You're getting compassion confused with autocracy. They really have nothing to do with each other. If anything, having compassion and helping the poor would make our society less akin to autocracy, not more. Besides, we _currently_ live in a mostly plutocratic/oligarctic socioeconomic world order, so we're not that far removed from autocracy when you think about it.
Hey David. Great conversation. I love Matthew Desmond. I'm an anti poverty political advocate. I help people all over the country talk to their members of congress about poverty and how to eradicate it and regularly talk to members myself. I would love to talk to you about poverty and the U.S. Congress. The kind of direct advocacy he is talking about is the exact kind of advocacy I do.
The simple answer is that the US does not have an interest in reducing poverty. Because the US ideology in practice does not want to reduce poverty. It uses poverty to incentivize lowest cost labour and it sees poverty as individual rather than collective failure
well in Germany and other European countries people have a great safety net. Universal healthcare, workers rights, great benefits like payed parental leave, payed maternity leave, child benefits, paid sick days, 30 day paid vacation….. Because they decided that the welfare of the majority of the citizens was more important than the wealth of the rich.
No. It's a personal choice. People come from the poorest countries in the world and have a middle class family within one generation in the US. It's not impossible, leftists just aren't willing to work for anything.
@@Stonecoldfrank imagine how incompetent you have to be to think your personal failures are the fault of government. Don't mistake government "incompetence" for malice, they know exactly what they're doing, and the left asked for it. Leftists are just too stupid to understand the consequences of their policies.
Thank you David, for having Matt Desmond on! I saw him on Democracy Now and have been wanting to see more of him, so thank you David, Matt needs to be on more media!!
Thank you for this interview with Matt Desmond. This conversation is the one we need to be focused on. Think of all the problems that would be solved if NO ONE experienced financial stress.
Another area we need to tackle the shareholders expectations. I'm retired and decided to work part-time at a national chain pharmacy/store and no one ever mentioned that I have to clean the bathrooms every night prior to being hired. When I asked why aren't they paying someone to do this ....I was told they use to. So, I assumed that this was to save money and probably at a corporate level.
So when there’s no “new hires” the bathrooms aren’t cleaned, then 🧼 Or does Management add cleaning bathrooms to their tasks 🌞😏 probably both, sometimes; the public bathrooms are unclean.
@@GVGandolfo no only the cashiers had to clean the bathroom, no one else. It was part of your duty after the store closed. I last 6 months and that was enough, but if I would have known before I would not have taken the job. I was pissed to say the least.
You will never 'fix poverty' in the USA while 20% of the nation's wealth is owned by 0.1% (yes, 0.1%, not 1.0%) of the nation's population. In no other country on our planet is wealth so unevenly distributed.
If we became a socialist country then we would all be equally hungry. Those relatively poor would be dead from starvation SO they wouldn't count and there would be no poverty (in small letters: relatively speaking)
@@chrispaul9454 Whose talking about Socialism? All I did was to point out the vast inequality in the USA. Being the richest country in the world, it should be entirely possible to narrow the yawning gap between the super rich and the rest within the framework of capitalist economy, as have most of the member states of the European Union, none of which can be described as socialist, but which, meaured by a vast range of indicators, provide a superior quality of life compared to that of most citizens of the USA.
Parts of America are living in conditions that are terrible. Homelessness, living wages and Healthcare are basic rights. The billionaires are modern day slavers!
@@markzuckergecko621 - to have secure shelter, a living wage, access to health care = why shouldn't it be a right? It's not a unique requirement but difficult to obtain for a myriad of reasons wherever we are in the world.
@@thesmilingtouristguide4931 that's pretty nebulous, that sounds like things you just see as basic, that you're arbitrarily labeling as "basic rights" to appeal to emotions and make it seem like anyone who disagrees with you is a bad person. There are only 2 kinds of rights, positive rights, that are allowed by a governing authority, and negative rights, or natural rights, that can't be granted because they can only be taken away. A positive right would be health insurance, you're not born with the right to have health insurance, it requires someone to offer insurance and enforcement from the government. You're demanding the right to someone's labor, at the barrel of a gun. A negative right is the right to free speech, you don't have to ask for the right to say whatever you want, that right can only be taken away from you.
@@markzuckergecko621 not really. You tell me how you would address these basic conditions? What do you think should be in place to address these basic needs?
As a lifelong independent voter who's values have not changed as a conservative, but who's recognition of the problems we face as a country have changed this is a good description of why I see that the Republican Party even before radicalization was part of the problem. The Democratic Party too has been part of the problem with at least some members who are part of the solution to varying degrees. Joe Biden himself was far more of a neoliberal (which is misleadingly not liberal) earlier in his career. I do admit he was not that way as a president and has earned my vote as a result. His age would be more concerning if his "real age" were as high as his actual age. He's in good shape and will outlive Trump barring the unexpected to which we are all vulnerable as mortal humans. So this conservative independent will continue to look at economic effects of policy and vote accordingly (and with empathy).
Nice interview David. I have read Matt's book and it is a personal life changer for me. I understand so much more about how my feelings of being poor have affected me.
@@jaybennet4491 I'm not the one crying about how anyone should give me anything, I don't want or need anything for free. I'm doing fine, and the people I care about are doing fine, because we're decent people who work for a living and don't demand anyone else's wealth or property.
In the USA "fixing poverty" is unprofitable. A permanent underclass depresses wages and benefits for those employed, if we were to "solve" poverty corporations would not be able to exploit as many people as they now do and corporate profits to the owners would suffer. Till politicians actually represent "the people" rather than corporations and the 1% who own them, poverty will never be "solved" in the USA.
Republicans have blocked raising the STARVATION MINIMUM WAGE for the last 16 years. We have always had poverty, but people could work their way out of poverty. A recent study found the only wat a minimum wage employee could afford renting a room, buying enough food to eat was to work 60 to 80 hours a week. I earned the minimum wage when I was in college. I had enough to rent a room, buy food and see a $1 movie on Friday at a twilight discount show.
