The Poor, The Rich

[GodsGrace]

Christ_empowered has a thread here in the lounge asking whether or not we speak to our neighbors..or, are friendly with them.

Which brought something else to mind....

In New York City neighborhoods are divided by financial and social considerations....mostly financial. It sort of happens naturally because poorer folk can't afford the houses in richer neighborhoods. So, there are poor neighborhoods, middle class neighborhoods, upper middle class, well to do, rich, richer and richest.

I was wondering...is this a good idea or a bad idea?
I've never condisered this before...

What are the pros and cons of this set-up?

 

[Christ_empowered]

i dunno. with my parents...they -were- once working class...or whatever you call people with advanced degrees and next to no money. they bought the place they're in now when they hit middle class enough to afford it and do repairs, etc...on the way up, basically. and now....

nearly 30 years later, they are -not- rich, but they're upper class enough (well to do, I guess) that its good for them in many ways, but rubs some people the wrong way...which i think is due not just to social class per se, but also the -upward mobility- angle, in a conservative area. actually...now that i think about it...upward mobility has its own set of pros and cons, like anything else.


ok. in general, i think people spend too much time with people who are exactly like themselves. pros and cons, as always, but....


then i also think back to what happens when you have a mix of people from different backgrounds....it can be constructive, it can also cause conflict as people compete (human nature) and just...dont see eye to eye, etc.

so i dunno, honestly. i think the urban US is becoming more upper class and more stratified, so its not just upper class, its particular kinds of upper class in each area...

and the suburbs are becoming the same way. i guess here the big thing are the newer subdivisions; some seem more for retirees, others for young(er) professionals, others are for the well to do, some are more for the established upper class...

maybe its just "the way world works," now?

 

[GodsGrace]

i dunno. with my parents...they -were- once working class...or whatever you call people with advanced degrees and next to no money. they bought the place they're in now when they hit middle class enough to afford it and do repairs, etc...on the way up, basically. and now....

nearly 30 years later, they are -not- rich, but they're upper class enough (well to do, I guess) that its good for them in many ways, but rubs some people the wrong way...which i think is due not just to social class per se, but also the -upward mobility- angle, in a conservative area. actually...now that i think about it...upward mobility has its own set of pros and cons, like anything else.


ok. in general, i think people spend too much time with people who are exactly like themselves. pros and cons, as always, but....


then i also think back to what happens when you have a mix of people from different backgrounds....it can be constructive, it can also cause conflict as people compete (human nature) and just...dont see eye to eye, etc.

so i dunno, honestly. i think the urban US is becoming more upper class and more stratified, so its not just upper class, its particular kinds of upper class in each area...

and the suburbs are becoming the same way. i guess here the big thing are the newer subdivisions; some seem more for retirees, others for young(er) professionals, others are for the well to do, some are more for the established upper class...

maybe its just "the way world works," now?

Yeah. I agree with you regarding the subdivisions...seems to be getting more and more divided.

And you're right. In some ways it's good that people mingle; it's good to know the poor, the rich, etc.

OTOH, I see over here that if someone passes by with a BMW there will be a comment...whereas in NYC if you live in that type of neighborhood, many will have a BMW and no comment is ever heard.

So yeah, there are pros and cons.
I was thinking of schooling too. Is it good for only rich kids to go to one school and all the poor kids in another? No. I don't think this is a good idea...not socially and not educationally since the higher end schools tend to get more money from taxes and can offer more to their students.

 

[Nathan12]

I was wondering...is this a good idea or a bad idea?

It would not matter whether anyone thought this was a good or bad idea. That is the reality of life on earth in this sinful world. At the same time, in the USA people can (and do) move from the lowest to the highest strata of society.

Booker T. Washington was a Black slave who became a leading American educator by the grace of God as well as his own efforts. You should read his autobiography -- Up From Slavery. There are a lot of whiners in America today. But it is still the land of opportunity, and blacks have prospered.

This is not generally true in Europe and the UK, given their histories of feudalism, class divisions and snobbery. And now that Europe has capitulated to Islam, Europeans will become third-class citizens in the European Caliphate (by their own choosing) while Middle Eastern Muslims take over.

 

[GodsGrace]

It would not matter whether anyone thought this was a good or bad idea. That is the reality of life on earth in this sinful world. At the same time, in the USA people can (and do) move from the lowest to the highest strata of society.

