Author Topic: Relatives who just don't get it  (Read 932795 times)

chaskavitch

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 166
  • Age: 31
  • Location: Fort Collins, CO
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #3650 on: September 26, 2017, 12:48:33 PM »
When the Edward Jones advisor is the voice of reason . . .
Because "Edward Jones" and their "Making Sense of Investing" on a sunflower yellow background gives a sense of reassurance to the wanna-stay-ignorant.

Or people could read the Bogleheads wiki on lazy portfolios, and ignore Fast Eddie who's constantly jonesing for your wallet.

My biggest beef with western countries is you almost always have the government to bail you out. If you didn't have that safety factor, you'd be saving and investing more, into equities, real estate, business, etc. Just my opinion, don't ask me to cite scholarly proof.

My mom is definitely the head-in-the-sand sort with investing.  My dad does ok, but I think he just wants to believe advisers have his best interests at heart.  They'll be fine, though - they've got Tricare insurance for life, they own their house, they go camping in-state for vacations, they JUST upgraded to smartphones last year, and they're perfectly happy with what they have.  With my dad's army retirement and SS, I'm pretty sure they're still socking money away, even though my mom makes very little money teaching computer skills at an elementary school. 

I really, really should have offered to help manage their stuff once I found out about the Primerica fiasco, but they're gun-shy about self-management after making bad decisions in 2000 and selling at the bottom of the market :(  We were talking about it, and Mom said "oh, I know we made a mistake not selling earlier.  If we'd done that it would have been fine."  I'm just over here like "Well, or you could have not sold AT ALL, and you'd have like a billion dollars right now."

MgoSam

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3438
  • Location: Minnesota
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #3651 on: September 27, 2017, 08:37:53 AM »
My biggest beef with western countries is you almost always have the government to bail you out. If you didn't have that safety factor, you'd be saving and investing more, into equities, real estate, business, etc. Just my opinion, don't ask me to cite scholarly proof.

I absolutely agree. I mean I'm not saying that it would be better overall if there weren't such safety nets, but I hate how passive it has made people. I know people that will do detailed research into their fantasy team but won't even look into index funds. That tells me that they have the ability but lack the desire. They are likely the first people that are outraged that they aren't getting a bailout when the economy tanks...but still view a good portion of the population as "moochers."

merula

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 801
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #3652 on: September 27, 2017, 12:42:27 PM »
They are likely the first people that are outraged that they aren't getting a bailout when the economy tanks...but still view a good portion of the population as "moochers."

This is a really interesting topic that was raised in something I read recently... I wish I could remember what it was. Basically, it's that there's a strong race- and class-based bias underlying those views. People who are 'like me' are doing the best they can and just need a hand getting back on their feet. People who are 'like them' are good-for-nothing layabouts who don't try, don't care, and need to be kicked off of government programs in order to save money for the 'deserving'.

Paul der Krake

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3514
  • Age: 9
  • Location: WA
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #3653 on: September 27, 2017, 01:11:03 PM »
They are likely the first people that are outraged that they aren't getting a bailout when the economy tanks...but still view a good portion of the population as "moochers."

This is a really interesting topic that was raised in something I read recently... I wish I could remember what it was. Basically, it's that there's a strong race- and class-based bias underlying those views. People who are 'like me' are doing the best they can and just need a hand getting back on their feet. People who are 'like them' are good-for-nothing layabouts who don't try, don't care, and need to be kicked off of government programs in order to save money for the 'deserving'.
Yeah my favorite example of this is the myth of the "hard working homeowner". Which is just code for some two-car family in the suburbia living above their means.

rockstache

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2831
  • Age: 2013
  • Location: Northeast
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #3654 on: September 27, 2017, 01:18:30 PM »
They are likely the first people that are outraged that they aren't getting a bailout when the economy tanks...but still view a good portion of the population as "moochers."

This is a really interesting topic that was raised in something I read recently... I wish I could remember what it was. Basically, it's that there's a strong race- and class-based bias underlying those views. People who are 'like me' are doing the best they can and just need a hand getting back on their feet. People who are 'like them' are good-for-nothing layabouts who don't try, don't care, and need to be kicked off of government programs in order to save money for the 'deserving'.

Fascinating topic. I have a relative who spent years on workers' compensation before transitioning directly to social security. This individual is one of the staunchest conservatives I know and believes that everyone (else?) should have to bootstrap their way through life. They are against all sorts of social programs and view most of these things as handouts and the participants as moochers.

I do not understand how they cannot see the disconnect between their own (I assume valid) use of the programs in our state, and the people they rail against who also need these sort of programs.

