less than $30/hr. They were responsible over a long time. I have about 12-15 retirements a year, about half are likely millionares the others barely able to survive. Worked their whole life and have nothing to show for it. They have role models all around them, but they bought the expensive new car every 4-5 year, always seemed to have the new things before anyone else,etc. At the end of their life they will subsist on the back of the government and the charity of family.

We cannot guarantee outcomes for a whole population of people. It’s the bell curve of life, you will have people at the extremes but for people that should be in the middle but ended up at the bottom: Who’s responsible for their life’s failure other than themselves? Not me.
Blaming the poor for being poor is a fool’s game. Recognizing that all of us had help to get where we are is the beginning of wisdom. Laying emotional charges aside and researching how to make that help more efficient and cost affective ends up helping everyone. As I’ve said in other posts, the research shows that a lot of outcomes are fixed by age 2 and are very predictable. Other industrial countries address that better than we do. Beyond age 2 there are other things that can be done to ease suffering and lessen the economic and social stress that ends up affecting us all.

When there is more upward mobility in countries like England than here then something is broken in our system. As our wealth inequalities continue to reach all time highs it is clear many of us are not getting the same opportunities. Every time we address those lack of opportunities our country does better.
 

MWBATL

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,536
Wife and I had a very interesting discussion with a German couple last time we visited Europe (a few years ago now). We met them in a small bar, enjoyed a couple of bottles of wine together. As the afternoon wore on, they brought up whether we thought some portion of any society's population were simply...lazy. That they did not have the same motivation to work and sense of self-respect that drove many others to want to fend for themselves. They guessed that perhaps 5% of Germans were that way (WAG, of course) and wondered about American society. While on can quibble with the %, I think it is hard to argue that SOME of the poor have chosen that path. SOME have not and have just had other difficulties, ranging from health problems, mental health issues, etc. It's a mix. We all agreed and went on to solve the other problems of the world in a pleasant drunken stupor together.
 

MWBATL

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,536
When there is more upward mobility in countries like England than here then something is broken in our system. As our wealth inequalities continue to reach all time highs it is clear many of us are not getting the same opportunities. Every time we address those lack of opportunities our country does better.
Having lived and worked in England for some years, I can suggest you should take such statistics with a HUGE grain of salt. I would say that the US is still better than the UK in this regard, based on my experience on the ground in both societies. Many people who do such studies do them to support political biases. Some to try to find the truth, but it is a VERY hard thing to do.

But the US is a society where our poor have air conditioning, cellphones, and color TVs. Poverty is actually a relative thing, imho. People who are poor in this country would be considered middle class (or better) in places like Indonesia.
 

4shotB

Helluva Engineer
Retired Staff
Messages
4,941
While on can quibble with the %, I think it is hard to argue that SOME of the poor have chosen that path. SOME have not and have just had other difficulties, ranging from health problems, mental health issues, etc. It's a mix. We all agreed and went on to solve the other problems of the world in a pleasant drunken stupor together.
This is true. It is NOT a binary situation. I agree with others above that there is some percentage of people who are in bad situations by choice or by poor decision making. If my posts created the impression to any who read them that I felt otherwise then it was simply poor writing on my part.
 

LibertyTurns

Banned
Messages
6,216
This is true. It is NOT a binary situation. I agree with others above that there is some percentage of people who are in bad situations by choice or by poor decision making. If my posts created the impression to any who read them that I felt otherwise then it was simply poor writing on my part.
I don’t think anyone’s in disagreement there are people that never legitimately have a chance by virtue of circumstances beyond their control, like born with a significant medical problem, were abused as a child, etc. Special consideration needs to be given to them. These are small numbers.

However, the vast majority have “normal” life challenges and it is impossible to eradicate every life barrier to success that exists. At some point, there needs to be some inherent desire to succeed. We make the schools more efficient and get rid of all the worthless junk, make the streets safe and stop rewarding bad behavior we would do a lot of good. It’s really as basic as that.
 

Northeast Stinger

Helluva Engineer
Messages
10,805
Having lived and worked in England for some years, I can suggest you should take such statistics with a HUGE grain of salt. I would say that the US is still better than the UK in this regard, based on my experience on the ground in both societies. Many people who do such studies do them to support political biases. Some to try to find the truth, but it is a VERY hard thing to do.

