sick of hearing this shit so i'm gonna make it real simple.
person a is a white, cis, straight man.
person b is a black woman.
person a's great grandparents worked as carpenters, and shop keepers, maybe a few railroad workers, perhaps even a soldier. they aren't rich, but they're comfortable.
person b's great grandparents were sharecroppers, who spent every dime they earned paying back a landowner who's rich off the backs of slave labor.
person a's grandparents inherit money from their parents, they buy a nice house in the suburbs, the men get cozy white collar jobs, and the women stay home raising kids.
person b's grandparents live in the city, having moved as kids, when their parents tried to find work in urban areas. the conditions aren't very good, and they are turned away for every job interview, every restaurant, every store. even if they could manage to get a job, the segregated buses are crowded, and run less frequently, so they're stuck with whatever minimum wage jobs are in the city.
person a's parents go to college, paid for by their parents. they're accepted immediately, having gone to good schools, and using their free time for sports, or girl scouts. they settle down in the suburbs, and become parents to person a.
person b's parents are still in the city. segregation is over, but they still face discrimination daily. they grow up having to work after school, so they have no time to study. sometimes they even have to stay home to take care of their siblings. they don't go to college, they don't have the money, or the grades to get in. they do what they can, but they end up with minimum wage jobs, barely scraping by.
person a is born in a nice neighborhood, with good schools, goes to college, gets a nice office job. he's free to save his money, since his parents paid for his college. he gets an injury, but his health insurance covers it for the most part.
person b spends her life studying, which is hard when the schools in the city are some of the worst in the country. she's constantly bullied, usually by people just like person a. she joins the workforce as a retail salesperson, hoping to put herself through college. she spends all the money she earns on rent, or food, or bills, or tuition, having to choose between eating and having heat some months. she doesn't have health insurance, so when she gets the same injury as person a, she can't afford the physical therapy. it heals wrong, and it's hard for her to walk around at work, so she's fired.
now person a and person b meet, through random chance. person a criticizes person b, saying that if she studied harder, she could have gotten a scholarship, or taken out a loan. person b explains that scholarships weren't available at her school. person a asks why she didn't save up her money to pay for college, person b explains that all her money went towards necessities.
person a mocks people online, he thinks that since there is not any legal disadvantages, no laws that explicitly limit black peoples opportunities. he says that people are just blaming their laziness on race.
he doesn't understand that person b is STILL feeling the effects of slavery, or sharecropping, of segregation. because poverty is a cycle. he doesn't understand that because of racism from years ago, she has less chances to succeed. and while there may not be any signs saying "whites only" she is still less likely to be hired if she has a "black sounding name". that school was harder when you were constantly harassed. person b doesn't have the time or money to get her hair straightened regularly, which makes it harder to get jobs since her natural hair is deemed "messy" or "inappropriate".
TLDR: systematic racism is real. people aren't struggling because they're lazy, or because they have no ambitions. and while obviously this isn't every poc's experience, i wanted to give an example of how racism from decades or even centuries ago can impact lives today.
I've been sitting on this one a looooooooong time. Why? In part because I'm no economist nor anthropologist. There are people in those roles who have written books on the subject and are far more educated than I could ever be. Some of them are even educated enough to know that all they're bringing to the table is a list of problems but no immediate solution.
So here's where I'll start then: this is a gross oversimplification. If you're reading it and are getting irked that I'm overlooking something - yeah, you're probably right. We can talk about it, and I'll give you my thoughts (including if I'm unable to answer it).
Full disclosure: I grew up poor. I spent my 20's pretty poor. Only in my 40's am I beginning to finally claw out of it, and that's due to a combination of both hard work and incredible luck. My current housing situation was an absolute blessing of serendipity. I cannot express how boned we would be if that turn of fortune hadn't been available a few years ago. That being said: **this is not about me**. There's a common misconception that when someone is advocating for something, they are actually arguing on behalf of themselves and being deceptive about their motives. I will absolutely draw on my life for examples, but I also intend on approaching these thoughts from a general humanist lens and from a data-driven lens. I have seen poverty far deeper than I have experienced personally, among strangers and friends. I am not limited by my own life.
