Poverty in America

[Darwoth]

[Flame]

I've read people simplify the concept of poverty into lazyness. That sounds more fantasy than my stereotipes, so i joined.
A "solution" can't be find in a topic, but what's then the purpose of a debating? Share complains?

(Clayet, can you slim your post somehow? I'm well known to be verbose but you are even more bulky. Try to make things easier. XD)

@Inotdead

you may simply visit...

I find hard to believe that the major amount of people choose to sleep on a cardboard box during the winter, instead of "take a home". With this, i won't say you're a liar.
I was unemployed for a while. Since i was actually searching for a job, i didn't asked to the institution to give me the money i should have when one is unemployed. After a couple of month, i decided to get those money since i needed them, surreinding at the lack of work. I could not. I was supposed to go there immediatly after i lost my job, otherwise no money at all. Burocracy.

This is an example about how the "You can simply do things" is often unreal. You "can", but there is burocracy in the middle and many other things that one can't know, if doesn't dig it out. The "you can" samples are stereotipes as well.
Plausible situations to explain a point of view, but in definitive aren't real situations.
The problem comes when there is an institution that gives homes and job, and there are unemployed and homeless dudes. The "lazy" excuse doesn't explain it, since winter is cold for evey type of human.
So, what happens in the middle of the road between the homeless and the institution?

(the reason why i focus on the lower layer is because i think there are many layer of poverty. Talk about them all at once is vague and messy to me, so i will not handle all of them at once. THis won't mean you cant talk about it, obv)

[Inotdead]

@Inotdead

you may simply visit...

I find hard to believe that the major amount of people choose to sleep on a cardboard box during the winter, instead of "take a home". With this, i won't say you're a liar.
I was unemployed for a while. Since i was actually searching for a job, i didn't asked to the institution to give me the money i should have when one is unemployed. After a couple of month, i decided to get those money since i needed them, surreinding at the lack of work. I could not. I was supposed to go there immediatly after i lost my job, otherwise no money at all.

This is an example about how the "You can simply do things" is often unreal. You "can", but there is burocracy in the middle and many other things that one can't know, if doesn't dig it out. The "you can" are stereotipes as well.
Plausible situations to explain a point of view, but in definitive aren't real situations.
The problem comes when there is an institution that gives homes and job, and then there are unemployed and homeless dudes. The "lazy" excuse doesn't explain it, since winter is cold for evey type of human.
So, what happens in the middle of the road between the homeless and the institution?

(the reason why i focus on the lower layer is because i think there are many layer of poverty. Talk about them all at once is vague and messy to me, so i will not handle all of them at once. THis won't mean you cant talk about it, obv)

Yes, see, that's actually the interesting part - the overwhelming majority of actually homeless people in Germany are alcoholics and drug addicts. Let me explain:

The government offers them housing, welfare and medical care - as to anyone else, the catch, of course, is that they have to undergo a rehab - a big portion of welfare money one would receive in form of food stamps, so that one couldn't spend it all on the substance. Then there are of course doctor appointments, and after that job search. To continue to be eligible for welfare you have to write a certain amount of job applications per month and also visit certain training programs, then there are "Massnahmen" - an event where you learn to use the PC and Internet to search for jobs, and then have to attend to on regular basis to do just that. Sprinkle it up with a fair portion of famous German bureaucracy and incompetent workers and suddenly it's crystal clear why one could lose their motivation halfway through.
See, I am not saying that it's simple like it's easy to get in the flow, it's quite difficult actually, because it requires effort and determination. But it is simple in a sense that a possibility is always there.
The problem is you can not help a person unless they want to help themselves. Substance addiction is no joke.

Now the alternative is not necessarily the cardboard boxes. Alongside government institutions there are also charity organisations, religious groups and social movements. There are even some that provide clean syringes for addicted. Grocery stores almost always give away food that's about to expire in the mornings, and then there is "Tafel" organisation that also provides food for poor people. Red Cross provides clothing. There are also shelters to spend the night. And then one could always gather recyclables for money or beg. One could get by. More importantly one wouldn't have to give up on habits.

Of course there are people who honestly just loathe and despise themselves, and don't seek any kind of help because they feel like they don't deserve to be treated well. Even if they are clean. Sad.