But the US is a society where our poor have air conditioning, cellphones, and color TVs. Poverty is actually a relative thing, imho. People who are poor in this country would be considered middle class (or better) in places like Indonesia.
The US ranks 27 in the world in social mobility.
 

LibertyTurns

Banned
Messages
6,216
The US ranks 27 in the world in social mobility.
#1 country in job prospects- United States.

These ranking are generally useless. To say it’s a bad thing that an individual has a good chance of earning well because he’s raised in good environment is a bad thing is comical. Of course they are. The question is why are some left behind? The answers are basic:

a. Broken families- largely due to crime and poor job prospects

b. Lack of education- largely due to a failing education system with misplaced priorities

We keep people down and deprive them of their dignity and then claim we need to take more of their dignity away. How about we fix our failing schools? It needs zero money, just the desire to cut the crap out and fire incompetents. How about we focus on economic policies that create better and higher paying jobs instead of regulating and taxing ourselves to death driving jobs offshore? How about we restore law and order to the streets so people can live in peace instead of being victims of crime, being dragged into destructive cultures like gangs and drugs, etc? These are all in our control and cost less than what we’re doing now. How about we don’t litigate medical care and drugs so they’re unaffordable? Lot’s of things we can do, but we always seem to clamor for the most expensive and worst options for the people we claim to want to help.

 

RonJohn

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,996
Blaming the poor for being poor is a fool’s game. Recognizing that all of us had help to get where we are is the beginning of wisdom. Laying emotional charges aside and researching how to make that help more efficient and cost affective ends up helping everyone. As I’ve said in other posts, the research shows that a lot of outcomes are fixed by age 2 and are very predictable. Other industrial countries address that better than we do. Beyond age 2 there are other things that can be done to ease suffering and lessen the economic and social stress that ends up affecting us all.
In my posts, I have not been "blaming" poor people. I have pointed out that many if not most poor people could be in better positions if they had made better choices. I am trying to be objective, not trying to assign blame or disavow any responsibility for society.

One thing that I stated before is that from personal anecdotal experience, poor people I have seen use money immediately upon receiving it. They seem to have a belief that the money won't be there in a few days. It seems to make a self-fulfilling prophecy. I am not laying blame on them. I am simply saying that if such a person were to plan, decide what they actually need, and budget for those needs, they would have money for a longer period. They would also likely be able to save at least a small amount. If they do that until they actually have some money saved up, they can likely make better decisions about jobs, transportation, housing, etc. I believe that even a lot of middle class people don't actually have budgets and don't realize how important and liberalizing a personal budget actually is.

Back to the poor. I don't advocate blaming the poor and saying it is their fault. I also don't advocate exonerating them because of trauma or difficulty that they have experienced. What I would advocate for is convincing them to make use of opportunities that they already have available to themselves. I won't go into details, but I was in a situation once in my life where I thought that I had zero way out. I sat down with a friend who was an outside observer to the situation, and he just pointed me in a direction. Once you get away from the emotion and stress involved, you can see that things aren't hopeless. This wouldn't apply to people in third world countries, but for most of the poor in the US, there are expenditures that can be eliminated or at least delayed. People don't need cigarettes, vapers, beer, lotto tickets, etc. They might want them, but if they delay spending on those things until the can actually afford them they can work themselves into a better spot.(or hopefully give at least some of them up) It might feel bad to not have those things, or for a class bump up to not have the latest iPhone. However, if your car has an unexpected $700 repair, and you happen to have $1,500 in the bank in an emergency fund, that feels much better than your friends with the latest iPhone who start scrambling to pull together $700 to get their car out of the shop. I don't really care if the poor person is to blame, or if his parent's caused him trauma which cause him to act that way.(which will probably lead to trauma for his kids, and lead to future problems) What we should work towards is getting people to use the opportunities that they already have and maximize them.
 
Last edited:

GT33

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,182
I've been following along and wasn't sure whether or not I wanted to comment, but there's some good ideas being provided. Here's my cut:

The worst thing that can happen to a child is to be in a single parent family. There's a lot of data on it. I understand it's not a good thing to hang onto a bad relationship, but the instability that comes from having a child with only one parent is staggering.

Secondly, how can people do well when they live in a community that they are not safe in? Why would that not be a priority? You'd think it would be pretty uncontroversial that having a safe neighborhood to work and live is a basic necessity for succeeding. Does anyone want to live in a neighborhood with a lot of crime except for a criminal?