Readability: Lists make things easier! Also, some terms I'll be abbreviating for ease of reading (and typing): Socio-economic status - SES (Basically, a person's "class". It is a classification of the intersection of employment, income, expenses, and living environment)
inb4: You undoubtedly know, or know of, someone who has bucked all of this and become enormously successful despite their background. Good for them! Really! These people are exceptions. Many of these points also apply to ethnicities! So poverty can also be a compounding factor, as opposed to the primary base. But I really don't want to get into that (I ain't writing a book here).
GREG! LET'S GO TO THE MAP!
1. Financial hardship =/= poverty.
I see this one pop up in some shape or form often, and it doesn't require hard research to dispute. It requires **thinking about poverty differently**. Any person from any SES will experience financial hardship. A wise man once said "Mo money, mo problems". As such, I think a lot of people, especially the middle class, will have trouble sympathizing with the poor expressing issues with money because THEY TOO have issues with money.
Instead we need to view poverty like we view common forms of mental illness, like depression. A depressed person isn't just someone who's sad all the time, and this is an important point:
-> Depression is a default state of feeling bombarded by negative emotions.
Depressed people laugh, love, experience joy, and can party hardy Marty. But if you tell a depressed person that you can sympathize with them because you get sad sometimes (or worse, you dismiss their depression because you get sad sometimes), you're missing what it means to be depressed.
Let's now contextualize poverty in that way. Sometimes a person in poverty will have money and will be doing okay financially, much in the same way someone rich will have financial hardship! What's the difference then? Let's take a look!
I'm trying to not be too verbose here. I once pissed off my uncle by trying to over-explain a point (haha).
2. Cheap Stuff Isn't Cheap
This is a huge distinction between why it can be difficult for those in poverty to actually get out. I'm going to use a generalized scenario to illustrate my point here, but it's (obviously) more complicated.
Mom has 3 kids, all younger than 12. Kids are going to public school and actively play outside. They are also growing continually. Our scenario involves SHOES. Because funds are tight, Mom often has to go to Walmart (yeah Walmart, you know what you did) to buy shoes. The shoes fit, they're not ugly enough to be noticeable, kids seems fine with them. The shoes all cost $50 each. A good pair of shoes would have cost $100 each. This saving of half off is already at the top end of the budget for Mom. Unfortunately these cheap shoes, which Mom had hoped would last at least 6 months, don't play that game. Kid 1 is very active (good!), and the shoes start wearing out after 5 weeks. Kid 2 and 3 likewise burn through their shoes within 3 months. Now Mom has to go and buy new shoes for the kids AGAIN. And AGAIN. And AGAIN. The investment of buying $100 shoes would mean that she would have better quality shoes, but (again) she cannot afford that upfront cost. But her annual budget of shoes winds up being higher!
Clothes are a huge expense, and becomes a bigger one with cheap clothes. "But there are solutions! Value Village! Family hand-me-downs!" Yes yes and yes, but don't get lost in the weeds without looking at the whole picture. This applies to many many many other consumables. Dishes, school supplies, art stuff, sports equipment, mattresses, etc etc etc. If your answer to ALL of the variables I've listed (and the ones I didn't) is to go shop at thrift stores, you're both missing the point and also making assumptions on the availability of both such stores and items available in them.
3. A Super Condensed Look At The Poverty Cycle
If this is news to you, please read up on it further. There's a lot of literature out there about it based on decades of research.
If you grew up with poor parents, those parents aren't going to have the same offerings that wealthy parents would have. Poor parents can't co-sign a loan with you, can't loan/give you money for down payments, can't network you with other professionals, can't get you a car for your 16th birthday (or whatever those sitcoms portray), can't hook you up with a job, are most likely ignorant to how to apply to more successful careers, and certainly can't advise you on market trends or whatever. That's usually not their fault; their parents couldn't do that for them. I think a lot of people in other SES don't really seem to grasp this. There's an assumption that everyone is starting with the same opportunities, and that's not true.