And then over the years I've met a bunch of people who consciously denied work and welfare simply because "***** the system". Well I personally have no comment about that.

edt. man, all this talking makes me really miss my days at the camp. those people were a fun bunch. hardly productive members of society though

[TotalyMeow]

Get over yourself already. It's embarrassing to see you type this stuff when there are people on this forum from 3rd world countries. Like I said, you had a father and mother and weren't starving. Do you even know what the definition of poverty means?

I'm guessing you don't know what 3rd world actually means. Regardless, this is one of the nastiest and most damaging attitudes you've exhibited so far. The idea that just because one person is suffering more, no one else deserves help. Because some are starving, those who are almost starving should 'get over' themselves? Not only does it display a total lack of human empathy on your part, it's also a dangerous logical fallacy known as "relative privation". I encourage you to look it up and to learn more about all of them. If you want to ever make a decent argument about anything, if you ever want to be able to think and argue logically about something, you need to stop using all these logical fallacies that completely invalidate your arguments. Just having them in your head is messing with your reasoning.

I'm amazed that you hold such idiotic conservative views if you think your family could have been better served with doctors and health care. Get over it.
[...]
***** you for trying to deny other people the benefits that may have helped your dad more. There are probably thousands of families right now in America who are dealing with undiagnosed lyme's disease and lack of universal health care to deal with it.

I'm not sure what 'idiotic conservative views' you think I have about healthcare as I haven't mentioned anything about said views. I only expressed some frustration with the behavior of doctors, which universal healthcare would not have affected. I'm glad that Lyme disease is well enough known now that fewer people have to suffer through its awful long term effects. Very few doctors knew it existed when my dad got it and none of them were interested in going the extra mile to try to find out why simply giving him an antidepressant didn't do a damn thing.

I'm not sure why you think I want to deny benefits to those who need them when I've actually said part of the problem with our system is that some who need said benefits don't get them.

Both Dallane and Darwoth have said it in this thread and yourself in this same paragraph are saying they don't work and should be replaced, thus you are saying they don't help people otherwise why would you contemplate replacing them and not fixing them.

In fact, I never said that at all. I said, "The system we are using isn't working the way it should be.", which is exactly what you just said. I certainly didn't say they're not helping people. You don't even really disagree with me yet you come in here and start jumping all over me and telling me to 'get over it' because you want to have someone you can abuse to make your opinions look better. I wish you'd stop doing that.

No one here said they didn't. I distinctly remember that -I- said people who need it can't get it while others who don't, do get it. The system is ***** up and that's all anyone has said so far. Not that charity shouldn't exist, but that what we have is not doing its job. You yourself just mentioned several cases where people were not getting back on their feet despite government assistance. They seem to not be properly using the funds they are getting to care for their kids. Logically, you would be agreeing with us, yet all you saw here was an opportunity to jump all over everyone, promote how saintlike you are for doing some charitable volunteer work like you're the only one, and at one point ... blame poverty on black people?? Seriously, wtf?

Government benefits are not about getting back on your feet, they are about stopping the fall.

Government benefits are not "charity" they are the basic human rights such as access to medicine and fear from hunger and homelessness

It's about saying this is the line where we can not allow people to live below and still maintain a decent life worth living. It's about a floor as to how far we let our citizens fall into poverty. Yes some people will get off what little temporary benefits they get after being unemployed, others will always be on benefits due to disability, mental illness and other reasons.

I think maybe we have different definitions of 'charity'. When I said charity I meant any voluntary charities and programs and all government assistance (which are really just enforced charities, you know). I was talking about all aid, not just governmental.

Government benefits are absolutely about getting back on your feet. That is what the goal should always be. Making sure someone has basic necessities such as food and shelter are only the FIRST step and that is partly why our system is a failure. It gets the first step almost right, but falls far short of encouraging people to go on independently, but getting them independent should always be the goal. Sure, some might need more help than others, but I'd like to know exactly what disabilities or mental illnesses you think should make us say "Well, there's no helping this guy. Just give him money and aid to keep him barely alive until he dies and call it good.", instead of "Let's get this guy the help/care/medicine/training he needs to be healed/retrained/whatever so he can become a functioning member of society again." There might be a few, but those should be a rare exception.

First, a flat tax favors the rich, especially if we maintain ANY deductions of corporate or capital income.

I never mentioned maintaining any deductions for anything. Without said deductions, in what way do you think a flat tax favors the rich? A much simplified flat tax with none of the loopholes we've accumulated would stop the issues you keep bringing up with Mitt Romney and save a lot of other people, like small business owners, a lot of grief and lawyer fees. Smaller businesses and startup companies especially seem to get the shaft in our current system, from what I've experienced.