Booker T. Washington was a Black slave who became a leading American educator by the grace of God as well as his own efforts. You should read his autobiography -- Up From Slavery. There are a lot of whiners in America today. But it is still the land of opportunity, and blacks have prospered.

This is not generally true in Europe and the UK, given their histories of feudalism, class divisions and snobbery. And now that Europe has capitulated to Islam, Europeans will become third-class citizens in the European Caliphate (by their own choosing) while Middle Eastern Muslims take over.

Gosh Nathan,,,
I think you made me depressed!

I didn't mean this thread to be about poor people and rich people...but if it's a good idea to have them mixed in a neighborhood..what would be the pros and cons.

I grew up and was educated in NYC. I know who Booker T. Washington is.

As to Europe,,,,that's where I got depressed...
You're right, of course. For some reason I'll never understand, other than that the Masons might be in charge of the world - it was deemed necessary to change the face of Europe. I now what that means and won't get into it here. Let's just say I'm very sad about it and life here will never be the same.

Latest news: The crucifixes in a cemetary in Rome have been covered by order of the mayor due to a request by Muslims because they found them offensive.

I live in a small town up North but the effects are felt even here.

 

[King Dan of Great the 1st]

If there is no reward then why would anyone bother trying or working.

 

[King Dan of Great the 1st]

Mr Money bags is a scrooge.

 

[Nathan12]

but if it's a good idea to have them mixed in a neighborhood..what would be the pros and cons.

Just like oil and water don't mix, the rich and the poor don't mix. There are too many differences. While Communism and Socialism claimed to make everyone the same economically and socially, they managed to create a very small wealthy elite at the top (in every country), while the poor became poorer. In some cases just one despot and his family grabbed all the wealth.

 

[King Dan of Great the 1st]

Just like oil and water don't mix, the rich and the poor don't mix. There are too many differences. While Communism and Socialism claimed to make everyone the same economically and socially, they managed to create a very small wealthy elite at the top (in every country), while the poor became poorer. In some cases just one despot and his family grabbed all the wealth.

Socialism looks good in theory and I guess that's why so many people fall for it, but in reality it doesn't work.

 

[Nathan12]

Socialism looks good in theory and I guess that's why so many people fall for it, but in reality it doesn't work.

The Millennials are flocking to Socialism because they have no clue about the way things work. Moreover, the Communists have hijacked the colleges and universities and have been feeding their nonsense to the students for quite some time. That a clueless Socialist could be elected to Congress in America tells you how low everything has gone.

A free enterprise economy is the only one that makes sense. But when governments started interfering with the free market system, and also providing corporate welfare to major corporations, that created some serious problems.

As long as the world was under the gold standard, inflation could not destroy economies. But after paper currency became the standard, economies could be manipulated, and were manipulated by a handful of people. "Whatever you could purchase with $100 US in year 1881, you have to spend $1,866 US in 2010 to purchase more or less the some goods." But there is a lot of propaganda out there to resist the gold standard.

 

[King Dan of Great the 1st]

The Millennials are flocking to Socialism because they have no clue about the way things work. Moreover, the Communists have hijacked the colleges and universities and have been feeding their nonsense to the students for quite some time. That a clueless Socialist could be elected to Congress in America tells you how low everything has gone.

A free enterprise economy is the only one that makes sense. But when governments started interfering with the free market system, and also providing corporate welfare to major corporations, that created some serious problems.

As long as the world was under the gold standard, inflation could not destroy economies. But after paper currency became the standard, economies could be manipulated, and were manipulated by a handful of people. "Whatever you could purchase with $100 US in year 1881, you have to spend $1,866 US in 2010 to purchase more or less the some goods." But there is a lot of propaganda out there to resist the gold standard.

If I have a item for sale and you have $5, and I want the $5, and you want the item, that is a private deal between two parties and nothing should interfere with that.

 

[GodsGrace]

If there is no reward then why would anyone bother trying or working.

Some persons are very conscientious and work well no matter if there's a reward or not.

But most do expect a reward. This is why I don't like socialism. Everyone gets paid the same, so quality of work decreases due to the feeling of unfairness...little pay - little work - little quality.

The world doesn't agree with the parable of the workers in the vineyard...

 

[GodsGrace]

The Millennials are flocking to Socialism because they have no clue about the way things work. Moreover, the Communists have hijacked the colleges and universities and have been feeding their nonsense to the students for quite some time. That a clueless Socialist could be elected to Congress in America tells you how low everything has gone.

