America's poorest kids
-
Dalek Dave wrote:
with a hopeless future
There's no such thing.
Dalek Dave wrote:
but still deciding to breed
Happiness is about people and having people you love and who love you; it has absolutely **** all to do with your financial situation. If the kids are happy and loved, and work together through troubles, they're better placed than a lot of smug b*st*rds who have an easy life.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
Mark_Wallace wrote:
it has absolutely **** all to do with your financial situation.
Wrong. That is a 'Leave it to Beaver' and 'Brady Bunch" wishful thinking. The reality is that people are less than ideal. And thus they do want things. And they are disappointed when they do not have them and/or cannot give them (to those they love.) And that limitation over years and years can grind the average person down.
Mark_Wallace wrote:
If the kids are happy and loved, and work together through troubles, they're better placed than a lot of smug b*st*rds who have an easy life.
The is no guarantee that money will bring happiness. But for the average person more financial resources are more likely to lead to a happier life.
-
Here's[^] a startling chart (from here). There are more people on food stamps in the US than the entire population of Argentina. Or, from this page[^]: 15 million children die of hunger each year. In this age of iPads, gigabit Internet access, YouTube, Facebook, etc., still 50% of the world lives in poverty. WTF. Marc
Latest Article: C# and Ruby Classes: A Deep Dive
My Blog -
We here in America seem to be able to help everyone else in the world but our own suffer and it's getting worse. The homeless, unemployed and disabled list is growing while the leader takes multi-million dollar golf trips and lavish vacations.
VS2010/Atmel Studio 6.0 ToDo Manager Extension
Version 3.0 now available. There is no place like 127.0.0.1Mike Hankey wrote:
The homeless, unemployed and disabled list is growing
Compared to when exactly? There wasn't any homeless 50 years ago because the police would lock them up in jail, insane asylums or cart them off to the county line. Unemployment is based on various factors that vary with the economy. And there were a lot fewer disabled 50 years ago because there simply were fewer people that ended up that way (more likely to die than be fixed) and because now there are more ways to categorize people as disabled.
Mike Hankey wrote:
while the leader takes multi-million dollar golf trips and lavish vacations.
The current president is not personally that wealthy. And the "trips" are almost always state business and are not all that remarkable compared to what other world leaders do. And there isn't anything different versus what previous presidents have done.
-
PHS241 wrote:
What I found startling was that this could happen in the world's so-called super power and economy and millions of yanks are dependent on food banks and the number is expected to keep growing.
For those of you who don't live here let me let you in on some secrets: * The roads are not literally paved with gold. Some of the cooler parts do have cobblestones, but they're bumpier. * Just living in a powerful country does not mean you get a lot of money by showing up. See: every other powerful country in history. * There has been a conscious effort by a very vocal minority to relax or change regulations and rearrange the tax code with the goal being to pour more money into the richest 2% of the population at the expense of everyone else. This strategy has been working since the Reagan administration, and is accelerating. * The last time we had a budget surplus - at the end of the Clinton administration 13 years ago - the government mailed checks to everyone in the country. $750 I think we got? The economy collapsed shortly thereafter, the surplus wasted on what was essentially a PR stunt. Not causation, but all part of the same bubble that EVERYONE knew was going to burst. Because they always do. See: every other economic boom in history. If you have a magic bullet to pull these poor kids out of poverty, let me know. All this talk about "we give money to other countries" blah blah blah is meaningless. The amounts we're talking about there are drops in the bucket of what the government spends - very largely on the military, which somehow never gets mentioned as a wasteful government program, even though it is the most expensive, most wasteful "program" we have (I'm not saying get rid of it, but good god look at the numbers). The government cares more about bombers than schools, more about Wall Street than schools, more about getting re-elected than schools. And so too, it seems, does most everyone else.
Look at me still talking when there's science to do When I look out there it makes me glad I'm not you
David Kentley wrote:
very largely on the military, which somehow never gets mentioned as a wasteful government program, even though it is the most expensive, most wasteful "program" we have (I'm not saying get rid of it, but good god look at the numbers). The government cares more about bombers than schools, more about Wall Street than schools, more about getting re-elected than schools.
Defense is at 24% and only 78% of that is actual military (war) spending. 14% of the defense budget goes towards veterans (pensions, healh, etc.) And 22% of the US budget is pensions. So including the defense pensions in that bucket means that more is spent on pensions than on defense. And that makes pensions the largest part of the US budget. And it reduces Defense spending to the same level as Health Care.
-
Dave Kreskowiak wrote:
Around here, the kids are "made" for two reasons, both of which are rooted in stupid selfishness.
That is of course vastly simplistic and thus of course wrong.
I didn't have time to write an entire paper on the subject. But, with a 70% single mother birth rate, you're free to describe how that happens.
A guide to posting questions on CodeProject[^]
Dave Kreskowiak -
I didn't have time to write an entire paper on the subject. But, with a 70% single mother birth rate, you're free to describe how that happens.
A guide to posting questions on CodeProject[^]
Dave Kreskowiak -
Dave Kreskowiak wrote:
But, with a 70% single mother birth rate, you're free to describe how that happens.
I don't need to "describe" something which I know is a complex subject.
Then all you've done is sadi that I'm wrong without backing up your position with any evidence what-so-ever.
A guide to posting questions on CodeProject[^]
Dave Kreskowiak -
Then all you've done is sadi that I'm wrong without backing up your position with any evidence what-so-ever.
A guide to posting questions on CodeProject[^]
Dave KreskowiakDave Kreskowiak wrote:
Then all you've done is sadi that I'm wrong without backing up your position with any evidence what-so-ever.
You provided zero evidence as well. But feel free to post some actual research (professional and vetted) that supports your position. I would certainly like to see it. I did in fact research poverty (actual review of journals and studies) some years ago and was well satisfied with the conclusion that I reached that it wasn't a trivial issue and that my previous simplistic ideas on the subject were wrong. But I am not your research engine.