4. Being Poor Is Bad For Your Mental Health
If I had one thing to say to impoverished parents, it would be to never talk money around the kids. Kids will soak that up and it will become a part of their mentality. It's bad enough that they're already cognizant they're "different" than their peers (sometimes! This is dependent on where they live too!) Just from my personal experience, I never went to Disneyland when I was a kid. We just couldn't ever afford it. I was painfully aware that I was the only kid in my class who hadn't.... or was I? This is an issue of perception, and only as an adult do I question it. Maybe other kids hadn't either! But as a child there's always a drive to be like everyone else. That drive for acceptance is really lodged in the old noggin, but that makes sense. We're a social species.
So it's not just about missing out on experiences, but we can factor in nutritional deficiencies, social ostracization, and an overall bleak outlook (blue collar UK anyone?). At the very least, general anxiety and depression have continued to be common. But I'm not even sure that the SES causes mental health trouble... it could be the other way around! You can miss many career and social opportunities if you are crippled by anxiety, depression, autism, etc etc. Then in turn those people who are in a lower SES due to their mental health struggles are now passing along both the poverty cycle AND any dispositions to mental health issues to their children. I actually think it's both. Mental health issues can lead to poverty AND poverty can lead to mental health issues. The literature certainly seems to suggest both.
5. Yeah, Sometimes You Gotta Make The Worst Kind Of Choice.
If you have never had to choose between rent and food, or clothes and phone bills, or prescription meds and Christmas presents, then you will never actually understand the pain that those who DO have to make that choice go through. It's deeply unsettling, for two reasons: you feel you are letting people down, and you feel you are being judged for being in that situation in the first place.
Handling those feelings is difficult. Some want to blame the government, some want to blame other people, some want to blame their parents, and some of us blame ourselves. Or some combination thereof. None of those options are wrong, but they are incomplete. Poverty is part of a system, and eliminating only one factor will not solve the problem of the system.
I am not going to propose or debate solutions here. Unless you just want to chant "Burn it all down" with me, then let's do it.
6. Solutions To Poverty That Aren't.
Let's talk about post-secondary! Us Millennials were fed a steady commentary about how post-secondary would guarantee a good, stable lifestyle for our futures. That the expense paid for tuition would pay off in some huge way. This is based off of a bad understanding of data. Lining up income comparing those with post-secondary and those without, those with DO have higher income.
But that is assuming that all post-secondary programs have the same, or at least comparable, career outcomes. This is clearly not true. While a plastic surgeon or market analyst may have a high income, an art history major (and I really hate picking on them, they're lovely people) and lab tech won't have the same results.
But the guaranteed and long-lasting result is the debt. I can't even speak to the utter tragedy that is student loans in the US, seeing people paying much much much more than they borrowed is horrific. Someone in poverty cannot afford post-secondary without a loan, and they are told that THIS is how to get out of poverty. And sometimes it may, but it's not the given it is advertised as.
I also have heard many opinions from well-meaning (I assume) Boomers who will advise to buy property. Even something small will get you on that ladder! This is, of course, entirely dependent on **where** you live. Here in Vancouver, that advice is a farce.
I've seen some people advocating moving to where the jobs are. Better job, lower cost of living, that kind of thing. This **can** also work, dependent on a lot of factors. Many people can make this work. But to assume it will work for everyone living in poverty doesn't hold up to scrutiny. Just on the surface, not only are you telling people to move away from the only support network they have (critical for the poor), but moving is expensive guys. Moving my family of four a few years ago cost us almost $5k. We could have definitely shaved some costs off, and I'm glad we didn't have to, but some costs are non-negotiable like damage deposits, inspections, cleanings, vehicles to move, etc.
I have DEFINITELY seen the argument that the poor are "living beyond their means." If faced with this argument, please ask the person to elaborate. The last time I heard this rationale, the person said that they saw poor people regularly using cell phones. I'll extend a bit of grace in that they were significantly older than I am, so maybe they don't quite understand the role phones play in our lives now, but imagine trying to get a job and not having a cell phone.