TheGrimSqueaker

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1594
  • Location: A desert wasteland, where none but the weird survive
  • www.theliveinlandlord.com
    • The Live-In Landlord
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #3655 on: September 27, 2017, 02:23:05 PM »
They are likely the first people that are outraged that they aren't getting a bailout when the economy tanks...but still view a good portion of the population as "moochers."

This is a really interesting topic that was raised in something I read recently... I wish I could remember what it was. Basically, it's that there's a strong race- and class-based bias underlying those views. People who are 'like me' are doing the best they can and just need a hand getting back on their feet. People who are 'like them' are good-for-nothing layabouts who don't try, don't care, and need to be kicked off of government programs in order to save money for the 'deserving'.

Fascinating topic. I have a relative who spent years on workers' compensation before transitioning directly to social security. This individual is one of the staunchest conservatives I know and believes that everyone (else?) should have to bootstrap their way through life. They are against all sorts of social programs and view most of these things as handouts and the participants as moochers.

I do not understand how they cannot see the disconnect between their own (I assume valid) use of the programs in our state, and the people they rail against who also need these sort of programs.

Many of the boot-strappers I know benefited from scholarships, grants, and bursaries during their school years. They also tended to go to public universities that are heavily subsidized by tax dollars. What I don't understand is why they don't acknowledge the extent to which they benefited from the ladder they got to climb, and why they pretend that they did it all themselves.
I squeak softly, but carry a big schtick.

merula

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 801
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #3656 on: September 27, 2017, 04:30:35 PM »
Now I really wish I could remember it. I've scoured my recent Goodreads list and I feel like it might have been The New Jim Crow, but I 'm not sure. However, a google search did reveal other very interesting information:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2016/10/24/we-showed-trump-voters-photos-of-black-and-white-americans-heres-how-it-affected-their-views/?utm_term=.15b323bea944

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2017/06/race-safety-net-welfare/529203/

mustachepungoeshere

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1702
  • Location: Sydney, Oz
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #3657 on: September 27, 2017, 05:05:51 PM »
I know people that will do detailed research into their fantasy team but won't even look into index funds. That tells me that they have the ability but lack the desire.

This sums it up perfectly!

One of my husband's friends spent hours comparing specs on a new TV but couldn't tell me which super fund he was with.

AnnaGrowsAMustache

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 238
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #3658 on: September 27, 2017, 06:28:04 PM »
They are likely the first people that are outraged that they aren't getting a bailout when the economy tanks...but still view a good portion of the population as "moochers."

This is a really interesting topic that was raised in something I read recently... I wish I could remember what it was. Basically, it's that there's a strong race- and class-based bias underlying those views. People who are 'like me' are doing the best they can and just need a hand getting back on their feet. People who are 'like them' are good-for-nothing layabouts who don't try, don't care, and need to be kicked off of government programs in order to save money for the 'deserving'.

Fascinating topic. I have a relative who spent years on workers' compensation before transitioning directly to social security. This individual is one of the staunchest conservatives I know and believes that everyone (else?) should have to bootstrap their way through life. They are against all sorts of social programs and view most of these things as handouts and the participants as moochers.

I do not understand how they cannot see the disconnect between their own (I assume valid) use of the programs in our state, and the people they rail against who also need these sort of programs.

Many of the boot-strappers I know benefited from scholarships, grants, and bursaries during their school years. They also tended to go to public universities that are heavily subsidized by tax dollars. What I don't understand is why they don't acknowledge the extent to which they benefited from the ladder they got to climb, and why they pretend that they did it all themselves.

It's called privilege. Very hard to see when you're the one benefiting. Very hard not to see when you're the one without it.

mustachepungoeshere

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1702
  • Location: Sydney, Oz
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #3659 on: September 27, 2017, 07:03:24 PM »
They are likely the first people that are outraged that they aren't getting a bailout when the economy tanks...but still view a good portion of the population as "moochers."

This is a really interesting topic that was raised in something I read recently... I wish I could remember what it was. Basically, it's that there's a strong race- and class-based bias underlying those views. People who are 'like me' are doing the best they can and just need a hand getting back on their feet. People who are 'like them' are good-for-nothing layabouts who don't try, don't care, and need to be kicked off of government programs in order to save money for the 'deserving'.

Fascinating topic. I have a relative who spent years on workers' compensation before transitioning directly to social security. This individual is one of the staunchest conservatives I know and believes that everyone (else?) should have to bootstrap their way through life. They are against all sorts of social programs and view most of these things as handouts and the participants as moochers.