You may pay the same sales tax on things as your sister but you DO NOT pay the same as a percentage of your income, and this is why sales taxes are a regressive tax.

I sincerely don't understand why you believe this. If I spend 100% of the money I make on buying things and consequently pay tax on it all at a fixed rate, then it's a flat tax. It doesn't even matter if I save a little of it to spend later, I'm paying that exact same tax at some point and so is everyone else.

the middle class is slipping into poverty

I don't understand your definition of poverty. I say I grew up in poverty and you told me to stop whining, but now you throw this out there.

I doubt she's on WIC, your income has to be pretty low as in 'not working more than 20 hrs a week as a family' low to get it but maybe she is, I don't know her situation or what state she's in. If her husband is working full time she's probably just getting a partial benefit from SNAP/food stamps which you can get pretty easily if you have a low income and kids. As for her going to your parents then that's on them but you don't sound like a very caring sister if you think that she doesn't need help and she qualifies for WIC. As for her spending money on HBO, you'd be amazed how often HBO and cable get canceled from month to month with poor people. Some months they can afford stuff like that and others not. It's a process getting someone off benefits. Hopefully she and her family eventually get better jobs and then the SNAP benifits won't be needed.

She absolutely is on WIC, and a few others, though I forget which ones. I think you're arguing with me on this because you want to believe that the systems we have in place are working perfectly and are just in a little need of refinement, but they're not. That's my point in sharing this. She needed the help at one point, but she doesn't need it now. Yet, she works to keep getting the help because she sees government benefits not as something she should use while she needs them and then give up so someone else can get help, but as extra stuff she can get for 'free' and that she deserves them simply because she wants them. This is an all too common attitude that is a problem and that the current system fosters, and people like her are part of the reason why I say this system is broken. Our aid programs need to change to encourage independence, not dependence.

[Dallane]

Plz don't let cleaty know about how to abuse unemployment. Something that also need to be 100% reworked.

[TotalyMeow]

I find hard to believe that the major amount of people choose to sleep on a cardboard box during the winter, instead of "take a home". With this, i won't say you're a liar.

Maybe not a cardboard box, but a van or something, sure. Inotdead makes some good points. I had a relative who used to be homeless and didn't care to change. He lived in a van in the city, which I wouldn't qualify as a 'home', and just moved it around to not get towed and played music on the street. He made enough money from passersby to buy weed and food and that's all he wanted out of life. Some people really do choose that life, hard as it is to believe.

[belgear]

Long story short
I grew up in a household that survived on a single disability check
it pushed me to not want to live like that
I grew up to take care of my mother and little sister single-handedly.

I thank god every day for that social program being out there, as without it I have no idea how things would have ended up.

[Claeyt]

Get over yourself already. It's embarrassing to see you type this stuff when there are people on this forum from 3rd world countries. Like I said, you had a father and mother and weren't starving. Do you even know what the definition of poverty means?

I'm guessing you don't know what 3rd world actually means. Regardless, this is one of the nastiest and most damaging attitudes you've exhibited so far. The idea that just because one person is suffering more, no one else deserves help. Because some are starving, those who are almost starving should 'get over' themselves? Not only does it display a total lack of human empathy on your part, it's also a dangerous logical fallacy known as "relative privation". I encourage you to look it up and to learn more about all of them. If you want to ever make a decent argument about anything, if you ever want to be able to think and argue logically about something, you need to stop using all these logical fallacies that completely invalidate your arguments. Just having them in your head is messing with your reasoning.

In fact lack of human empathy basically describes Darwoth, Dallane's and your political views in my opinion. As for the relative privation, there's always something worse out there so using your own stories of woe to discount the general woe of poor Americans is not recommended.

I'm amazed that you hold such idiotic conservative views if you think your family could have been better served with doctors and health care. Get over it.
[...]
***** you for trying to deny other people the benefits that may have helped your dad more. There are probably thousands of families right now in America who are dealing with undiagnosed lyme's disease and lack of universal health care to deal with it.

I'm not sure what 'idiotic conservative views' you think I have about healthcare as I haven't mentioned anything about said views. I only expressed some frustration with the behavior of doctors, which universal healthcare would not have affected. I'm glad that Lyme disease is well enough known now that fewer people have to suffer through its awful long term effects. Very few doctors knew it existed when my dad got it and none of them were interested in going the extra mile to try to find out why simply giving him an antidepressant didn't do a damn thing.