Let's look at that one a bit more
7. Living Beyond Their Means
AKA You're poor so you shouldn't spend money on x.
This one is tough, because it's rooted in some truth. I know people who are "house poor" or who struggle with costs but need to buy the newest gadgets (do people still use that word?) The big one for me that I have to measure my response with is smokers. I've known many many many people who are impoverished but are smokers. Talk about a sinkhole for your money.
So I get where the argument comes from. But I think it's taken too far too often.
Thought exercise: You're sitting in a food court eating your burger and fries. An obese woman, at least 350 lbs, passes by you and sits a couple tables away. She has a bucket of chicken and a piece of cake. What is the first thought that goes through your mind? Be honest.
Conversely, maybe she has a small salad and a bottle of water. What is your first thought then? BE HONEST.
If you're critical of her choice the first time, and applaud her choice the second time, guess what? You're normal! But you know what I'm going to say next, I hope.
You don't actually know enough to make a judgment call.
It's the same way with us and the poor. You're at the grocery store and you see a poor person buying chips. They should be spending their money on veggies, right? There's a couple immediate problems with this line of reasoning. The first is the notion that only people above a certain SES should ever eat junk food. Why do any of us eat junk food? Because we like it, and it makes us feel good. But the second is that we're seeing a behaviour in isolation and are assuming it's typical. The poor person buying chips may be doing it to satisfy a craving, sure, or maybe they're treating themselves out because they just landed a new job. Or maybe they're actually invited to a party and don't want to show up empty-handed. You don't know, and it's not your place to police them.
Worst of all, it might be because that might be the most affordable option.
8. Food Deserts
This is a huge topic, so I'm not going to go deep into it (but I've included further reading below). In short, we need to acknowledge that prices of food are not static, and vary per region. Living in Vancouver, we're in a pretty good spot for affordability of food (except meat, apparently, unless you love pork). Fresh, well-priced veggies are available all over Metro Vancouver and the Fraser Valley. But it would be fallacious for me to assume that it's the same in every city, even within BC. We can certainly go to the extreme end to, say, many towns in or around the Arctic circle where those veggies are a luxury. Could you fault a hungry family for loading up on some chips when veggies are prohibitively expensive or straight up not available?
But this isn't just in extreme climates. Isolated towns across both the US and Canada have difficulty shipping in perishables regularly, whereas canned beans and soda can last on a shelf for ages. And in the middle of winter? Forget about it. Anyway, it's a whole thing. Read up more on it.
9. Crime
Dad and Mom are both working. Kids are alone, bored, and unsupervised. Hey, they don't even HAVE to commit any crimes or (more often) misdemeanors, they just have to be associated with another kid who did.
That stigma and any record will hang over their heads. Even with sealed youth records, you have kids who now are more likely to stay in a life of crime. The reasons are ALL over the place, from despondency to legitimate malice, so I'm not going to paint these people with the same brush. But one need only look at conviction rates to see that the police and Crown target low income offenders more regularly and more aggressively than those with higher incomes.
Crime is complicated, and the reasons for crime even more so. I took several Law and Crim classes for my degree and I work for the Courts in BC. And I can tell you that this subject is SUPER complicated. A glib "don't commit crimes" or "all crimes should be punished" is laughably simplistic. Personally, I'm totally about "WHY is the crime happening in the first place? WHY are people attracted to drugs? WHAT CAN WE DO about that?" but the drive of this article is to address thoughts and factors about poverty. And the stigma of crime or even just being associated with an area known for crime can hinder career and societal opportunities (and has for a looooooong time!).
10. Child Care
Hey, pop quiz! A couple with a young child are financially more stable when a) both parents are working and the child is in daycare, or b) one parent works and the other stays at home to care for the child?