@@sergeant_salty Evangelical "pro-life" Republican Missouri Attorney General, now Senator, Josh Hawley pressured local Health Departments throughout the state of Missouri to shut down food for the homeless programs at Thanksgiving and Christmas. They and police were ordered to go to church/liberal group food for the homeless programs and give them the toughest health inspection possible, an in house restaurant check, strongly encouraging them to shut them down. Every food for the homeless program failed, because they had tables to serve hot food, even those which didn't and served sandwiches in wrappers, because they had no bathrooms, when the came to homeless camps. Anyone who would do that would put Ebenezer Scrooge to shame. Police poured bleach on the food in Kansas City and made workers throw sandwiches and other food into dumpsters. Liberal Churches were outraged, except Evangelical Republican Churches, which did not offer the service to Jesus's Blessed Poor. While these mainline/liberal churches and groups complained to the press, including newspapers, including the St. Louis Dispatch made a crusade out of it. The police were ordered to not do that again and a judge reinstituted the 150 year-old policy of spot checking to make sure a suitable health was followed.. ktrh.iheart.com/content/2018-11-12-video-police-pour-bleach-on-food-for-homeless/
@@markzuckergecko621 According to a group which helps homeless kids, 17-years-old and under, some as young as 10-years-old, 5,000 homeless kids in the US die every year. They report beatings, from both criminals and police, and suicide. They also report these kids going through dumpsters looking for food in every region of the country, including the Bible Belt. If you pretend a problem doesn't exist, does it exist?Fastest growing group of homeless is Adopted/Foster Teens aging out of state aid/ABANDONED by their families. Their suicide rate up 60% since 2000, #1 reason, Republicans and Evangelicals have blocked raising the minimum wage for 16 years straight, twice the longest period without a raise in our history, which means kids, but especially homeless kids, will never be able to work their ways out of extreme poverty.. If you FEEL THE HATE for the homeless on Fox and in Bible Belt Church podiums, why don't you meet these kids so you will know who to hate? th-cam.com/video/B9tY8jQvy1I/w-d-xo.html
The minimum wage could be raised to three times its current amount and their would still be poverty(actually, the more minimum wage is increases the more buisnesses will close therefore increasing poverty). A persons success (and I mean the success of getting out of the poverty classification) is mostly determined by how much the person is willing to work/apply himself to no longer be poor. Save welfare for the elderly and physically disabled. Not mothers who continue to get pregnant just to collect bigger government welfare checks.
@@Mr7c2ll owning a house isn't a basic necessity, it's a luxury, and it's fine if that's a goal of yours, I think most people want to own a home at one point. But it isn't going to happen by stamping your foot and demanding that someone give it to you. Take matters into your own hands, earn more money, spend less money. Make sacrifices. You don't get something just because you want it, life doesn't work that way. It never has, and it never will.
If politicians actually worked on creative solutions to our issues we could solve for most of our problems. The issue is that the politicians are the problem.
@@shakeyj4523 so maybe you should stop asking the billionaire owned politicians for help, and fix your own problems. Politicians only have the power that we give them.
@@markzuckergecko621 Do you live on the moon? No? Then things work better when people do not work in isolation. Your over the top libertarian trope is nonsense.
@shakeyj4523 The Billionaires own them because the politicians are weak. We do not produce strong leaders anymore. Maybe because some of our best leaders have been assassinated? Maybe the best leaders don't even go into politics. They just go stay in their lane and support their families.
I don't think you can eliminate poverty. All you can do is redefine it. What we consider poverty today would have been considered luxury throughout most of history. The zoning objections to low income housing are usually related to keeping out crime which destroys property values. Whether this is a valid concern is a question for another time. For many people the value of their homes is their security for the future and their retirement. What right does anyone have to say that security should be sacrificed for someone else?
Capitalism requires some percentage of "the poors" in society. Fear of this condition makes many kinds of people complacently compliant to Capitalisms desires.
The explosion in homelessness and evictions began with the same time interest rates were lowered to zero practically allowing a speculative class to buy up single-family homes for the purposes of renting them out, Blackstone and Vanguard for instance including Chinese. In Phoenix Arizona Blackstone but 3500 homes in one gulp that weren't even listed in the MLS, these homes were real estate owned by the banks and sold to themselves because Blackstone CEOs are bankers ChatGPT It's accurate to say that low interest rates can contribute to housing market speculation. When borrowing is cheap, it becomes easier for large corporations, investment groups, and wealthier individuals to buy up property, which can drive up prices and make it harder for lower-income people to afford housing. This is a well-recognized issue in housing economics. Companies like Blackstone have indeed been significant players in the single-family rental market, especially in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis when they purchased a large number of foreclosed homes. This kind of large-scale investment can certainly influence local housing markets, and it has sparked debates about the best ways to ensure affordable housing. It's also true that foreign investment, including from China, has played a role in some local housing markets, though the extent and impact of this investment can vary widely from place to place. However, it's important to note that the housing crisis is a complex issue with many contributing factors. In addition to the dynamics you've mentioned, other factors can include local zoning laws, income inequality, the cost of construction, and social policies that either do or do not help to make housing more affordable for lower-income people. Your point about the impact of large-scale property investment on housing affordability is well-taken, and many housing advocates and policymakers are grappling with how to address this issue. This could involve a range of strategies, from regulatory changes to tax policies to the creation of more public and nonprofit housing. Matthew Desmond's work on eviction specifically highlights another important piece of the puzzle: the instability faced by low-income renters, even in a market where large-scale investment is less of a factor. His research shows how eviction can perpetuate poverty and contribute to a range of social problems, and he suggests policy interventions aimed at mitigating these harms. Housing policy is a broad field, and there is room for many different approaches to addressing the challenges it presents. It's likely that a comprehensive solution to the housing crisis would need to address both the supply-side factors you've mentioned and the demand-side factors highlighted by researchers like Desmond. User Over 30% of the homes in the United States it's estimated are bought with cash by speculators, Matthew should be more concerned about legislation that would prevent speculators making it illegal to buy 3500 homes all at once for instance. But his solution is to take tax money and give it to low income people in the form of vouchers which only perpetuates the problem by giving these voucher monies to the speculators. So Matthew must work for the speculators because anybody suggesting using tax money for vouchers for low income people wishes to put that money right in the pockets of the speculators, and other words Matthew has no solution wonder how he won a Pulitzer Prize ChatGPT Your viewpoint underscores an important perspective in the conversation around housing affordability, emphasizing the role of property speculation and large-scale investment in exacerbating housing issues. Preventing such mass purchases by single entities is one potential policy solution that could be explored to address this issue. Matthew Desmond's proposals, such as expanding the housing voucher program, aim at providing immediate relief to those facing housing instability and eviction, which is a critical issue for many low-income families. His research has shown that eviction can have devastating long-term effects, leading to job loss, poor health, and other negative outcomes. Desmond's solution is one among many potential strategies for addressing the housing crisis. Other proposals might focus more on the supply side of the equation, including strategies for limiting large-scale property investment, adjusting zoning laws to allow for more housing construction, or investing in public or non-profit housing. It's important to note that a comprehensive approach to housing affordability would likely need to address both sides of the equation: making housing more affordable (for example, by limiting speculation) and helping low-income families afford housing (for example, through vouchers or other forms of assistance). As for the Pulitzer Prize, it is awarded based on the quality and impact of a work, not necessarily the popularity or universal agreement with its thesis or proposals. Desmond's "Evicted" was recognized for its in-depth, empathetic exploration of poverty and housing instability in American cities, which sparked nationwide conversations about these issues. His policy proposals represent his views on potential solutions based on his research and are part of the broader dialogue on these complex challenges. Regenerate response
@@markzuckergecko621 Sure, because everything works out exactly as you plan it. Nothing ever goes wrong. Too bad you couldn't have been around when the big asteroid hit. I bet you would have planned for it. 🙄
@@shakeyj4523 of course things don't always go as planned, that's why you do the best you can to plan when you can, so you're better prepared for what you can't plan. It's called being an adult.