A free enterprise economy is the only one that makes sense. But when governments started interfering with the free market system, and also providing corporate welfare to major corporations, that created some serious problems.

As long as the world was under the gold standard, inflation could not destroy economies. But after paper currency became the standard, economies could be manipulated, and were manipulated by a handful of people. "Whatever you could purchase with $100 US in year 1881, you have to spend $1,866 US in 2010 to purchase more or less the some goods." But there is a lot of propaganda out there to resist the gold standard.

Every economic system has flaws, but capitalism is the best we've got.

I hear millenials are flocking to socialism...
they should try it out before agreeing to it.

When the govt tells you they'll give you something for nothing..it's probably your soul they want.

Nothing is free: Not even love.

 

[Christ_empowered]

i dunno. there's a vocabulary/terminology issue here. When US millennials say "we want socialism," what they seem to mean is...we want New Deal-type programs, which is understandable. In the US, a lot of the problems plaguing the middle class and lower stem from shredding the safety net and rolling back New Deal-style controls and protections. The more affluent classes--especially the rich and the super rich--are, obviously, doing -quite- well with things in their current state.

the other thing...people hear someone criticize capitalism as is, they say "pinko commie socialist!," when really...I think, again, most people just want to revisit FDR's way of doing capitalism. higher taxes on the rich and very rich, more $$$ for infrastructure, a strong(er) safety net, protections for workers...now, of course, the big deal is lots of people want everyone to have health care, which I agree with, overall. The US could probably end up spending less $$$ and get better results (for the masses...individual results may vary, as always) with an NHS-style health care program. and...

OK, another issue is that when one hears AOC and some other more left leaning Dems analyze the current state of affairs, its worth remembering: even Eisenhower warned of the "military-industrial complex," way back in I think the early to mid 50s (I could very easily be wrong about the date, sorry). Deal is...the mainstream political discussion in the US has shifted to the right, even the -very- right wing...I've read some 'experts' dating it with Reagan, I think maybe it started a bit before then (Nixon got elected on his "silent majority" or whatever...look how that turned out...), but...

what would have been a moderate proposal in, say, 1973 is now "left wing." what would have been scary, crazy right wing in 1973 is now...pushed openly, on FOX News. so, to me...just as a non-expert who has an interest in this, kinda sorta....I think its really just a push-back, because some of the results of the rightward shift (decimation of the middle-middle class, growing inequality, the growth of pockets of Extreme Poverty, widespread food insecurity and hunger, masss incarceration) are....how do I put this...

-not- exactly good for communities, society as a whole, or democracy.

 

[GodsGrace]

i dunno. there's a vocabulary/terminology issue here. When US millennials say "we want socialism," what they seem to mean is...we want New Deal-type programs, which is understandable. In the US, a lot of the problems plaguing the middle class and lower stem from shredding the safety net and rolling back New Deal-style controls and protections. The more affluent classes--especially the rich and the super rich--are, obviously, doing -quite- well with things in their current state.

the other thing...people hear someone criticize capitalism as is, they say "pinko commie socialist!," when really...I think, again, most people just want to revisit FDR's way of doing capitalism. higher taxes on the rich and very rich, more $$$ for infrastructure, a strong(er) safety net, protections for workers...now, of course, the big deal is lots of people want everyone to have health care, which I agree with, overall. The US could probably end up spending less $$$ and get better results (for the masses...individual results may vary, as always) with an NHS-style health care program. and...

OK, another issue is that when one hears AOC and some other more left leaning Dems analyze the current state of affairs, its worth remembering: even Eisenhower warned of the "military-industrial complex," way back in I think the early to mid 50s (I could very easily be wrong about the date, sorry). Deal is...the mainstream political discussion in the US has shifted to the right, even the -very- right wing...I've read some 'experts' dating it with Reagan, I think maybe it started a bit before then (Nixon got elected on his "silent majority" or whatever...look how that turned out...), but...

what would have been a moderate proposal in, say, 1973 is now "left wing." what would have been scary, crazy right wing in 1973 is now...pushed openly, on FOX News. so, to me...just as a non-expert who has an interest in this, kinda sorta....I think its really just a push-back, because some of the results of the rightward shift (decimation of the middle-middle class, growing inequality, the growth of pockets of Extreme Poverty, widespread food insecurity and hunger, masss incarceration) are....how do I put this...

