The War on the Poor

We have a lot of people living in poverty in this country and through various conversations on Facebook and on blogs you see a lot of arguments against providing a social safety net, raising the minimum wage, and helping them in general that I thought I would compile a list of my least favorite and most fallacious arguments I hear.

  1. I know some people that actually think the government owes them, doesn’t look for a job, and these people are just lazy freeloaders.  Throwing money at them just supports a dependency culture.

Some variant of this argument is often used so let’s dissect it.  Whenever you hear someone say “I know some people…” or “I know this person who…” this argument can already be dismissed based on being anecdotal and not necessarily a representation of how things are.  We all have our own experiences that shape our views, nobody is saying your own experience didn’t happen, only that you may not be understand your experience properly in the context of the bigger picture.  There is no question that some people cheat the system.  But this happens across the board at every level of society, and I would argue that the rich cheat the system by a far higher percentage rate than the poor, the only difference is that the rich can change the laws so what they are doing is legal.  They can afford better lawyers.  More importantly is that we do tend to focus on the negative, and this is what we tend to see.  There are so many poor in our country that even if 2% of the 50 million living in poverty in the U.S. were cheating the welfare system that still 1 million people and FOX news could run 100 stories a day focusing on a different cheater of the system and still not be done in a year, but that doesn’t really give you the reality of the situation.  What if there are a lot of people on welfare who are trying to get a job, or who actually work a job but it doesn’t pay well enough to make ends meet?  What if most people are actually embarrassed that they are on welfare and are trying to get out of it and don’t get very vocal about it.  Do the rest of our time really take the time to talk to all the poor and find out which ones are on welfare and are honestly trying to get out of their situation?  Nope.  And especially if the freeloaders anger us, not surprisingly we are going to take You-Pay-Taxes-So-the-Rich-Dont-Have-tospecial notes on those people and they are going to stick in our memory and support our views about wasted taxpayer money.  I have also yet to find anybody post some actual data on how many of these welfare freeloaders are.  They are always anecdotal.

I would agree that throwing money at the poor is not always the solution that we also need to do better to help people out of it so that they can support themselves, but the conversation always seems to be welfare, or not welfare.  There is a 3rd option and that is to improve welfare.  To say it doesn’t have value is an insult to many people who have depended on it when times were lean.  Not all people on welfare are on welfare for the rest of their lives.

And concerning the subject of wasting taxpayer money if we want to play the “I’m not supporting things I don’t like game” with my taxes, then I would also not like any of my taxpayers to go to foreign wars that I disagree with.  You pull your money out of the freeloader driven welfare system, and I will pull my money out of military spending, and I guarantee I will be much richer at the end of the day.

  1. I have never had to work a minimum wage job in my life. If you can’t live on minimum wage, go find a better job.  Ask for a raise.

Once again we have a point that rests on anecdotal experience.  I find these statements also come from white people.  I’m not saying their racist, but perhaps the people who hired you are, and preferential chose you.  That’s a light argument though, so let’s get a little deeper.

Let’s just look at it by the numbers.  In a capitalist society I think conservative and liberal alike we can say that businesses want to make money.  They will definitely maximize their profits by selling some product for the highest possible price that gives them a large base of customers, and they will try to cut costs on expenses.  People that work for them are part of those expenses.  So we would expect that just like there are always a very small amount of really rich people in the country, there are also going to be a lot of low paying jobs and then less and less jobs that are higher paying.  The more special skills you have, and this could simply being really strong and doing hard manual labor, trade skills, or this could be, being highly educated, you are of course are going to garner a higher wage.  The types of jobs available to the high school graduate are small.  You have a job at $7.25/hr and you want a better one, and of course a lot of people do.  You have to compete, and if that higher paying one doesn’t require a specific skill set then you have even more competition, quite simply not everyone can get it.  So just to say “Find another job” isn’t realistic.  Finally, how easy is it to find that new job when you are working 5 days a week and actually can’t search for jobs which are quite often only open during the times that you work?  How do you take time off from your job, unpaid, to go look for jobs?  How do you think your boss will react when you need to take an afternoon off to go to a job interview?  And if they don’t get the job, they’ve lost money just by taking those hours off.  Money they desperately need.

The immobility of the poor demonstrated by disasters like Katrina
The immobility of the poor demonstrated by disasters like Katrina

More importantly many poor people have other issues to deal with than just finding that better job.  What if that job is another city?  Can they afford to move if they already have no money?  What if by moving they lose the support of family who can help reduce their costs by taking care of their kid(s) while at work?  Even a job in another part of the city may involve a long commute on public transportation which increases the time that they have to leave kids at daycare or a babysitter that increasing their expenses.  Finally, should we really expect other people to move away from friends and family for a better job, a decision many of us are not willing to make either?  Why is it so unreasonable for them to expect the minimum wage to be increased and keep pace with inflation, since it has not?