@@markzuckergecko621 And yet you are going through the comments ASSUMING that people did not do those things. You really have led a very sheltered life, or you, like I said earlier, neglected to choose a working brain. Taking in all of your comments, and your rampant oversimplifications and shallow reasoning, I can only conclude it is the latter in your case.
Its from Tommy Orange's novel "There, There" and was originally specifically addressing the suicide epidemic of American Indian kids on reservations But it is applicable to this situation as well. But I highly recommend the book
Hold the phone. At 9:33 there's a real egregious false dichotomy- "You know, studies show that conservative renters are actually more likely to vote yes on an affordable housing project than liberal homeowners." It's probably true that all renters, regardless of political demographic, would like more affordable housing projects. Either for themselves or for the people they would rather see move elsewhere. I'm not going to point out the mentality of anyone here, but I think it's pretty plain how taking the label that identifies someone who would vote against their own self interest applies.
both parties have not done enough for the citizens!!! It’s time for a third or fourth party!!!! A government as a obligation to take care their citizens. Because prosper brings peace!!!
Its from Tommy Orange's novel "There, There" and was originally specifically addressing the suicide epidemic of American Indian kids on reservations But it is applicable to this situation as well. But I highly recommend the book
Nobody is satisfied. Neither the poor or the rich. It is human nature to want more. Greed, jealousy and lust brings hatred to those live by it. The love of God is the only way to free ourselves from these evils.
Germany has a standard of living that is better than a lot of other “first world country’s” and with one of the worlds best economy’s you’d be hard pressed to argue otherwise!!! Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Canada, Sweden, UK usually fight for #1 as “best country” those countries have VERY high standards of living, VERY good healthcare and VERY good infrastructure & also VERY low crime-rate - even better than USA (in some areas by far) USA only leads in military budget (and has slightly higher income than most of those i mentioned - yet after compareable quality of living and security (healthcare, US citizen have LESS left of their before higher income)!!!
Just one example: the wealthy who own rental properties/apt. complex. My rent went up over $50/month. That is a lot of money for me. The wealthy are taking advantage of those who can’t afford to purchase their own property.
I must be missing something, This non-liberal Professor Decides to live in a low income ghetto to do research on evictions, puts a human face on that, and somehow wins the Pulitzer Prize? Does he have any other experience in life other than being a professor and temporarily living in a ghetto ChatGPT Matthew Desmond is a sociologist by profession, and his role involves conducting in-depth research to understand human behavior and societal issues. This often requires immersing oneself in the environment being studied, a common method in ethnographic research. This allows the researcher to gain a richer, more nuanced understanding of the complexities and realities of life in certain contexts. Before his work on "Evicted," Desmond received his Ph.D. in Sociology from the University of Wisconsin-Madison in 2010. During his graduate studies, he spent 18 months living in a trailer park and an inner-city rooming house to conduct the research that would later inform his award-winning book. This type of immersive fieldwork is common in sociology and anthropology and is considered a valuable method for understanding complex social phenomena. Desmond's other experience includes teaching at Harvard University and Princeton University, where he has shared his knowledge and research findings with students. Additionally, his academic work extends beyond "Evicted," with numerous published articles and papers focusing on various aspects of poverty, race, housing, and urban sociology. His work on "Evicted" was recognized with the Pulitzer Prize because it offered a deeply researched, powerfully narrated, and illuminating look at a pressing societal issue: the eviction crisis in America. The Pulitzer Prize committee recognized the book for its profound impact on public understanding of this issue. It's worth noting that the Pulitzer Prize doesn't necessarily reward the breadth of a person's life experience, but rather the quality and impact of their specific journalistic, literary, or artistic contribution. Desmond's "Evicted" was deemed to have made a significant contribution to the public's understanding of the eviction crisis, hence its recognition with the award.
I’m all for paying higher taxes but I refuse to integrate in a poor community for the sake of equality. Most of these places are so far gone it would take a decades to rehab. I grew up in poverty and I wouldn’t wish that on my worst enemy let alone my own kids. Making people choose it not a winning strategy. Now if u want to start talking about dismantling cities I’m all ears.
In Los Angeles, restaurants put it in fine print that they will charge us an extra percentage to COVER their employee’s insurance. Completely unethical!!
@@markzuckergecko621 nope,you are talking about something completely different. Some restaurants cry poverty and add a percentage more onto the bill in order to cover healthcare costs of the workers, for instance. It is added onto the bill, like a surcharge, and they usually explain why. Tacky and immoral. When you ask them to remove it, they usually comply.
@@Mister_Listener well if you provide insurance to your employees, then your labor costs are going to be higher. What part of this is hard to understand?
Awsome conversation on actually making a dent on poverty and unions. I'm gonna be brutally honest, though, for the sake of honesty. I'm not sure how well I can get my products from places that treat their workers well or how to really find that out. Usually it's not something that comes up till it's too late, kinda like the Starbucks or writers in Hollywood situation right now. But perhaps I'll take a look at his book for an answer. I'm just not sure how much I would realistically commit, to be honest.
Just saying before someone comments I made sure to rewatch vid since he mentioned some organizations that talk about places that have union made products, or list of organizations/ companies.
It appears that both Dave and Matt do not understand how our political system works. At all levels of government, corporate donors largely determine who they want to represent their business interests. The electorate accepts this corporate political complex by voting for representatives that agreed to this arrangement from the Reagan administration on, which creates an increasing distance between our richest and poorest citizens. The reason why we are rich or poor is related to our voting decisions.
Imagine for one minute…as unfit as she may be…what Marianne Williamson could do to implement a lot of whats being discussed here. Shes not viable as a politician, but how wonderful the USA would be if citizens actually cared about their neighbors!!
Because nobody can fox other people's problems no matter how much government tries to "help". Until someome wants to improve their life and makes good decisions to achieve things, nothing changes in their life.
I would like to see poverty gone. In a capitalist society, I believe it is impossible. The poverty line moves with the increase or decrease of the lowest group. If you move people "out of poverty" the line will follow. Also, If it could be done there would be massive inflation based on companies raising prices because more people can afford products they could not in the past. This would create poverty again. This would be based on huge wage increases and the system's inability to handle the increase. Companies would have to raise prices to pay workers. What do you think?
@@Stonecoldfrank You're confusing work, for their hobbies. As for the ever shrinking middle class, they have the less horrible jobs. When it comes down to it, there's a whole class of work that NOBODY wants. The poor do that, because they have no other choice. That's not capitalism. That's slavery. MINIMUM WAGE! And tie it to maximum wage. Then you might see a semblance of fair.
This is basically what I was trying to ask women months ago when we were talking about 'incels'. They have the most money of this generation and a ton of power by virtue of being women. But instead of talking about fixing poverty we're getting bullshit 'you can have it all' politics and social justice that no longer applies to anything.
I love how this guy claiming someone earning enough money to survive is now "privileged" with no probing into that. When you incorrectly use a word enough, the word loses its meaning. A millionaire is financially privileged, a person earning $55k/year is not financially privileged, they're barely even financially secure.
Because you can't "fix" people making bad decisions. That's part of life. There will always be people who have more than others. You're supposed to be an adult, and be happy with what you have, and if you're not, you work to earn more. What you don't do is cry about how it's someone else's fault, and someone else should have to fix it.