I'm not sure why you think I want to deny benefits to those who need them when I've actually said part of the problem with our system is that some who need said benefits don't get them.

Your "libertarian views" are well known. Those generally don't include universal healthcare.

You've hinted several times here that you want to change the benefits programs and that there are too many people on the them.

Both Dallane and Darwoth have said it in this thread and yourself in this same paragraph are saying they don't work and should be replaced, thus you are saying they don't help people otherwise why would you contemplate replacing them and not fixing them.

In fact, I never said that at all. I said, "The system we are using isn't working the way it should be.", which is exactly what you just said. I certainly didn't say they're not helping people. You don't even really disagree with me yet you come in here and start jumping all over me and telling me to 'get over it' because you want to have someone you can abuse to make your opinions look better. I wish you'd stop doing that.

...and you've hinted that there are too many people using the benefits, including your own sister and that somehow they're gaming the system to get benefits they don't need.

No one here said they didn't. I distinctly remember that -I- said people who need it can't get it while others who don't, do get it. The system is ***** up and that's all anyone has said so far. Not that charity shouldn't exist, but that what we have is not doing its job. You yourself just mentioned several cases where people were not getting back on their feet despite government assistance. They seem to not be properly using the funds they are getting to care for their kids. Logically, you would be agreeing with us, yet all you saw here was an opportunity to jump all over everyone, promote how saintlike you are for doing some charitable volunteer work like you're the only one, and at one point ... blame poverty on black people?? Seriously, wtf?

Government benefits are not about getting back on your feet, they are about stopping the fall.

Government benefits are not "charity" they are the basic human rights such as access to medicine and fear from hunger and homelessness

It's about saying this is the line where we can not allow people to live below and still maintain a decent life worth living. It's about a floor as to how far we let our citizens fall into poverty. Yes some people will get off what little temporary benefits they get after being unemployed, others will always be on benefits due to disability, mental illness and other reasons.

I think maybe we have different definitions of 'charity'. When I said charity I meant any voluntary charities and programs and all government assistance (which are really just enforced charities, you know). I was talking about all aid, not just governmental.

Government benefits are absolutely about getting back on your feet. That is what the goal should always be. Making sure someone has basic necessities such as food and shelter are only the FIRST step and that is partly why our system is a failure. It gets the first step almost right, but falls far short of encouraging people to go on independently, but getting them independent should always be the goal. Sure, some might need more help than others, but I'd like to know exactly what disabilities or mental illnesses you think should make us say "Well, there's no helping this guy. Just give him money and aid to keep him barely alive until he dies and call it good.", instead of "Let's get this guy the help/care/medicine/training he needs to be healed/retrained/whatever so he can become a functioning member of society again." There might be a few, but those should be a rare exception.

GOVERNMENT BENEFITS ARE NOT CHARITY. They were not created to be charity by the politicians of the time they were created. They were created to be a floor where we could not see anyone falling further than or living under and because of them desperate levels of poverty have been eliminated and our society and economy are better for it. Social Security is not a charity, even for people living on it with disabilities. Unemployment, Medicare, Disability, WIC and SNAP are not charities. They are for people who payed taxes, or FOR PEOPLE WHO MAY SOMEDAY PAY TAXES or for people who are raising kids by themselves or people who have a disability, mental illness or health issues. They are for people who may need short or long term or permanent help depending on their situation and as determined by an effective and competent government and overworked and under-payed social worker. This is what government benefits, social programs and assistance are for. They are not charities.

Government social programs, benefits and assistance are not about "getting back on your feet" this is a Republican dog whistle tag line to define benefits as time limited. Many, many people with disabilities and special needs permanently use benefits to maintain a normal living standard. Some benefits such as unemployment and SNAP are time limited because they are resource limited but that does not mean that they are not sometimes needed for a long time for whatever reason.

First, a flat tax favors the rich, especially if we maintain ANY deductions of corporate or capital income.

I never mentioned maintaining any deductions for anything. Without said deductions, in what way do you think a flat tax favors the rich? A much simplified flat tax with none of the loopholes we've accumulated would stop the issues you keep bringing up with Mitt Romney and save a lot of other people, like small business owners, a lot of grief and lawyer fees. Smaller businesses and startup companies especially seem to get the shaft in our current system, from what I've experienced.

A much simplified progressive tax like what we use to have in this country would fix not just some but all the issues I keep bringing up, unfortunately the Republicans keep fighting this and regressing the taxes of the rich.