Thirdly, why is it a bad thing to educate our children? If the road to success was "school" starting at 1 year old, I'd pay for it. Pay to have people read to children, teach them to write, count, color, etc. Get rid of all this garbage education. If you want to learn about religion or some political cause, get it at home. We should be teaching reading so kids can understand what they're looking at, writing so they can put together coherent sentences and develop their minds, math so they can figure out that $25/hr in a week is $200 more than $20 or that it's going to take them 6 years to pay off that $30k car at $550/month. The should learn about our rights & laws, history of how we came to be and topics like that. The rest of education should be vocational unless you're going to be the next GT grad, you know life skills of value to an employer.

Just my thoughts.
 

Northeast Stinger

Helluva Engineer
Messages
10,805
#1 country in job prospects- United States.

These ranking are generally useless. To say it’s a bad thing that an individual has a good chance of earning well because he’s raised in good environment is a bad thing is comical. Of course they are. The question is why are some left behind? The answers are basic:

a. Broken families- largely due to crime and poor job prospects

b. Lack of education- largely due to a failing education system with misplaced priorities

We keep people down and deprive them of their dignity and then claim we need to take more of their dignity away. How about we fix our failing schools? It needs zero money, just the desire to cut the crap out and fire incompetents. How about we focus on economic policies that create better and higher paying jobs instead of regulating and taxing ourselves to death driving jobs offshore? How about we restore law and order to the streets so people can live in peace instead of being victims of crime, being dragged into destructive cultures like gangs and drugs, etc? These are all in our control and cost less than what we’re doing now. How about we don’t litigate medical care and drugs so they’re unaffordable? Lot’s of things we can do, but we always seem to clamor for the most expensive and worst options for the people we claim to want to help.

There are much much easier solutions than the ones you suggest. Countries with greater social mobility do them.
 

Northeast Stinger

Helluva Engineer
Messages
10,805
Countries that do better than us have a bad educational systems, a lot of crime, high taxes, mostly low paying jobs and little access to medical care? I’m very interested.
This analysis was first done by the CIA decades ago when it was important for our national security to know which countries were stable and which were not. Now that kind of analysis is pretty much the international standard. But generally speaking countries with more opportunities have much greater social mobility. This is measured in a pretty straight forward statistical manner. You can compare crime, health care, education, standard of living, taxes, housing, longevity etc etc.
 

4shotB

Helluva Engineer
Retired Staff
Messages
4,941
Thirdly, why is it a bad thing to educate our children? If the road to success was "school" starting at 1 year old, I'd pay for it. Pay to have people read to children, teach them to write, count, color, etc. Get rid of all this garbage education.
Just my brief $.02 after a decade of teaching at both ends of the socioeconomic spectrum (rural,poor,public and wealthy, suburban,private) on the topic of "fixing education". To leave all other variables the same and attempt to engineer a solution vis a vis our government is throwing good money after bad.

My takeway at the end of the day (after seeing kids who have failed mightily and will continue to do so and kids who have attended the world's best colleges and universities and achieved success as young adults) is that 80% of a child's education is dependent on the home and what happens there. The other 20% is the name on the front of the building. We (general use of the term) want to throw money at this 20% on our Pareto chart. I guess because we either don't understand the issues or it's not as messy as the 80%.

To put it in other terms, new buildings, hiring the best and brightest to work as faculty, etc. is not enough to offset a bad foundation. Again, let me be clear, these are just opinions based on my experiences and I am not sharing them as facts.
 

684Bee

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,644
Just my brief $.02 after a decade of teaching at both ends of the socioeconomic spectrum (rural,poor,public and wealthy, suburban,private) on the topic of "fixing education". To leave all other variables the same and attempt to engineer a solution vis a vis our government is throwing good money after bad.

My takeway at the end of the day (after seeing kids who have failed mightily and will continue to do so and kids who have attended the world's best colleges and universities and achieved success as young adults) is that 80% of a child's education is dependent on the home and what happens there. The other 20% is the name on the front of the building. We (general use of the term) want to throw money at this 20% on our Pareto chart. I guess because we either don't understand the issues or it's not as messy as the 80%.

To put it in other terms, new buildings, hiring the best and brightest to work as faculty, etc. is not enough to offset a bad foundation. Again, let me be clear, these are just opinions based on my experiences and I am not sharing them as facts.
Totally agree with you on this.
 
Top