Well wanting the minimum wage raised, is actually asking for a raise.  Going back to the start of this argument, in a capitalist society why would a company raise the wage of a minimum wage worker if they didn’t have to, if they job had such a low skill they could just replace them with the next applicant?  What if by asking for a raise, the boss actually decided to terminate them or give them worse hours?  When you are barely surviving rocking the boat isn’t always the safest play either.

And raising the minimum wage will help greatly with reducing suffering.  While it’s probably best to raise the minimum wage incrementally, in general the idea that prices on everything would double is wholly untrue, since wages are only a portion of expenses for a business.  While $15/hour might be excessive, no study finds that when the minimum wage is raised to keep pace with inflation that this harms the economy. This article by the Department of Labor does a great job of discussing it and remember that when people actually have money to spend, this is good in a consumer driven economy.  All those people in poverty aren’t buying as much stuff as you think.

  1. People on welfare are buying steak, have smart phones, getting manicures, smoking, buying drugs, etc.

Nothing cheers me up more than a person of privilege who has been fortunate to have the luxuries of this world, whether through marrying someone with a great job, or being born into a middle-class or higher family, complaining about other people wanting those things too.

Let’s ignore the fact that people need a phone, and that smart phones are practically free, and that maybe spending more money on quality nutritious food is maybe a better idea than crappy food which is cheaper and leads to all sorts of health problems.  But let’s look at the psychology of poverty .  When you live paycheck to paycheck barely making ends meet, and have grown up in poverty, your ability to long term plan fades, and yes you tend to not save money depriving yourself of creature comforts, because your life is one in which appears to have no long terms solutions.  So why live for tomorrow, when you can live for today?

Income-InequalityIn my training for my volunteer work we had to try and make a budget based on what a family makes on two minimum wage jobs and it is a daunting task.  And of course there are many families that do try to save, but saving is hard to do when you’re poor.  If you don’t have access to public transport, you have to depend on  car.  And people live in poverty have to buy old cars that nobody else really wants, but they can get a good deal on them.  However, such cars need repairs frequently, and repairs cost.  Now you could say why don’t they get a better car that is more reliable.  Quite simply it costs more and they wouldn’t qualify for the loan.  This leads to, what I call, the “stay-in-poverty-feedback loop”.  What little money poor people often save goes to these types of expenses because they literal can’t afford better quality stuff.  Car repairs are just one example, but people in poverty often have to get home repairs more often, replace things like water heaters, furnaces, or air-conditioners more often, because poorer housing means people are getting used, cheaper, and/or older stuff in their home.  So even if they are able to put away a little money each month it often gets eaten in one fell swoop by these unexpected repairs.  And there are plenty of other big costs, like health care, which they often put off, even if they have insurance to save money on co-pays, but then this compound into a worse cost later, but remember how poverty doesn’t lend itself to long-term planning.  And if you have kids, there are even more emergencies that can come up.

On the topic of buying drugs, well I don’t see a lot of people asking that all employees receiving public money take such drug tests, only poor people.  Some how if poor people are doing drugs, that is more egregious than any other income bracket.  As it turns out though, the amount of drug abuse among those on welfare is staggering low. So low that the cost of testing everybody costs more taxpayer money than letting that small percentage of people have their drugs.  Not to mention that just cutting off their life support doesn’t actually work as a deterrent to doing drugs, just makes them resort to more desperate measures to obtain drugs likely causes more problems.  And throwing these horrible drug users in jail, just gives them a criminal record, making it harder for them to get a good job and get out of poverty.

 4. Why are they having babies if they can’t afford to raise them?

Well there are all sorts of reasons that people have children, and if we ignore the fact that there are many areas of the country that don’t have adequate sex education, women don’t have easy access to birth control, or that a woman might simply get pregnant because a man lied to her, or the birth control failed.  But let’s say that there are these terrible women out there who are having children as some sort of scam to get more free money.  I am sure such women exist.  Nevermind the fact that such women were likely raised by a similar mother, probably has little education and special skills and is certainly not mentally well to be making that decision, should we cut her off from that money?  Is this the way she will become a wonderful mother? Or will she literally be unable to cope, unable to keep up with all her new responsibilities?  More importantly it’s of little good to question whether she should have had children, she does have children.  These children are innocent, they’ve done nothing wrong, and so cutting off the mother also harms the children.  Where is the humanity in this?  If you’re pro-life then this must also be part of your consideration if you care about children.