You may pay the same sales tax on things as your sister but you DO NOT pay the same as a percentage of your income, and this is why sales taxes are a regressive tax.

I sincerely don't understand why you believe this. If I spend 100% of the money I make on buying things and consequently pay tax on it all at a fixed rate, then it's a flat tax. It doesn't even matter if I save a little of it to spend later, I'm paying that exact same tax at some point and so is everyone else.

Well you may spend 100% of what you earn and then yes, you'd be paying as much as your sister, but I'm guessing you may own a home and have a savings account or retirement account. In that case she'd be paying more. The point is that the wealthy are not buying stuff with 100% of their income while the poor are. They are saving, hiding overseas and retiring on their wealth and that income is un-sales-taxed.

the middle class is slipping into poverty

I don't understand your definition of poverty. I say I grew up in poverty and you told me to stop whining, but now you throw this out there.

"Poverty is not the absence of money. Poverty is the absence of the feeling of a comfortable assurance of 'enough'." - Franklin Roosevelt

I doubt she's on WIC, your income has to be pretty low as in 'not working more than 20 hrs a week as a family' low to get it but maybe she is, I don't know her situation or what state she's in. If her husband is working full time she's probably just getting a partial benefit from SNAP/food stamps which you can get pretty easily if you have a low income and kids. As for her going to your parents then that's on them but you don't sound like a very caring sister if you think that she doesn't need help and she qualifies for WIC. As for her spending money on HBO, you'd be amazed how often HBO and cable get canceled from month to month with poor people. Some months they can afford stuff like that and others not. It's a process getting someone off benefits. Hopefully she and her family eventually get better jobs and then the SNAP benifits won't be needed.

She absolutely is on WIC, and a few others, though I forget which ones. I think you're arguing with me on this because you want to believe that the systems we have in place are working perfectly and are just in a little need of refinement, but they're not. That's my point in sharing this. She needed the help at one point, but she doesn't need it now. Yet, she works to keep getting the help because she sees government benefits not as something she should use while she needs them and then give up so someone else can get help, but as extra stuff she can get for 'free' and that she deserves them simply because she wants them. This is an all too common attitude that is a problem and that the current system fosters, and people like her are part of the reason why I say this system is broken. Our aid programs need to change to encourage independence, not dependence.

No I'm arguing this with you because it's actually pretty hard to get on WIC and WIC is a short term benefit with re-application after a year. Usually WIC is only available to single mothers who are pregnant or the kids are under 5 along with a straight federal poverty level which was like $14,000. It's also available for nutritional needs like special food needs. If her story is with 2 adults in the house and one working full time that's pretty hard to see her on WIC for more than a year. It's adjusted based on some criteria but WIC is generally only given to people who really need it. SNAP/food stamps is much more common and available with less amounts.

No, benefit abuse and overuse is absolutely not a common attitude within the current system of benefits from the government. As I showed on that chart I posted, it's actually fairly rare for people to be on continuing benefits after 3 years. If you didn't read it, it showed that about 1/3 of people drop off benefits after 1 year, and 2/3 are off the benefit after 3 years. Continuing long term benefits generally mean the person has been disabled, been diagnosed with a mental illness or health problems or actually continues to need it as determined by a social worker.

I don't know your sister's story, but maybe you don't either. WIC for more than a year generally means she has a social worker assigned to her, that's what threw me. If she's been on WIC for more than a year that's a monthly evaluation and occasional meetings with a social worker including home visits. Are you sure she's on WIC or sure of her situation?

[Flame]

At this point i think there is an overestimating of the human species.

A few years ago i was a firm person, following my big ideal. Nothing bad or impossible, just a "plan to create a place where me and my friends can live happily".
In order to follow my path without swerve around, i had a strict set of rules to avoid any kind of dependance. No drug, alchool or tobacco. I can't waste my time and money on something that ask me more than i can gain from it.
But also, i was completely unable to understand the weaker ones. To me they were weird animals doing weird and stupid things. Surrended people complaining about everything, without the will to fight. "How can they call themselves alive if they don't have a plan?"
Society sucks, i agreed on this, since society let me dream something that i can't achieve. It is a struggle, a sort of society torture. Even so, i had plans to get near what i wanted and improve my condition.
I had no pity for the ones that don't fight. I could not understand them, their presence harmed my feeling and so i was hating them as a defence. Too weird for me to suffer them.