The answer is 3) it depends! Either can be true! One can be true, then change later! It can be so close that the margins might be razor thin. That's not even addressing the availability of child care in your area, the wait lists, or any incidents that may affect you child's enrolment. A friend had her daughter "de-enlisted"... "un-registered".... "kicked out nicely(??)" because they felt they didn't have the resources to deal with the daughter's (probable) autism. And while that certainly isn't an invalid reason, the effect is still that a child care option was taken away by circumstances she couldn't control.
Here's one my own grandfather said to my parents: stop having so many kids! I do see this one circulating around a lot, as if having children is the height of irresponsibility for the poor. Ironically, this is also a new outlook on an old phenomenon. Pre-industrial revolution (and even for a lot of agricultural societies still around), the poor farmers would have a lot of children BECAUSE they were poor. They needed all the help they could get! Children were an asset. It allowed for the expansion of the farm. This is, of course, a tremendous oversimplification with many many other factors.
But this leads into an uncomfortable line of questioning. So what IS the income line for having children? If the child is a product of rape, is the mother still to blame? In some states in the US, abortion is illegal and added to that, contraceptives are frowned upon - so are we just telling poor people they're not allowed to have sex? Even if we assume the parent(s) is being reckless and exploiting social safety nets by having so many children, does that invalidate who the child is as a person? One rich family with five children, one poor family with five children - is there a difference in the value of life?
11. It's Okay That You Don't Get It - Just Show A Little Humanity
Much like ethnicity, religion, or cultural differences it can be hard to really understand what it's like to be poor without having experienced it yourself. And that's okay - advocating someone live as a poor person is quite horrendous in my opinion (but apparently educational!).
But here's some honest suggestions: Be kind. Don't be patronizing. No, you don't have a single simple solution that will fix it, either in general or case by case. Don't be judgmental. Show empathy but don't pretend "you get it". If someone asks for your advice, that's when you give it (and only then). Acknowledge that it's an inherent issue in a system - blaming a certain government, or person, or ethnicity, or service misses the mark in a bad way.
Above all else, just remember that they're people. We ALL have our struggles, but that doesn't mean all struggles are equal. The destitute have struggles that neither you nor I can really grasp.
Now for some light reading:
Food deserts are areas where people have limited access to healthful and nourishing foods. Poverty and other socioeconomic factors can cause
The poor spend more of their money on essentials like groceries and utilities. The rich spend more on education.
Jeffrey C. Fuhrer explores the disproportionate impact of rising living costs and inflation on low-income and minority families.
In spite of the safety net, families residing in poverty devote a substantial share of their monthly expenditures to basic shelter, health,
The cycle of poverty refers to a self-perpetuating pattern in which individuals or families experience poverty and find it difficult to esca
The cycle of poverty describes a persistent state where families remain trapped in poverty across multiple generations, making it difficult
Eunice Akoth, a sixth-grader from Shining Hope for Communities' Kibera School for Girls in Kenya, is fiercely smart and creative. Like many of her peers, she has big dreams! She has written an inspiring new poem to encourage others.
Add your voice to the #DreamOfMany, a global poetry performance starring Eunice to support the dreams of young people worldwide!
Learn more: www.apathappears.org/dream
I landed a really great job, but I feel guilty for the possibility of breaking my poverty cycle? I feel like I don’t deserve to have this, like I’m not just in a different socioeconomic class as everyone else there, but like I’m from another planet. I really want this. I don’t want to go back to living paycheck to paycheck ever again. (Even though I kind of am until I get my first one.) Am I wrong for feeling out of place? I am going to try and fake it til I make it, not for the nice things, but for the freedom it can buy me. To be able to afford a car that won’t break down every few months, to be able to get help with domestic stuff I can’t do alone, to be able to take a breath without worrying that I’m not productive enough, to be able to have some goddamn wiggle room.
Inequality for all : Le cycle de la pauvreté s'avère psychologique, non pas seulement financier
La pauvreté demeure l’un des problèmes les plus pressants auxquels le monde entier doit faire face; les mécanismes par lesquels la pauvreté se pose et se perpétue, cependant, restent encore mal compris.