I do not understand how they cannot see the disconnect between their own (I assume valid) use of the programs in our state, and the people they rail against who also need these sort of programs.

Many of the boot-strappers I know benefited from scholarships, grants, and bursaries during their school years. They also tended to go to public universities that are heavily subsidized by tax dollars. What I don't understand is why they don't acknowledge the extent to which they benefited from the ladder they got to climb, and why they pretend that they did it all themselves.

It goes back to judging themselves by their intentions and others by their actions.

A Planet Money or This American Life podcast on welfare interviewed a woman who received subsidised housing, food stamps, and subsidised education for her son, then had the gall to proudly tell the reporter, "But I never went on welfare."

druth

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 308
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #3660 on: September 27, 2017, 09:10:23 PM »
A Planet Money or This American Life podcast on welfare interviewed a woman who received subsidised housing, food stamps, and subsidised education for her son, then had the gall to proudly tell the reporter, "But I never went on welfare."

Is it only welfare if you are getting actual cash from the government?

ixtap

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 396
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #3661 on: September 27, 2017, 09:44:00 PM »
A Planet Money or This American Life podcast on welfare interviewed a woman who received subsidised housing, food stamps, and subsidised education for her son, then had the gall to proudly tell the reporter, "But I never went on welfare."

Is it only welfare if you are getting actual cash from the government?

It is only welfare when other people get it, especially non white people.

I have one in my family who gets food stamps and CHIP for the kids, lived a decade or so in a house owned by the parents, with sporadic rent payments, who frequently goes on rants about no one ever gave him anything, he has earned everything he has and other people need to learn yo take care of themselves.

martyconlonontherun

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 88
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #3662 on: September 27, 2017, 09:58:38 PM »
My problem/experience with food stamps was working at a grocery and seeing tons of crap being bought. I would never buy the soda and chips myself 1. I couldn't afford it 2. It's so bad for you. I just wish government money only went to healthy foods. Too many people are malnourished in this country to be wasting money on coke and Doritos.

Apples

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 732
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #3663 on: September 28, 2017, 07:04:49 AM »
A Planet Money or This American Life podcast on welfare interviewed a woman who received subsidised housing, food stamps, and subsidised education for her son, then had the gall to proudly tell the reporter, "But I never went on welfare."

Is it only welfare if you are getting actual cash from the government?

For the specifics of that Planet Money episode, yes.  That woman and many in her community only consider "welfare" actual cash handouts from the government.  I listened to that a long time ago, and can't remember what exactly the reasoning was.

You also realize that most middle class Americans, like the reporter, have also benefited from government benefits and would never consider themselves to have been on welfare (school grants, subsidized loans, state school, etc.).  That's just a helping hand to the working man as many around here (where I live) like to say. 

merula

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 801
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #3664 on: September 28, 2017, 07:11:27 AM »
My problem/experience with food stamps was working at a grocery and seeing tons of crap being bought. I would never buy the soda and chips myself 1. I couldn't afford it 2. It's so bad for you. I just wish government money only went to healthy foods. Too many people are malnourished in this country to be wasting money on coke and Doritos.

Eh, I personally think values-judgment with stuff like that is a waste of time and money. Besides, what's "healthy"? Is my breakfast of oatmeal, toast and coffee healthy? My mom, who is still on the 80's low-fat craze, would say yes. (Except that I had whole milk in both.) MMM, as a a low-carb believer, would say no. My grandma believed that a hot breakfast was healthier than a cold breakfast (bacon and eggs or oatmeal would be healthy, hard-boiled eggs or cold cereal are not).

I think SNAP is a much better program, overall, than WIC, for example. With WIC, you *have* to buy the exact thing you have vouchers for. Like, I saw a woman who had to go back to get a different orange juice because she had grabbed the 59oz bottle that was on sale and not the 64oz bottle that wasn't, and only the 64oz bottle qualified for the voucher. Who benefits in that situation? Not her, who had to spend all that extra time re-ringing her stuff. Not the people in line behind her. Not the store who has to deal with the vouchers and program their systems to flag 'non-compliant' purchases. Not the government, who has to reimburse the store for the more expensive but basically identical product, AND has to administer those byzantine rules.

rockstache

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2831
  • Age: 2013
  • Location: Northeast
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #3665 on: September 28, 2017, 07:12:39 AM »

You also realize that most middle class Americans, like the reporter, have also benefited from government benefits and would never consider themselves to have been on welfare (school grants, subsidized loans, state school, etc.).  That's just a helping hand to the working man as many around here (where I live) like to say.