@@AbyssalMelody it's not for me to decide, that's what the market is for. If someone is rich, that means someone decided whatever it is they do is valuable. Otherwise they wouldn't have paid them. It's not for me to decide what value other people put on other people's labor, and the government shouldn't be in charge in making those decisions either. Other governments have tried that before, it always ends the same way, and it's not pretty.
@@shakeyj4523 dismissing someone as a "troll" without even attempting to address anything they say is a tactic cults use to control their flock, they usually refer to them as "sinners" or something to that effect. It emotionally manipulates the flock into thinking they're doing something bad by even listening to what someone outside of the cult says. It keeps them obedient, because they refuse to hear anything unless another cult member is saying it.
I think Professor Desmond has to stop using the word "segregation." The reason is that folks will immediately tune him out because he doesn't mean Jim Crow. Can anybody suggest a better word?
Great conversation. It is a complicated subject with no single and or simple answer. I have known several people and families in 'poverty' as we define it. It seems to me that those with well structured families are able to climb out of the pit of poverty and of course for some it is tough and for others it is not as tough. A lot of things can make that 'pit' very hard to climb out of. Drug and alcohol abuse, mental illnesses which can be caused by genetic inheritance, failing to accept responsibility for poor decision such as teen pregnancy. Also a selfish base attitude or character. Yes, we all can be selfish, even the poor. Hatred for others only limits ones ability to succeed. I meet more and more people who say they are not religous because religion is man made but they are spiritual. Most of the people I have heard say that are living paycheck by paycheck. They seem to be heading for destruction by the way they live out their lives. What I am saying is that quite a bit of poverty is self inflicted. But not all. Some kids are stuck in that slippery walled pit of poverty not because of their mistakes but because of their parents who don't care enough to teach what is right and what is wrong. Child abuse comes in many forms and makes the 'pit' seem impossible to climb out of. Welfare only prolongs poverty and reduces the incentive to be any kind of success because of the temporary relief it brings. Believe it or not it is the devil himself who is in control of this world today and we can say it's the Democrats or the Republicans but in fact it's that image we see in the mirror who is truly at fault for all the poverty in our country. People don't want to take responsibility for themselves, we just want to blame others and go about our business.
I have to wonder if you have ever seen extreme poverty. It requires some sort of support structure. There's people who don't have or can't depend on family, and there's not any type of safety net in our system. Life is hard but for some , it's not possible to see a way out of poverty for even generatios without some sort of assistance
@@denesewarn8003 the US has one of the most expansive welfare programs in the world, what in the fuck are you talking about, "no safety net"? That's just objectively false. Maybe you want bigger safety nets, you're free to have your opinion, but how big do you want them?
Poverty is an intractable issue. We don’t babysit everyone’s actions. There will be people who choose to do things that will not put them in the best position to make sure they aren’t poor and destitute.
Exactly, and the period where we saw the most economic growth and lowest poverty rates was when there weren't social safety nets, and people had to figure out a way to support themselves.
@@markzuckergecko621that's because social safety nets weren't needed back in the hay day. The rise in inflation and the stagnant minimum wage contribute to the rising need in social safety nets. Colleges charge way more today than they ever have before. Those students, who need to take out loans in order to go to college, need to do as such because without a degree, it becomes exponentially harder to get any higher paying job. You'll eventually see these factors turn the democratic party further progressive than ever before. Social programs are in higher demand than ever, and with the college kids who make up the newer voting block feeling the weight of America's poor economy, they'll vote in the blue and wash out that red. Your once steadfast meritocracy is steadily crumbling away.
@@jaybennet4491 so you're blaming stagnant minimum wage for problems that didn't exist when there was no minimum wage? Derpy derp. It's big brain time.
the reason poverty will never be fixed is the wealthy and greedy won't let it happen. if you ask , and in the past wealthy people have been interviewed , and stated that if people were paid enough to be secure economically , they will become lazy and their work habits will deteriorate. also i think it is because the banking industry makes money from workers being oppressed , by criminally high interest rates forced on the lower income , and banks also know if they give low income people mortgages , they will more than likely forclose and resell the home at profits, at which non of any money over the balance on the mortgage the property sells for goes to the bank. the main reason the greedy and wealthy don't want all citizens to be secure , is they don't want to drive down the road in their benz and see everyone else driving them too.
Much of poverty is by choice. I’ve had people refuse to work because they thought the work was below them. U.S. capitalism still provides more opportunity for those who work hard to rise above poverty.
"Our values cannot stop where our property lines begin" EXACTLY
You're getting compassion confused with autocracy. They really have nothing to do with each other. If anything, having compassion and helping the poor would make our society less akin to autocracy, not more. Besides, we _currently_ live in a mostly plutocratic/oligarctic socioeconomic world order, so we're not that far removed from autocracy when you think about it.
You made a dumb comment about autocracy so you figure it out. 😀
Hey David. Great conversation. I love Matthew Desmond. I'm an anti poverty political advocate. I help people all over the country talk to their members of congress about poverty and how to eradicate it and regularly talk to members myself. I would love to talk to you about poverty and the U.S. Congress. The kind of direct advocacy he is talking about is the exact kind of advocacy I do.
The simple answer is that the US does not have an interest in reducing poverty.
Because the US ideology in practice does not want to reduce poverty. It uses poverty to incentivize lowest cost labour and it sees poverty as individual rather than collective failure
It is both.
Exactly.
well in Germany and other European countries people have a great safety net. Universal healthcare, workers rights, great benefits like payed parental leave, payed maternity leave, child benefits, paid sick days, 30 day paid vacation…..
Because they decided that the welfare of the majority of the citizens was more important than the wealth of the rich.
Poverty is a policy choice
I agree
No. It's a personal choice. People come from the poorest countries in the world and have a middle class family within one generation in the US. It's not impossible, leftists just aren't willing to work for anything.
I agree that 95% or more of the time it is.
It's not a matter of choice, it's a matter of incompetent Governance. To think we as a society want poverty is absurd.
@@Stonecoldfrank imagine how incompetent you have to be to think your personal failures are the fault of government. Don't mistake government "incompetence" for malice, they know exactly what they're doing, and the left asked for it. Leftists are just too stupid to understand the consequences of their policies.
Thank you David, for having Matt Desmond on! I saw him on Democracy Now and have been wanting to see more of him, so thank you David, Matt needs to be on more media!!
Safety nets are weak in US.
Thank you for this interview with Matt Desmond. This conversation is the one we need to be focused on. Think of all the problems that would be solved if NO ONE experienced financial stress.
Another area we need to tackle the shareholders expectations. I'm retired and decided to work part-time at a national chain pharmacy/store and no one ever mentioned that I have to clean the bathrooms every night prior to being hired. When I asked why aren't they paying someone to do this ....I was told they use to. So, I assumed that this was to save money and probably at a corporate level.
So when there’s no “new hires” the bathrooms aren’t cleaned, then 🧼
Or does Management add cleaning bathrooms to their tasks 🌞😏 probably both, sometimes; the public bathrooms are unclean.