Then i failed.
My "plan" crumbled, my dream did too and all my strict rules fell in the same pit. I literally saw them fall in a foggy evening, leaving me with nothing. A day i can't forget.
I take into count the option to surrender phisically, since the battle was lost. Somehow, i was too much pride to suicide. Even so, i harassed a lot of people, in the attemp to find myself again.
There, i saw what humans are.
Humans.

The human i trusted most was myself. But even myself betrayed me. I was weak, i was illogic and i was a problem. I was aware of this and this was what i hated most, but there were no plan and no firmness to guide my mind and my body into something usefull.
I was able to see all the errors i was doing. I've lost friends for this and messed up with my family.

I know exactly all the reasons why i did this, and i know exactly how weird is to be unable to avoid it. When you have no hope, you just can't force yourself into something vague like "plans" or "job" or "future". That's impossible to do.
Think that a human can survive the weight of a huge fail and fight to rebuild a whole life, is overstimating.

The reason why i'm fine now and i have a future, a new plan and new resources, is because i had friends. Sure, i lost them at some point, because they was So Much involved that get hurt as well. But one by one, all the friends that had care of me, gave me a place where heal my wounds. I wasn't "easy" to handle, at that time, so i suppose that loose them is an inevitable conseguence.
Once the major wounds in my mind were sort of sealed, i were able to walk by myself. Fall here and there, like a wounded man, but that help was enough to regain some integrity and use my brain in the good way.


If the society was offering me many solution, i wasn't phisically and mentally able to get any advantage from it. I would rather refuse it, in an emotional anger and hate, just like how much is illogic a wounded animal.
So that's it. We are just animals.

Like all the animals, some of them can't be helped at all. But most of them are just weakened and doesn't need "possibilities". Possibilities are too much vague.
That's why you'll see people harm themselves in pride and stupid choises. A few of them wish that for real. Many of them though, are wounded animals.

The ones that fight, usually have something to fight for. But is also common that, if you're out of the society, you're alone. So not much left to fight for.


This was an attempt to explain why those people are so "dumb" and "illogic". The fact that they are sitting there, doesn't mean that they deserve to sit there.
Since we can't know if those are sitting there for real or are surrended to sit there, is better to totally ignore this fact and act like if all of them are there as wounded animals. So the society and the rules have to act like if they are unable to move themselves at first.
Give them chances to work is... a step too much above the reach.

I could get that job now, easily.
Before, that was totally impossible for me.
I'm the same human in two different step of my life. I can't find hard anymore to guess why others can't move that easily, now.
My only plan about this, for now, is to understand. I will not fall into a hating attitude for the poor ones with words like "they steal my money and do nothing to improve their condition", because that's a blind view of the problem.
But i see that the society itself doesn't take the problem in the psicologic way. Doing so, the majority of those human animals are unable to raise themselves.

A step is missing and the way the society "fix" the poverty problem, is too much mechanic and not adapted to the real situation.
Is not an easy step, though. Even so, i think is important that people start to see what the "surrended poor man" really is, and how it is a broken human that can be repaired.


Edit: Oh. Anyway, since i was completely ignorant about how to find drug, in the end i didn't found any and i went out that black period without dependencies. Strict rules worked in a silly way, but they worked somehow. Good for me. XD
WOw. This was long. Yay, wall of text! \o/

[RobertoKarlos]

You ain't gonna solve poverty is necessary for a stable capitalist system like the one USA has, especially at the gates of a new industrialization era brought by robotics. In a few years you will need to ditch almost half of the working society or emigrate, that won't have a job because robots.
Given that poverty and unemployment are a must to have precarious job conditions there are many ways to dump the worthless population (wars, epidemics,etc)
Claeyt is a top class troll to collect so much hot air towards him( Its really hard don't want to punch him while reading him) kinda of a gift.
What's the point in knowing what poverty or being the victim of society is? Quality or quantity poverty? Its kinda cool to see a lot of personal experiences, but at the same time gave the feeling of “i/him had a worse life than you so you cannot give your opinion“
In my country we have social plans called “working plan“ in which you have to do public services for x amount of hours as a condition, it works pretty bad since there's no possible control over those people and mostly the just sit in a park bench for some hours.
The current society gave the feeling that's lost mostly because young generations don't have a life philosophy( check the old greece schools) and have really low tolerance to failure. I found that the values of estoicism( especially Lucius Seneca) can give a way to most people that feels empty with just blinded consuming stuff that you don't need and want to make a better of the situation even in front of your biggest fears.