  5.  Poor people need to be more personally responsible.

I’ve blogged about personal responsibility before, I don’t want to repeat all I’ve said there, but I think we can agree that one’s responsibility for themselves depends on the environment in which they were raised, such as level of education, family, friends, culture, etc.  And as I also stated in that post, when we look around we don’t see a lot of people being personally responsible.  Politicians rarely are.  Rich kids like Ethan Couch certainly don’t show a lot of personal responsibility and so even if you believe that personal responsibility comes down to the absolute free will to choose to be that way, it’s clear that a lack of personal responsibility is not a trait that only applies to the poor.  Should we say that rich people are allowed to lack personal responsibility, but poor people or not?  More importantly why aren’t we asking the question of personal responsibility to those that are extremely wealthy?  Is it personally responsible to have more wealth than you can spend in your lifetime.  Is it personally responsible to have more wealth than is required to meet your basic needs have plenty of luxuries and send your kids off to the best of colleges?  Is it personally responsible for corporations to ship jobs overseas just to make more money, while their fellow citizens now struggle to make ends meet?  Is it personally responsible to make that 5 billion in a year than the 2 billion you might make if you paid your employees a fair wage?  Is it personally responsible to not pay your fair share in taxes by hiding your wealth in off-shore accounts and other tax shelters?  For those who hold personal responsibility as the most important of virtues, can we not apply this attitude consistently across all economic classes?  Why are only the poor held to these standards of personal responsibility?


I know this is already a little TLDR, so I’ll be brief here.  In a line from the movie the Usual Suspects Kevin Spacey’s character says “The greatest trick the devil ever pulled is that he convinced the world he doesn’t exist.”  Well maybe there is an even greater trick.  Is it possible that those who are driven by greed in the acquisition of wealth and power have instead convinced you that the poor are the demons in our society?  That even though a majority of them work longer hours, take less vacation, receive poorer education, less nutritional options, worse health care, and less social mobility, somehow a good proportion of the wealthy have led you to believe they are the bane of your quality of life?  And so effective is this message that many of the poor are complicit in that oppression and vote into office the same people who have demonized them in society.  If trends continue as they do, with the exception of a small percentage of the population we all sink together so let’s stop making the poor our enemy.

23 thoughts on “The War on the Poor

  1. ryan59479

    It’s a classic case of misdirection. While you’re watching one hand, you aren’t seeing what the other hand is doing. And so it is, here. People with wealth and power point the finger at the poor, and while you’re scrutinizing what those people do, the wealthy get away with all sorts of theft.

    Now that isn’t to say that every wealthy individual or corporation is evil. There are lots of philanthropists. But in general, it isn’t like the wealthy don’t have some incentive to try to stay wealthy. What’s more egregious? Someone who scams the welfare system for $100,000, or some rich asshole who hides $25 million offshore to avoid the millions in taxes they’d have to pay? Technically the rich person isn’t breaking the law, but that’s only because rich people get to write the laws in this country. To me, socking money in other countries is worse because it has much broader impact on more people.

    And it angers me to no end that the greedy bastards who crashed the economy and ruined the lives of countless people didn’t have to pay for it. Not one red cent. No jail time. Nothing. They got away with it, plain and simple. Again, because they get to make the rules.

    You’re spot on with this analysis, and there definitely is a war on the poor. What’s a kick in the teeth to me is the people who complain about this offer no solutions to problems, as you so rightly pointed out. Simply gutting or scrapping a social program isn’t the same thing as waving a magic wand. At a certain point, the wealthy or well-do-to in this country stop living in reality. Let’s face it, they live in a different world. They just don’t understand, literally don’t understand, what it’s like for 99% of the world.

    Liked by 1 person

        1. LOL — no problem. I thought the same thing (didn’t think we could comment directly on the blog) when I initially started commenting here. I think I discovered it by accident.

          I would suspect Swarn would get a lot more comments if it weren’t for the hidden reply button. I’ve never seen that feature on any other template.


            1. LOL…Well I figured it out, after much research and realizing that mostly what I was looking up was for and not, but in the end it all worked out. The worst part was how you didn’t facilitate my continued laziness and just give me the answer. 🙂

              Liked by 1 person

  2. Swarn, thank you for this superbly written post. It is very disconcerting that people are so quick to demonize the poor in the U.S. Here are some stats:

    The combined cost of these 10 corporate welfare programs is $1.539 trillion per year.

    The three main programs needy families depend upon:

    1) Temporary Assistance for Needy Families ($17.3 billion)

    2) Food stamps ($74 billion)

    3) Earned Income Tax Credit ($67.2 billion)

    $158.5 billion in total.

