undefined


On a similar note, most Americans also say that work is the best way out of poverty. Likewise, the majority of Americans, 83 percent agree that work should be required by those receiving welfare.

However, Washington’s approach to poverty has been just about the exact opposite. What has been the result of 50 years and roughly $20 trillion of government welfare? The poverty rate—perhaps more appropriately called the “self-sufficiency” rate—has not improved since the “War on Poverty” began in the 1960s. Today, government welfare dependence is high, welfare spending is high, and work rates among the poor are comparatively low.

Another major player in poverty is family breakdown—which came in fourth in the poll (and 13 percent gave this as the number one reason for poverty). Children in single-parent households are over five times as likely to be poor compared to children in married-parent households, and the number of children born to single mothers is at historic highs at over 40 percent. 

I'm there with numbers 3, 10 and 24 not in that order. 

Considering that class mobility is nearly non-existant in this country (or any country perhaps), I think the biggest indicator of poverty is being born into poverty.

What's that meme about the women of Africa? If hard work equated to wealth, all of the women in Africa would be rich. 

class mobility is nearly non-existant in this country

You really believe that?

How do you explain all of the people in America who have risen in wealth??? 

Considering that class mobility is nearly non-existant in this country (or any country perhaps),

I think upward class mobility is made from a few more ingredients than luck. 

If hard work equated to wealth, all of the women in Africa would be rich.

Surely hard work does not GUARANTEE wealth, but I would say almost all wealth is created through hard work. 

Surely hard work does not GUARANTEE wealth, but I would say almost all wealth is created through hard work.

Yes, as well as working smart. 

It would be interesting to know exactly who participated in this "survey."
I'm guessing it isn't people currently in poverty. 

A lot of wealth is created on the backs of those in poverty. 

A lot of wealth is created on the backs of those in poverty.

No, not really..... Not in America. 

Poverty is caused by a series of poor choices. Education in this country is available to anyone who wants it. So that is no excuse. If you are poor, do not buy lottery tickets, cigarettes, alcohol, drugs or commit crimes. And don't play the blame game. Look at where you are and where you would like to be and set goals. Instead of getting caught up in the welfare system, get a job. While working take classes to ensure you are promotable. Be kind and courteous and go the extra mile. Internal and external customers will take note. Often this leads to offers and opportunities. Hard work increases your self-esteem and your self-worth. You can beat the cycle of poverty! 

Yes, really.

And notice that I didn't say ALL wealth. I said a lot of wealth.

But I guess it depends on your definition of wealth.

There is a lot of reasons why people become wealthy - education, hard work, luck, being born into it, etc. but fact is, there are a lot of wealthy people in America who are so due in large part to those working for them. And many of those people are lower income, borderline poverty. 

The greatest predictors of poverty are being born into poverty and low education. That's not universal, of course, but there's a direct correlation between education and economic status. 

. but fact is, there are a lot of wealthy people in America who are so due in large part to those working for them.

I would argue that there are far MORE people who are middle class due to the wealthy people who have built companies and provided good jobs......

Are the middle class also living off the backs of the poor? 

Why are you attempting to switch the conversation?

Sure, there are a lot of middle class who are so because of the wealthy.
That doesn't negate the fact that some of the wealthy are so because of the lower class. 

That doesn't negate the fact that some of the wealthy are so because of the lower class.

For the sake of argument, lets say that is true, what then is the problem?

Are you saying that the poor are exploited? 

Of course the poor are exploited. It's not necessarily a bad thing...it's been happening since the dawn of time. It's a necessary evil, so to speak.

We will always need minimum wage workers - they provide services that are beneficial and make our lives easier.
I think the minimum wage should be raised though. Wealthy CEOs will still be wealthy if they provide their workers a living wage.

Not everyone will be educated and successful.

But to insinuate that the poor are poor because they CHOOSE to be poor is inane. Some, sure. But the vast majority don't want to be poor.
How many people work, and work, and work their entire lives and die poor?
A lot.

Hard work isn't always a determining factor in getting out of poverty. 

Class mobility information Here 

Doesn't the military provide a degree for those who join? If you are very poor then can't you join the military, get a degree, and make enough to live on?

A degree doesn't guarantee anything anymore, but you have a way better chance than without one. 

Does the military provide a degree?

Absolutely not.

But, in my experience, military service and experience trumps a degree.

Now, there are programs that help obtaining a degree easier, but it isn't given to you.

Many military, due to work ups and deployments, are not able to attend college.

And, not everyone is qualified to join the military in the first place, especially right now. 