-not- exactly good for communities, society as a whole, or democracy.

Very complicated situation CE.
Back in the 50's rich persons paid 90% of their income in taxes.
Does this seem fair to you?

Is someone made a million dollars in one year,,,they got left with a hundred thousand.

This will tend to make the rich move out of the U.S. and take their money with them AND their money-making machine, which probably employees people.

A loss for the middle class and lower class.
Also, the shift to a service economy has had a big toll that we tend to forget about.

 

[Christ_empowered]

hi.

i dunno. "fair" is...complicated....

I kinda wondered how there -were- any seriously rich people, given the tax codes and such. and yet...it really looks like the taxes just kept the very rich from getting unbelievably rich and the rich (but not super rich) from becoming very, very rich, while at the same time....

the US had a thriving middle class, more upward mobility. you're correct about the service economy, of course; im not at all an expert, but I don't think taxing the 1% would have helped keep the steel mills in the US, for instance. but...

the right-ward tilt was in England, too...the Thatcher years...now, the neoliberal gov't in the UK has enacted "austerity measures," which seems to be turning the UK into the US, with cool accents and tea time...

more homeless people, fewer gov't services for the vulnerable, even (I read this in a brief article on mad in america) massive increases in psych drug prescribing. -sigh-

i dont hate the rich, not even the very rich. I'm suspicious of wealth that reaches into the billion$, because there's also some very real power issues, here....

plus, the billionaires seem to popping up in Europe and the US at the same time a lot more people are pushed down: from middle-middle to lower middle, even struggling working class; from the more comfortable end of the working class (in the US, that would have been skilled blue collar, middle-class incomes) into desitution...

and, per usual, the poor and the vulnerable get jail, prison, homeless-ness, hunger, early death, etc. :-(

its worth noting that income inequality on this scale has, from what I"ve read, happened before...

the Great Depression tipped the scales towards gov't programs and such to restrain capitalism, because...and not to sound like a commie here, because I think regulated capitalism is better than anything else, honestly....when one looks at the way capitalism really works, after a while....

one sees more and more people, working for less and less $$$, while the upper classes get richer and ever more powerful.

One lil history lesson that only recently 'sunk in' with me was that The New Deal wasn't really about the upper classes wanting to share; it was about stabilizing capitalism, really....saving capitalism from itself, and from socialism, communism, etc. (back then, the communists and socialists and labor unions were interconnected, powerful forces to be reckoned with).

so, if one truly wants to keep capitalism going, the rational thing would be...a (new) New Deal. that's my take on it, anyway...regulate it, stabilize it, soften it, make it work for more people...

to prevent out of control class warfare.

 

[GodsGrace]

Christ_empowered
I think you covered everything...
Not much to add,
except that I don't understand what's going on..seems like the whole world is in the same boat.
Sounds like a huge conspiracy...

 

[Not_Now.Soon]

Our enemies are not flesh and blood, but are unseen ruling forces. At least that's my initial though when considering the idea of conspiracy.

As for the rich and the poor. I wish there was more intagration between the two. Where the rich and the poor knew each other, and did not hate or distance themselves from the other. That said though this kind of wish is a bit of a copout coming from me. I don't even know my neighbors that much. Not as outgoing in that area ad I'd lie to be, plus a schedule that is opposite as most people's regular work week, keep socializing and meeting people down quite a bit.

Still my wish is still that the rich see the poor and not just distance themselves from them, and the poorer walk alongside the richer instead of hating them for having do much when everyone else seems to have so much less, or even struggle to get by.

Knowing one another and being near one another would hopefully put a face to an issue, and help both the rich want to help the poor, and the poor not to hate the rich.

 

[Nathan12]

Knowing one another and being near one another would hopefully put a face to an issue, and help both the rich want to help the poor, and the poor not to hate the rich.

One cannot expect this from those who are unsaved and are essentially self-centered. There is more than enough wealth in the world to eradicate poverty and disease, but we will never see this until the Second Coming of Christ.

 

[Christ_empowered]

i dunno. i could see knowing poor people make working class and middle class people more sympathetic, but...rich people? nah. one bad thing about my existence before Jesus saved me (ongoing process, of course) is that I was labeled a "poser," and therefore picked on by the rich kids...mostly behind my back.

truth? i was just a bright, precocious dorky teenager who liked the thrift store. but....when one rubs high(er) status people the wrong way, bad things can happen....

-sigh-