@@GVGandolfo no only the cashiers had to clean the bathroom, no one else. It was part of your duty after the store closed. I last 6 months and that was enough, but if I would have known before I would not have taken the job. I was pissed to say the least.
You will never 'fix poverty' in the USA while 20% of the nation's wealth is owned by 0.1% (yes, 0.1%, not 1.0%) of the nation's population. In no other country on our planet is wealth so unevenly distributed.
If we became a socialist country then we would all be equally hungry. Those relatively poor would be dead from starvation SO they wouldn't count and there would be no poverty (in small letters: relatively speaking)
@@chrispaul9454 Whose talking about Socialism? All I did was to point out the vast inequality in the USA. Being the richest country in the world, it should be entirely possible to narrow the yawning gap between the super rich and the rest within the framework of capitalist economy, as have most of the member states of the European Union, none of which can be described as socialist, but which, meaured by a vast range of indicators, provide a superior quality of life compared to that of most citizens of the USA.
Parts of America are living in conditions that are terrible. Homelessness, living wages and Healthcare are basic rights. The billionaires are modern day slavers!
How do you define a "basic right"?
@@markzuckergecko621 - to have secure shelter, a living wage, access to health care = why shouldn't it be a right? It's not a unique requirement but difficult to obtain for a myriad of reasons wherever we are in the world.
@@thesmilingtouristguide4931 that's pretty nebulous, that sounds like things you just see as basic, that you're arbitrarily labeling as "basic rights" to appeal to emotions and make it seem like anyone who disagrees with you is a bad person. There are only 2 kinds of rights, positive rights, that are allowed by a governing authority, and negative rights, or natural rights, that can't be granted because they can only be taken away. A positive right would be health insurance, you're not born with the right to have health insurance, it requires someone to offer insurance and enforcement from the government. You're demanding the right to someone's labor, at the barrel of a gun. A negative right is the right to free speech, you don't have to ask for the right to say whatever you want, that right can only be taken away from you.
@@markzuckergecko621 what a load!
@@markzuckergecko621 not really. You tell me how you would address these basic conditions? What do you think should be in place to address these basic needs?
As a lifelong independent voter who's values have not changed as a conservative, but who's recognition of the problems we face as a country have changed this is a good description of why I see that the Republican Party even before radicalization was part of the problem. The Democratic Party too has been part of the problem with at least some members who are part of the solution to varying degrees. Joe Biden himself was far more of a neoliberal (which is misleadingly not liberal) earlier in his career. I do admit he was not that way as a president and has earned my vote as a result. His age would be more concerning if his "real age" were as high as his actual age. He's in good shape and will outlive Trump barring the unexpected to which we are all vulnerable as mortal humans. So this conservative independent will continue to look at economic effects of policy and vote accordingly (and with empathy).
The top 1% is the issue. Bernie Sanders ain't lying when he calls that shit out. The greeds gotta go!
Nice interview David. I have read Matt's book and it is a personal life changer for me. I understand so much more about how my feelings of being poor have affected me.
if Farmers are going to receive government subsidies, basic food needs should be free
Free this, free that, socialists are always talking about what they should get, but I never hear them talk about what they're willing to do.
@@markzuckergecko621 I live in Germany and am glad to use my taxes to pay the poor. Children shouldn't be going to school hungry like I did
@@wizzelhoart and I'm willing to bet you benefit from taxes more than you give up.
@@markzuckergecko621same to you
@@jaybennet4491 I'm not the one crying about how anyone should give me anything, I don't want or need anything for free. I'm doing fine, and the people I care about are doing fine, because we're decent people who work for a living and don't demand anyone else's wealth or property.
In the USA "fixing poverty" is unprofitable. A permanent underclass depresses wages and benefits for those employed, if we were to "solve" poverty corporations would not be able to exploit as many people as they now do and corporate profits to the owners would suffer. Till politicians actually represent "the people" rather than corporations and the 1% who own them, poverty will never be "solved" in the USA.
Republicans have blocked raising the STARVATION MINIMUM WAGE for the last 16 years. We have always had poverty, but people could work their way out of poverty. A recent study found the only wat a minimum wage employee could afford renting a room, buying enough food to eat was to work 60 to 80 hours a week. I earned the minimum wage when I was in college. I had enough to rent a room, buy food and see a $1 movie on Friday at a twilight discount show.
@@sergeant_salty Evangelical "pro-life" Republican Missouri Attorney General, now Senator, Josh Hawley pressured local Health Departments throughout the state of Missouri to shut down food for the homeless programs at Thanksgiving and Christmas. They and police were ordered to go to church/liberal group food for the homeless programs and give them the toughest health inspection possible, an in house restaurant check, strongly encouraging them to shut them down. Every food for the homeless program failed, because they had tables to serve hot food, even those which didn't and served sandwiches in wrappers, because they had no bathrooms, when the came to homeless camps. Anyone who would do that would put Ebenezer Scrooge to shame. Police poured bleach on the food in Kansas City and made workers throw sandwiches and other food into dumpsters. Liberal Churches were outraged, except Evangelical Republican Churches, which did not offer the service to Jesus's Blessed Poor. While these mainline/liberal churches and groups complained to the press, including newspapers, including the St. Louis Dispatch made a crusade out of it. The police were ordered to not do that again and a judge reinstituted the 150 year-old policy of spot checking to make sure a suitable health was followed.. ktrh.iheart.com/content/2018-11-12-video-police-pour-bleach-on-food-for-homeless/
How many Americans do you think starve every year? Go ahead, give an estimate.
@@markzuckergecko621 According to a group which helps homeless kids, 17-years-old and under, some as young as 10-years-old, 5,000 homeless kids in the US die every year. They report beatings, from both criminals and police, and suicide. They also report these kids going through dumpsters looking for food in every region of the country, including the Bible Belt. If you pretend a problem doesn't exist, does it exist?Fastest growing group of homeless is Adopted/Foster Teens aging out of state aid/ABANDONED by their families.
Their suicide rate up 60% since 2000, #1 reason, Republicans and Evangelicals have blocked raising the minimum wage for 16 years straight, twice the longest period without a raise in our history, which means kids, but especially homeless kids, will never be able to work their ways out of extreme poverty.. If you FEEL THE HATE for the homeless on Fox and in Bible Belt Church podiums, why don't you meet these kids so you will know who to hate? th-cam.com/video/B9tY8jQvy1I/w-d-xo.html
The minimum wage could be raised to three times its current amount and their would still be poverty(actually, the more minimum wage is increases the more buisnesses will close therefore increasing poverty). A persons success (and I mean the success of getting out of the poverty classification) is mostly determined by how much the person is willing to work/apply himself to no longer be poor. Save welfare for the elderly and physically disabled. Not mothers who continue to get pregnant just to collect bigger government welfare checks.
Excellent guest. I would like to hear more from him.
You could fix poverty and the extremely wealthy would still be extremely wealthy. they would just lose a billion or two. i honestly hate them.