I'm sorry, what I meant was don't they pay for college. Wrong wording. 

My step-son was a Marine for 4 years and he is at Blinn and the government is paying for it. In some branches of the service you can take classes while in the service. 

My daughter knows so many first generation Americans. Most of their parents came here without much of anything. They all know how to work their butts off and value education. You know welfare is not the answer when people say they don't want more hours or more money, because they will lose some of their benefits. It is hard to get an education, work hard or even want to get ahead, when you have never had role models. 

Your step-son is probably utilizing his GI Bill.

There are various programs to help with the education tuition, but everything is dependant upon your MOS/rate, command, deployment schedule, etc.

As a Texas veteran, I qualify for different programs. I have exhausted my GI benefits and will be using my husband's to complete my degree.

But no, the government doesn't necessarily pay for someone's education, and they don't cover 100% of it. 

But, in my experience, military service and experience trumps a degree.

Unless you are an engineer, doctor, lawyer, accountant, geologist,physicist, psychologist etc. 

Doesn't the military provide a degree for those who join? If you are very poor then can't you join the military, get a degree, and make enough to live on?

A degree doesn't guarantee anything anymore, but you have a way better chance than without one.

No, but they do provide ample opportunities for you to earn a degree. Many of their programs are at nearly no cost to the service member. The Navy paid for my degree while I was on active duty. Its a great way to go. 

My husband is an engineer without a degree. So neener neener boo boo!!!

But yes, for the most part you're right.

But I wasn't taking about careers that typically require a longer education. 

No, he is not an engineer without a degree from an accredited university. Sorry, you can't just call yourself an engineer without the credentials. 

OK, I'll tell him he needs to tell his company to change his job title. 

He is not eligible for a professional engineers license without a degree. It doesn't matter what some company says. 

LMAO, it matters since they're the ones paying him...NOT you ;)

Butt hurt cream is two aisles over, Bob. 

Butt hurt cream is two aisles over, Bob.

What's that mean? 

I'm going with 13- if you don't grow up seeing good work ethic, and where education isn't stressed, chances are you'll continue on that path- 

First we need to define poverty better before we start speculating about causes. There's no way we can accurately compare poverty across nations without a standard definition and normalized criteria for comparison.

In this country, we continually redefine poverty upward. Never before in history has America's poor had such a problem with obesity. The poor from the 1930s and before would have LOVED that kind of poverty. These days, the majority of persons in this country we classify as poor have air conditioning, microwave ovens, video media players, and own one or more cars.

I suspect that when we speak about generational poverty these days, it's really a conversation about a state of mind which contributes the most to long term economic woes. 

agree totally-I think 13 says it all- 

If hard work equated to wealth, all of the women in Africa would be rich. 

Right, but what's unique about working hard in Africa is the lack of economic freedoms that African nations typically impose in their preferred forms of government. In many of those nations, starting a business legally is too burdensome to get through the regulations, and too costly to pay for the certifications and licensing. Even if those obstacles were crossed, the labor markets can be highly controlled. Businesses that get this far struggle because with all the corrupt government meddling, the monetary stability is fragile. A heavy government hand limits trade, and cripples investment opportunities. If those nations would do more to promote and advance property rights, use the courts effectively and fairly to protect people from corruption, in addition to embracing forms of government which respect the freedoms of the individual, massive wealth creation would lift millions out of poverty within a generation.

But many of these nations have entire populations with the state of mind that breeds poverty in this country. Other forms of government which are proven to advance wealth creation just don't take root in nations with a tradition of corruption. 

No, he is not an engineer without a degree from an accredited university. Sorry, you can't just call yourself an engineer without the credentials. 

Bob, There are several states where you do not have to have a college education to get your PE. Those states that do not require a college degree do, however, require that you have a certain number of years working in the engineering field before getting your PE. 

Your step-son is probably utilizing his GI Bill.

There are various programs to help with the education tuition, but everything is dependant upon your MOS/rate, command, deployment schedule, etc.

As a Texas veteran, I qualify for different programs. I have exhausted my GI benefits and will be using my husband's to complete my degree.

But no, the government doesn't necessarily pay for someone's education, and they don't cover 100% of it. 



Even then it is not free to military personnel. You have to sign up for it when you enlist and a portion of your pay goes towards those benefits.

I think for Texas its now GI and Hazelwood Act. 

Considering that class mobility is nearly non-existant in this country (or any country perhaps), I think the biggest indicator of poverty is being born into poverty.

Nearly non-existstant? Aren't the majority of millionaires in the US (somewhere around 70%) first generation rich? How many nations can exceed that?