August 24, 2005

Do we really know poverty?

Just a random thought which I'm sure this is going to open up a can of worms.

I've often wondered...do the poorest of Americans really know what it's like to live in poverty? I'm talking real poverty here...I'm talking the famine in Africa type of poverty. The very fact that our nation's poorest people are able to stay fattened is a testament to this.

I guess it's all relative.

On another note, via SayUncle comes a story showing that Tennessee ranks fifth in the nation for obesity.

Comments:

Please Note! Failure to abide by the following may result in your comments being edited or deleted: Remain on topic. Foul language and/or personal attacks are not permitted. Excessive links (more than three per thread) must be approved first. If you do include a link in your comment, make sure it is a short link (go to tinyurl.com if it is too long). Try to keep comments to 125 words or less. Thank you.

At least they left my name out of that obesity article.

Posted by: Jakester at August 24, 2005 10:14 AM

"do the poorest of Americans really know what it's like to live in poverty? I'm talking real poverty here...I'm talking the famine in Africa type of poverty."

Simple answer is, of course, no. "Poverty" here is nothing like poverty in the Third World. In America, the poor are FAT. Now granted that is partly because the cheapest food is often the worst for you -- but still they are EATING whereas the real poor often do not.

Posted by: A. C. Kleinheider at August 24, 2005 10:14 AM

It is probably a matter of definition or scale: There is poor, as in little money, but happy. There is poor, as in no money, and surviving. And then there is poor, without anything, destitute, and without hope. When hope is borderline, poverty gets painfully ugly...generally, in the US, hope is still within reach.

Posted by: Paul at August 24, 2005 11:13 AM

Americans have no idea what true poverty is. Still, we have plenty of suffering. The sickening thing is that we have the resources to end hunger and poverty, we are just too caught up in our fancy cars and petty politics to do it. And we call ourselves a Christian nation?

Posted by: ColeWake at August 24, 2005 11:14 AM

Cole,

What specifically are you doing? Are you giving away 90% of your paycheck and living on 10%?

There is a lot of hew and cry about how we do nothing. Most of the people talking are still doing nothing.

Posted by: Katherine Coble at August 24, 2005 11:44 AM

What specifically are you doing? Are you giving away 90% of your paycheck and living on 10%?

There is a lot of hew and cry about how we do nothing. Most of the people talking are still doing nothing.

Ad hominem and hence irrelevant.

Posted by: Chris Wage at August 24, 2005 11:50 AM

AYFKM?

There are horribly impoverished people in the US. All you have to do is go to East Tennessee in the mountains. The rural poor in the US do not have the same kinds of resources available as the urban poor.

The urban poor are surviving on assistance. Unfortunately, much of the assistance (and what they can afford with the money that they have) is full of additives and preservatives, thus the obesity. It is not a balanced diet. They are not getting fat on Filet Mignone

I am frankly amazed at everyone's willingness to co-opt your narrow view in their comments. This is ridiculous.

Posted by: Jackson at August 24, 2005 12:57 PM

I've never been to East Tenn but I have been to the Arkansas Delta, there is true suffering there. The suffering in our own country is almost more unforgivable than the total poverty of Africa. After all, in America, the resources are often just miles away. In Arkansas, the world's largest company sits in the Northest corner of the state, but there are people just miles away who cannot afford basic needs. Its even worse in the Delta.

There are poor in America, very poor, and they are not poor by choice or laziness, they are the hardest workers in the country, and we treat them like crap.

Posted by: ColeWake at August 24, 2005 01:27 PM

What a great argument. Not only are fat people still in "poverty", "poverty" is no longer being determined by traditional definitions.

Poverty is now "not having a balanced diet" or "not getting Filet Mignon". Or having to drive a Nissan Sentra instead of a Hummer H3. Or only having 60 channels of cable instead of 400 channels of satellite and broadband.

Plenty of middle class and upper class people are fat and engage in unhealthy diets. But we're not distinguishing "health" issues - this is talking about "poverty".
poverty:
1. The state of being poor; lack of the means of providing material needs or comforts.

2. Deficiency in amount; scantiness: “the poverty of feeling that reduced her soul” (Scott Turow).

3. Unproductiveness; infertility: the poverty of the soil.

4. Renunciation made by a member of a religious order of the right to own property

You alleged Christians are supposed to learn a thing or two about not coveting other people's possessions. People are running across the desert in the middle of night to be "poor" in this country because being "poor" here has so many advantages over being "poor" where they are.

When we start having tent cities filled with people who are fleeing this country to the other side of the Mexican border some of you may have a point. But you all aren't arguing about poverty. You're arguing about a gap between "the haves" and "the don't have as much".

Posted by: smantix at August 24, 2005 03:33 PM

This has really turned into a debat about semantics, which is, as always, pretty retarded.

I think the point worth making is that often on the right you see arguments for the status quo in this country (i.e. not doing anything about poor people in this country) because they don't have it as bad as they do in, say, Somalia.

But these arguments are rarely accompanied by a driving push to eliminate poverty in Somalia.

Posted by: Chris Wage at August 24, 2005 04:26 PM

There is no such thing as poverty in America, period.

Posted by: Glen Dean at August 24, 2005 05:57 PM

Whatever you say, Captain Make-Believe.

Posted by: Chris Wage at August 24, 2005 09:10 PM

Chris is evidently just historically ignorant when it comes to US Aid. We were in Somalia trying to help poverty there when 16 US soldiers were killed.

It spurned a movie called "Black Hawk Down". Feel free to rent it one night.

Posted by: smantix at August 25, 2005 08:17 AM

"Black Hawk Down" -- awesome movie! And you're right smantix, we can't keep throwing food at people and expect them to automatically know how to grow it for themselves. They gotta be self motivated to a) industrialize themselves and b) create government that won't stab them in the back and steal their food! There is poverty here in America too, but mostly due to lack of self motivation as well i feel. Ours is the most senseless and thus least to be pitied. But poverty none the less.

Posted by: faustus at August 25, 2005 06:10 PM

Wait, I thought poverty in Africa was corrected by 1984's Live Aid? Wait...you mean all those idiot singers didn't make a lasting impact? Who knew?

Posted by: Drake at August 26, 2005 08:49 AM

Poverty in North America can be, and is, as horrific in places. Squalid make-shift shanties do exist here; it's not publicised by the media much, but all you have to do is look at some of the druggies on the streets, they are mere skin and bones.

Faustus, I agree that the poverty here is at least partly a result of lack of motivation, and it's also drug abuse, neglect of sorts, and reliance on government aid such as welfare.

Posted by: Sam at August 26, 2005 06:41 PM