Because you're an adult sized child who never got over being jealous because your classmate got better Christmas presents than you.
@@markzuckergecko621 you're a regular little energizer bunny of crap spewing.
He's simply saying that a lot more of privilege class beings have to stop being racist
Because this country's society is a "every man for himself" mindset
Me I don't care about being rich, i just want to own my own house
So you care about being richer than you are now.
@@markzuckergecko621 No. He's just saying he'd just like to own his own home and meet basic needs.
@@Mr7c2ll owning a house isn't a basic necessity, it's a luxury, and it's fine if that's a goal of yours, I think most people want to own a home at one point. But it isn't going to happen by stamping your foot and demanding that someone give it to you. Take matters into your own hands, earn more money, spend less money. Make sacrifices. You don't get something just because you want it, life doesn't work that way. It never has, and it never will.
@@markzuckergecko621 you sir.....are a putz
If politicians actually worked on creative solutions to our issues we could solve for most of our problems. The issue is that the politicians are the problem.
No, the Billionaires that own them are the problem.
@@shakeyj4523 so maybe you should stop asking the billionaire owned politicians for help, and fix your own problems. Politicians only have the power that we give them.
@@markzuckergecko621 Do you live on the moon? No? Then things work better when people do not work in isolation. Your over the top libertarian trope is nonsense.
@shakeyj4523 The Billionaires own them because the politicians are weak. We do not produce strong leaders anymore. Maybe because some of our best leaders have been assassinated?
Maybe the best leaders don't even go into politics. They just go stay in their lane and support their families.
@@shakeyj4523 Or maybe it's those who are impoverished who are part of the problem.
In fixing poverty you must illuminate Capitalism. Just look at European countries, their IA program in Government.
I don't think you can eliminate poverty. All you can do is redefine it. What we consider poverty today would have been considered luxury throughout most of history.
The zoning objections to low income housing are usually related to keeping out crime which destroys property values. Whether this is a valid concern is a question for another time. For many people the value of their homes is their security for the future and their retirement. What right does anyone have to say that security should be sacrificed for someone else?
I agree with the housing comment..
Good discussion
Capitalism requires some percentage of "the poors" in society. Fear of this condition makes many kinds of people complacently compliant to Capitalisms desires.
Poor people in capitalist countries have a better quality of life than the middle class in socialist countries.
The explosion in homelessness and evictions began with the same time interest rates were lowered to zero practically allowing a speculative class to buy up single-family homes for the purposes of renting them out, Blackstone and Vanguard for instance including Chinese. In Phoenix Arizona Blackstone but 3500 homes in one gulp that weren't even listed in the MLS, these homes were real estate owned by the banks and sold to themselves because Blackstone CEOs are bankers
ChatGPT
It's accurate to say that low interest rates can contribute to housing market speculation. When borrowing is cheap, it becomes easier for large corporations, investment groups, and wealthier individuals to buy up property, which can drive up prices and make it harder for lower-income people to afford housing. This is a well-recognized issue in housing economics.
Companies like Blackstone have indeed been significant players in the single-family rental market, especially in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis when they purchased a large number of foreclosed homes. This kind of large-scale investment can certainly influence local housing markets, and it has sparked debates about the best ways to ensure affordable housing.
It's also true that foreign investment, including from China, has played a role in some local housing markets, though the extent and impact of this investment can vary widely from place to place.
However, it's important to note that the housing crisis is a complex issue with many contributing factors. In addition to the dynamics you've mentioned, other factors can include local zoning laws, income inequality, the cost of construction, and social policies that either do or do not help to make housing more affordable for lower-income people.
Your point about the impact of large-scale property investment on housing affordability is well-taken, and many housing advocates and policymakers are grappling with how to address this issue. This could involve a range of strategies, from regulatory changes to tax policies to the creation of more public and nonprofit housing.
Matthew Desmond's work on eviction specifically highlights another important piece of the puzzle: the instability faced by low-income renters, even in a market where large-scale investment is less of a factor. His research shows how eviction can perpetuate poverty and contribute to a range of social problems, and he suggests policy interventions aimed at mitigating these harms.
Housing policy is a broad field, and there is room for many different approaches to addressing the challenges it presents. It's likely that a comprehensive solution to the housing crisis would need to address both the supply-side factors you've mentioned and the demand-side factors highlighted by researchers like Desmond.
User
Over 30% of the homes in the United States it's estimated are bought with cash by speculators, Matthew should be more concerned about legislation that would prevent speculators making it illegal to buy 3500 homes all at once for instance. But his solution is to take tax money and give it to low income people in the form of vouchers which only perpetuates the problem by giving these voucher monies to the speculators. So Matthew must work for the speculators because anybody suggesting using tax money for vouchers for low income people wishes to put that money right in the pockets of the speculators, and other words Matthew has no solution wonder how he won a Pulitzer Prize
ChatGPT
Your viewpoint underscores an important perspective in the conversation around housing affordability, emphasizing the role of property speculation and large-scale investment in exacerbating housing issues. Preventing such mass purchases by single entities is one potential policy solution that could be explored to address this issue.
Matthew Desmond's proposals, such as expanding the housing voucher program, aim at providing immediate relief to those facing housing instability and eviction, which is a critical issue for many low-income families. His research has shown that eviction can have devastating long-term effects, leading to job loss, poor health, and other negative outcomes.
Desmond's solution is one among many potential strategies for addressing the housing crisis. Other proposals might focus more on the supply side of the equation, including strategies for limiting large-scale property investment, adjusting zoning laws to allow for more housing construction, or investing in public or non-profit housing.
It's important to note that a comprehensive approach to housing affordability would likely need to address both sides of the equation: making housing more affordable (for example, by limiting speculation) and helping low-income families afford housing (for example, through vouchers or other forms of assistance).
As for the Pulitzer Prize, it is awarded based on the quality and impact of a work, not necessarily the popularity or universal agreement with its thesis or proposals. Desmond's "Evicted" was recognized for its in-depth, empathetic exploration of poverty and housing instability in American cities, which sparked nationwide conversations about these issues. His policy proposals represent his views on potential solutions based on his research and are part of the broader dialogue on these complex challenges.
Regenerate response
The Professor is a 12 course meal! Thanks DP, I wanted 2 sleep..not tonight. HUGE thanks 4 introducing TommyOrange.
Let’s put extra taxes on people with gold toilets.
Do they flush 10-15 times sir?
@@zlpatriot11 only for massive dumps
@@ahopefiend1867 BIG massive dumps sir, with tears in my eyes sir
I like the term "economic nationalist" since it creates livable wages for all Americans. Great points!
Try living on social security ! That's poverty
It's not really a competition. You can make quite a bit more and be just as poor depending on where you live.
Maybe you should have planned for your retirement more thoughtfully.
@@markzuckergecko621 Sure, because everything works out exactly as you plan it. Nothing ever goes wrong. Too bad you couldn't have been around when the big asteroid hit. I bet you would have planned for it. 🙄
@@shakeyj4523 of course things don't always go as planned, that's why you do the best you can to plan when you can, so you're better prepared for what you can't plan. It's called being an adult.