    This means we spend ten times as much on corporate welfare and handouts to the top 1 percent than we do on welfare for working families struggling to make ends meet.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Thank you! And yes it’s hard to understand why these numbers seem to have no impact on those who would rail against the poor. Do they think their fake? Every analysis I’ve seen shows welfare costs are relatively small compared so much else we spend or give tax breaks on.

      Liked by 1 person

  3. As I suspected yesterday Swarn without first reading this… you have written a gem! Well done, well done! I SO appreciate your efforts to give well considered, well researched, well reasoned perspective to an all too often OVERSIMPLIFIED political-social-economic problem with Capitalism/Free-enterprise within a democratic nation. Excellent work Sir!

    You stated in #2 —

    I have never had to work a minimum wage job in my life. If you can’t live on minimum wage, go find a better job. Ask for a raise.

    This particular ill-founded useless remark (insult?) doesn’t work at all in Texas. Why? Because in order to perpetually grow our state’s booming economy and housing construction, the state of Texas is an “At-Will” state. In other words, an employer can hire you and fire you without any explanation whatsoever — Federal Circuit Courts or the Supreme Court being the exceptions on filed law-suits. This gives ALL POWER to businesses/corporations… or more realistically, many ‘Good Ole Boys’ who own their businesses. It’s also why many billion-dollar corporations move their operations to Texas — no local union’s with any real power, or the risk of ultra-expensive law-suits from ill-treated employees. And with today’s technology to TRACK any individual worker & their “work history” within a specific field/industry, one’s “work ethic” or willingness to follow orders soon gets around when HR’s do their employment checks.

    Everything you covered in #4 is spot-on correct about Texas. I wrote long extensive posts on that very subject and Gov. Rick Perry’s moronic position on all things sex-education. Last I checked, Texas ranks as one of if not the highest teen pregnancies AND teen repeat-pregnancies in the entire nation. 😦

    Ethan Couch and your #5 is a grand example Swarn of growing up in never-ending wealth, opulence, and the family taught attitude ‘my status’ can allow me to legally get away with murder (many times?) ala O.J. Simpson. Great points Swarn in #5!

    I don’t feel this post was LONG ENOUGH or extensive enough Swarn! 😉 I’m kidding, but a little not-kidding. This stuff needs to be understood thoroughly and it’s a waste of time to get try and get into meaningful, productive, discussion about ALL the factors & probable solutions on Facebook, Twitter, or any of today’s social-media platforms; no one wants to spend even 5-mins doing it decent justice, much less full justice! LOL

    And then I could easily get into our nation’s and state’s poor lack of mental health programs, clinics, hospitals, decent wages for mental health staff and doctors. My sister of 36+ years of addiction, relapse, jail, treatment, repeat, repeat, repeat, repeat is ONE primary example of society (all of it! everyone!) one way or another PAYS for not properly dealing with societies problematic citizens. She’s either using up tax-dollars in jail, on the street (via law-enforcement resources), or poorly funded social-welfare programs… instead of perhaps 2, 3 or 4 long-term psych/A&D admissions for a final solution and at least a GOOD chance of returning to society as a productive citizen!

    But I won’t get started on that can-of-worms that the upper 10% or 1% don’t want visible; similar to what we do with our geriatric populations — stuff them away in Earthly purgatory holding tanks. :/

    Fantastic post Swarn! ❤

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Sorry it has taken so long to respond to this comment. It was a good one that adds a lot to the discussion, particularly because you were kind of enough to share a personal story here so I thank you for sharing. I’m also not a big fan of state’s rights, and in general think it’s a bad idea for many facets of how society runs. It seems like the more I look at the impact of states rights the more disparity and inequality I find. I remember in Canada learning about regional disparity and how a central federal government can often overlook local needs of people in different regions because their resources, culture and economy are different. And I think that’s a valid concern. But there is an equally valid concern when it comes to oppressive practices and laws. Slavery and segregation are great examples historically. When we look at things like health care, labor practices, gun laws, etc, the ability of states to really screw over their own people is too strong and I do think there needs to be some oversight in ensuring a certain standard of living for all people in a country. It doesn’t seem right that the state that you live in should impact which basic rights for equality that you should have. Historically the federal government has been able to take a sound moral stand when it comes to fight against those who would wave the state’s rights banner, but it seems too often this states rights arguments slows progress down.

      Clearly there are larger-scale improvements that should be done as well as you point out. And yes I think I could have written a lot more. I may add to this post in the future as I think of other sound retorts to common arguments used by people who don’t think the poor should be helped.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s