Plus de 1,5 milliard de personnes dans le monde vivent avec moins de 1 dollar par jour (parité de pouvoir d’achat en dollars, décembre 2013). Ce manque de moyens financiers a de lourdes…
Arunachalam Muruganantham, who has become the unlikely leader of a menstrual health revolution in rural India with his invention of a simple machine to make inexpensive sanitary pads, was recently recognized by Time Magazine as one of the world's 100 Most Influential People in 2014. Over sixteen years, Muruganantham's machine has spread to 1,300 villages in 23 states and since most of his clients are NGOs and women's self-help groups who produce and sell the pads directly in a "by the women, for the women, and to the women" model, the average machine also provides employment for ten women. His success, both at providing women with more hygienic options and creating local economic opportunities for women, is generating interest in his machine in many developing countries.
Muruganantham's interest in menstrual health began in 1998 when, as a young, newly married man, he saw his wife, Shanthi, hiding the rags she used as menstrual cloths. Like most men in his village, he had no idea about the reality of menstruation and was horrified that cloths that “I would not even use... to clean my scooter” were his wife’s solution to menstrual sanitation. When he asked why she didn’t buy sanitary pads, she told him that the expense would prevent her from buying staples like milk for the family.
Muruganantham, who left school at age 14 to start working, decided to try making his own sanitary pads for less but the testing of his first prototype ran into a snag almost immediately: Muruganantham had no idea that periods were monthly. “I can't wait a month for each feedback, it'll take two decades!” he said, and sought volunteers among the women in his community. He discovered that less than 10% of the women in his area used sanitary pads, instead using rags, sawdust, leaves, or ash. Even if they did use cloths, they were too embarrassed to dry them in the sun, meaning that they never got disinfected -- contributing to the approximately 70% of all reproductive diseases in India that are caused by poor menstrual hygiene.
Finding volunteers was nearly impossible: women were embarrassed, or afraid of myths about sanitary pads that say that women who use them will go blind or never marry. Muruganantham came up with an ingenious solution: “I became the man who wore a sanitary pad,” he says. He made an artificial uterus, filled it with goat’s blood, and wore it throughout the day. But his determination had severe consequences: his village concluded he was a pervert with a sexual disease, his mother left his household in shame and his wife left him. As he remarks in the documentary "Menstrual Man" about his experience, "So you see God's sense of humour. I'd started the research for my wife and after 18 months she left me!"
After years of research, Muruganantham perfected his machine and now works with NGOs and women’s self-help groups to distribute it. Women can use it to make sanitary napkins for themselves, but he encourages them to make pads to sell as well to provide employment for women in poor communities. And, since 23% of girls drop out of school once they start menstruating, he also works with schools, teaching girls to make their own pads: “Why wait till they are women? Why not empower girls?”
As communities accepted his machine, opinions of his “crazy” behavior changed. Five and a half years after she left, Shanthi contacted him, and they are now living together again. She says it was hard living with the ostracization that came from his project, but now, she helps spread the word about sanitary napkins to other women. “Initially I used to be very shy when talking to people about it, but after all this time, people have started to open up. Now they come and talk to me, they ask questions and they also get sanitary napkins to try them.”
In 2009, Muruganantham was honored with a national Innovation Award in 2009 by then President of India, Pratibha Patil, beating out nearly 1,000 other entries. Now, he's looking at expanding to other countries and believes that 106 countries could benefit from his invention.
Muruganantham is proud to have made such a difference: “from childhood I know no human being died because of poverty -- everything happens because of ignorance... I have accumulated no money but I accumulate a lot of happiness.” His proudest moment? A year after he installed one of the machines in a village so poor that, for generations, no one had earned enough for their children to attend school. Then he received a call from one of the women selling sanitary pads who told him that, thanks to the income, her daughter was now able to go to school.
A modern slave of privilege
my chains glisten with the polish of developed poverty.
The sweat of my labours
begets none but a coarse mattress, and errant hopes,
for the unpaid meals of further servitude.