@@markzuckergecko621 And yet you are going through the comments ASSUMING that people did not do those things. You really have led a very sheltered life, or you, like I said earlier, neglected to choose a working brain. Taking in all of your comments, and your rampant oversimplifications and shallow reasoning, I can only conclude it is the latter in your case.
What does it say about America that there are millions of Americans America is ok with sacrificing?
The fire analogy was powerful.
Its from Tommy Orange's novel "There, There" and was originally specifically addressing the suicide epidemic of American Indian kids on reservations
But it is applicable to this situation as well.
But I highly recommend the book
❤❤❤
Hold the phone. At 9:33 there's a real egregious false dichotomy- "You know, studies show that conservative renters are actually more likely to vote yes on an affordable housing project than liberal homeowners." It's probably true that all renters, regardless of political demographic, would like more affordable housing projects. Either for themselves or for the people they would rather see move elsewhere. I'm not going to point out the mentality of anyone here, but I think it's pretty plain how taking the label that identifies someone who would vote against their own self interest applies.
both parties have not done enough for the citizens!!! It’s time for a third or fourth party!!!! A government as a obligation to take care their citizens. Because prosper brings peace!!!
Or maybe you could do something for yourself.
@@markzuckergecko621 Primates are hyper social creatures. You appear to be an aberration. Work on that.
👍👍👍
Restricted income properties is a great example.
I like the burning building analogy. It's quite apt.
Its from Tommy Orange's novel "There, There" and was originally specifically addressing the suicide epidemic of American Indian kids on reservations
But it is applicable to this situation as well.
But I highly recommend the book
It's because we can't satisfy the rich.
Nobody is satisfied. Neither the poor or the rich. It is human nature to want more. Greed, jealousy and lust brings hatred to those live by it. The love of God is the only way to free ourselves from these evils.
Then why are so many televangelists super-wealthy?
The rich are more important.
Germany has a standard of living that is better than a lot of other “first world country’s” and with one of the worlds best economy’s you’d be hard pressed to argue otherwise!!!
Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Canada, Sweden, UK usually fight for #1 as “best country”
those countries have VERY high standards of living, VERY good healthcare and VERY good infrastructure & also VERY low crime-rate - even better than USA (in some areas by far)
USA only leads in military budget (and has slightly higher income than most of those i mentioned - yet after compareable quality of living and security (healthcare, US citizen have LESS left of their before higher income)!!!
Broader inclusive communities? Not in the U.S. This does hold true for our Dem representatives as well as Republicans.
Just one example: the wealthy who own rental properties/apt. complex. My rent went up over $50/month. That is a lot of money for me. The wealthy are taking advantage of those who can’t afford to purchase their own property.
Ironically I work in philanthropy and the foundation is reading Poverty in America for our monthly study.
I must be missing something, This non-liberal Professor Decides to live in a low income ghetto to do research on evictions, puts a human face on that, and somehow wins the Pulitzer Prize? Does he have any other experience in life other than being a professor and temporarily living in a ghetto
ChatGPT
Matthew Desmond is a sociologist by profession, and his role involves conducting in-depth research to understand human behavior and societal issues. This often requires immersing oneself in the environment being studied, a common method in ethnographic research. This allows the researcher to gain a richer, more nuanced understanding of the complexities and realities of life in certain contexts.
Before his work on "Evicted," Desmond received his Ph.D. in Sociology from the University of Wisconsin-Madison in 2010. During his graduate studies, he spent 18 months living in a trailer park and an inner-city rooming house to conduct the research that would later inform his award-winning book. This type of immersive fieldwork is common in sociology and anthropology and is considered a valuable method for understanding complex social phenomena.
Desmond's other experience includes teaching at Harvard University and Princeton University, where he has shared his knowledge and research findings with students. Additionally, his academic work extends beyond "Evicted," with numerous published articles and papers focusing on various aspects of poverty, race, housing, and urban sociology.
His work on "Evicted" was recognized with the Pulitzer Prize because it offered a deeply researched, powerfully narrated, and illuminating look at a pressing societal issue: the eviction crisis in America. The Pulitzer Prize committee recognized the book for its profound impact on public understanding of this issue.
It's worth noting that the Pulitzer Prize doesn't necessarily reward the breadth of a person's life experience, but rather the quality and impact of their specific journalistic, literary, or artistic contribution. Desmond's "Evicted" was deemed to have made a significant contribution to the public's understanding of the eviction crisis, hence its recognition with the award.
I’m all for paying higher taxes but I refuse to integrate in a poor community for the sake of equality. Most of these places are so far gone it would take a decades to rehab. I grew up in poverty and I wouldn’t wish that on my worst enemy let alone my own kids. Making people choose it not a winning strategy. Now if u want to start talking about dismantling cities I’m all ears.
In Los Angeles, restaurants put it in fine print that they will charge us an extra percentage to COVER their employee’s insurance. Completely unethical!!
Why do you think food costs more at a restaurant than if you buy it and cook the same thing at home? You're paying for labor. That's nothing new.
@@markzuckergecko621 nope,you are talking about something completely different. Some restaurants cry poverty and add a percentage more onto the bill in order to cover healthcare costs of the workers, for instance. It is added onto the bill, like a surcharge, and they usually explain why. Tacky and immoral. When you ask them to remove it, they usually comply.
@@Mister_Listener well if you provide insurance to your employees, then your labor costs are going to be higher. What part of this is hard to understand?
@@markzuckergecko621 dumb.
@@markzuckergecko621 what is your point? You just want to act like a jerk…it probably turns you on sexually.
Awsome conversation on actually making a dent on poverty and unions. I'm gonna be brutally honest, though, for the sake of honesty. I'm not sure how well I can get my products from places that treat their workers well or how to really find that out. Usually it's not something that comes up till it's too late, kinda like the Starbucks or writers in Hollywood situation right now. But perhaps I'll take a look at his book for an answer. I'm just not sure how much I would realistically commit, to be honest.
Just saying before someone comments I made sure to rewatch vid since he mentioned some organizations that talk about places that have union made products, or list of organizations/ companies.
I agree 💯 Prozent
What a special little boy guest
It appears that both Dave and Matt do not understand how our political system works. At all levels of government, corporate donors largely determine who they want to represent their business interests. The electorate accepts this corporate political complex by voting for representatives that agreed to this arrangement from the Reagan administration on, which creates an increasing distance between our richest and poorest citizens. The reason why we are rich or poor is related to our voting decisions.
Imagine for one minute…as unfit as she may be…what Marianne Williamson could do to implement a lot of whats being discussed here. Shes not viable as a politician, but how wonderful the USA would be if citizens actually cared about their neighbors!!
Because nobody can fox other people's problems no matter how much government tries to "help". Until someome wants to improve their life and makes good decisions to achieve things, nothing changes in their life.
I would like to see poverty gone. In a capitalist society, I believe it is impossible. The poverty line moves with the increase or decrease of the lowest group. If you move people "out of poverty" the line will follow. Also, If it could be done there would be massive inflation based on companies raising prices because more people can afford products they could not in the past. This would create poverty again. This would be based on huge wage increases and the system's inability to handle the increase. Companies would have to raise prices to pay workers. What do you think?
Yeah, we want out of it, but it is so hard.
because there is no profit for corporate America to do so
How did this guy get where he is? Did he work for it? He probably did this is what we miss. Work for it.
If there was no poverty, who would do all the work for rich people? Thats the point of poverty.
Only poor people work?
@@Stonecoldfrank You're confusing work, for their hobbies. As for the ever shrinking middle class, they have the less horrible jobs.
When it comes down to it, there's a whole class of work that NOBODY wants. The poor do that, because they have no other choice. That's not capitalism. That's slavery.
MINIMUM WAGE! And tie it to maximum wage. Then you might see a semblance of fair.
First.
This is basically what I was trying to ask women months ago when we were talking about 'incels'. They have the most money of this generation and a ton of power by virtue of being women. But instead of talking about fixing poverty we're getting bullshit 'you can have it all' politics and social justice that no longer applies to anything.
"The country does so much more to guard fortunes than to fight poverty"
Indeed.
~
I love how this guy claiming someone earning enough money to survive is now "privileged" with no probing into that. When you incorrectly use a word enough, the word loses its meaning. A millionaire is financially privileged, a person earning $55k/year is not financially privileged, they're barely even financially secure.
When I feed the poor they call me a saint....
...when I ask why the poor have no food they call me a communist.
Let's print more money out of nothing and fix it
Because you can't "fix" people making bad decisions. That's part of life. There will always be people who have more than others. You're supposed to be an adult, and be happy with what you have, and if you're not, you work to earn more. What you don't do is cry about how it's someone else's fault, and someone else should have to fix it.
Wow, you sound like a controlling nickname for Richard.
Rugged determinism huh? If someone is wealthy, they must have made good decisions? The real world doesn't match your fantasy.
@@AbyssalMelody Yeah he is trolling the entire chat with that drivel.
@@AbyssalMelody it's not for me to decide, that's what the market is for. If someone is rich, that means someone decided whatever it is they do is valuable. Otherwise they wouldn't have paid them. It's not for me to decide what value other people put on other people's labor, and the government shouldn't be in charge in making those decisions either. Other governments have tried that before, it always ends the same way, and it's not pretty.
@@shakeyj4523 dismissing someone as a "troll" without even attempting to address anything they say is a tactic cults use to control their flock, they usually refer to them as "sinners" or something to that effect. It emotionally manipulates the flock into thinking they're doing something bad by even listening to what someone outside of the cult says. It keeps them obedient, because they refuse to hear anything unless another cult member is saying it.
Fix human nature.
I think Professor Desmond has to stop using the word "segregation." The reason is that folks will immediately tune him out because he doesn't mean Jim Crow. Can anybody suggest a better word?
I thought Elon was going to take care of that?
Because the rich operate on debt. Thats why IMO.
Enough of our products continue to include controversial makeup.
Great conversation. It is a complicated subject with no single and or simple answer. I have known several people and families in 'poverty' as we define it. It seems to me that those with well structured families are able to climb out of the pit of poverty and of course for some it is tough and for others it is not as tough. A lot of things can make that 'pit' very hard to climb out of. Drug and alcohol abuse, mental illnesses which can be caused by genetic inheritance, failing to accept responsibility for poor decision such as teen pregnancy. Also a selfish base attitude or character. Yes, we all can be selfish, even the poor. Hatred for others only limits ones ability to succeed. I meet more and more people who say they are not religous because religion is man made but they are spiritual. Most of the people I have heard say that are living paycheck by paycheck. They seem to be heading for destruction by the way they live out their lives. What I am saying is that quite a bit of poverty is self inflicted. But not all. Some kids are stuck in that slippery walled pit of poverty not because of their mistakes but because of their parents who don't care enough to teach what is right and what is wrong. Child abuse comes in many forms and makes the 'pit' seem impossible to climb out of. Welfare only prolongs poverty and reduces the incentive to be any kind of success because of the temporary relief it brings. Believe it or not it is the devil himself who is in control of this world today and we can say it's the Democrats or the Republicans but in fact it's that image we see in the mirror who is truly at fault for all the poverty in our country. People don't want to take responsibility for themselves, we just want to blame others and go about our business.
which is precisely what you are doing........
I have to wonder if you have ever seen extreme poverty. It requires some sort of support structure. There's people who don't have or can't depend on family, and there's not any type of safety net in our system. Life is hard but for some , it's not possible to see a way out of poverty for even generatios without some sort of assistance
@@denesewarn8003 the US has one of the most expansive welfare programs in the world, what in the fuck are you talking about, "no safety net"? That's just objectively false. Maybe you want bigger safety nets, you're free to have your opinion, but how big do you want them?
Poverty is an intractable issue. We don’t babysit everyone’s actions. There will be people who choose to do things that will not put them in the best position to make sure they aren’t poor and destitute.
Exactly, and the period where we saw the most economic growth and lowest poverty rates was when there weren't social safety nets, and people had to figure out a way to support themselves.
@@markzuckergecko621 what a load of crap!
@@markzuckergecko621that's because social safety nets weren't needed back in the hay day. The rise in inflation and the stagnant minimum wage contribute to the rising need in social safety nets.
Colleges charge way more today than they ever have before. Those students, who need to take out loans in order to go to college, need to do as such because without a degree, it becomes exponentially harder to get any higher paying job.
You'll eventually see these factors turn the democratic party further progressive than ever before. Social programs are in higher demand than ever, and with the college kids who make up the newer voting block feeling the weight of America's poor economy, they'll vote in the blue and wash out that red.
Your once steadfast meritocracy is steadily crumbling away.
@@jaybennet4491 so you're blaming stagnant minimum wage for problems that didn't exist when there was no minimum wage? Derpy derp. It's big brain time.
Wow. What a great looking guy.
Gay.
@markzuckergecko621 It seems we have an ass hat in the house. But no, he's married, he's not gay. Are you?
Vote MARIANNE WILLIAMSON 2024 to end corruption and thus poverty.
A President can’t end corruption and poverty. 😂
the reason poverty will never be fixed is the wealthy and greedy won't let it happen. if you ask , and in the past wealthy people have been interviewed , and stated that if people were paid enough to be secure economically , they will become lazy and their work habits will deteriorate. also i think it is because the banking industry makes money from workers being oppressed , by criminally high interest rates forced on the lower income , and banks also know if they give low income people mortgages , they will more than likely forclose and resell the home at profits, at which non of any money over the balance on the mortgage the property sells for goes to the bank. the main reason the greedy and wealthy don't want all citizens to be secure , is they don't want to drive down the road in their benz and see everyone else driving them too.
Why don’t we fix unhappiness? And other dumb questions.
Much of poverty is by choice. I’ve had people refuse to work because they thought the work was below them. U.S. capitalism still provides more opportunity for those who work hard to rise above poverty.
That's just a lie you tell yourself to make yourself feel better.
Why should one work at a job that they feel is below them? C'mon now that is ridiculous