I don't know if I would consider those things welfare either. They ARE government benefits/handouts certainly, but I think when most people say, "on welfare," they are referring to payments made for basic needs such as food and rent, due to low income. At least that's how I've always seen it referred to around these parts.*


*I was 'on welfare' as a kid - we got weirdly shaped butter and cheese and coupons for free groceries.


ixtap

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 396
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #3666 on: September 28, 2017, 07:35:49 AM »
Regarding WIC, in CA, there are WIC stores. I never asked, but they don't seem to accept non WIC purchases. I have no idea if they are businesses or state run, but the one near me is beside the WIC office, not inside.

iris lily

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2415
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #3667 on: September 28, 2017, 07:49:50 AM »
They are likely the first people that are outraged that they aren't getting a bailout when the economy tanks...but still view a good portion of the population as "moochers."

This is a really interesting topic that was raised in something I read recently... I wish I could remember what it was. Basically, it's that there's a strong race- and class-based bias underlying those views. People who are 'like me' are doing the best they can and just need a hand getting back on their feet. People who are 'like them' are good-for-nothing layabouts who don't try, don't care, and need to be kicked off of government programs in order to save money for the 'deserving'.

Fascinating topic. I have a relative who spent years on workers' compensation before transitioning directly to social security. This individual is one of the staunchest conservatives I know and believes that everyone (else?) should have to bootstrap their way through life. They are against all sorts of social programs and view most of these things as handouts and the participants as moochers.

I do not understand how they cannot see the disconnect between their own (I assume valid) use of the programs in our state, and the people they rail against who also need these sort of programs.

Many of the boot-strappers I know benefited from scholarships, grants, and bursaries during their school years. They also tended to go to public universities that are heavily subsidized by tax dollars. What I don't understand is why they don't acknowledge the extent to which they benefited from the ladder they got to climb, and why they pretend that they did it all themselves.

What an odd way to frame an issue and marginalize "boot-strappers."

Another way would be to say that boot-strappers, a group to which you would conscript me, wonder why these publicly available resources are not recognized and utilized by those who are, for simplicity of argument "not boot-strappers."

It's not a secret, you know, the publicly funded universities and the like.
« Last Edit: September 28, 2017, 07:52:31 AM by iris lily »

infogoon

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 814
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #3668 on: September 28, 2017, 07:50:49 AM »
Fascinating topic. I have a relative who spent years on workers' compensation before transitioning directly to social security. This individual is one of the staunchest conservatives I know and believes that everyone (else?) should have to bootstrap their way through life. They are against all sorts of social programs and view most of these things as handouts and the participants as moochers.

I do not understand how they cannot see the disconnect between their own (I assume valid) use of the programs in our state, and the people they rail against who also need these sort of programs.

It's a common phenomenon. I have a relative who would be in desperate poverty, possibly dead, without the income and health insurance from his wife's job as a public elementary school teacher. He spends his free time complaining on Facebook about the evils of unions and the incompetence of state employees.

rockstache

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2831
  • Age: 2013
  • Location: Northeast
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #3669 on: September 28, 2017, 08:43:37 AM »
iris lily I don't think you were replying to me, and I certainly don't speak for TGS, but since my quote is in your post, I'll comment. When I refer to boot-strappers, I am referring to a subset of the population (in this case my relative), who believes that everyone should be able to pull themselves up to a certain level (their level) via willpower and hard work and that the failure of anyone to do so is solely laziness.

I do reject that idea in a broad sense because it ignores the plight of people who simply do not have this ability. Services are not that easy to get (some more than others of course). If you don't know they exist, don't speak English, or know how to read, they are even more difficult to get. My relative scorns these very services while using them which I find ridiculous. 

MgoSam

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3438
  • Location: Minnesota
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #3670 on: September 28, 2017, 09:35:11 AM »
A Planet Money or This American Life podcast on welfare interviewed a woman who received subsidised housing, food stamps, and subsidised education for her son, then had the gall to proudly tell the reporter, "But I never went on welfare."

Is it only welfare if you are getting actual cash from the government?

For the specifics of that Planet Money episode, yes.  That woman and many in her community only consider "welfare" actual cash handouts from the government.  I listened to that a long time ago, and can't remember what exactly the reasoning was.

You also realize that most middle class Americans, like the reporter, have also benefited from government benefits and would never consider themselves to have been on welfare (school grants, subsidized loans, state school, etc.).  That's just a helping hand to the working man as many around here (where I live) like to say.

Actually you can get welfare and still refuse to think that anyone helped you out. Just look at Craig T Nelson, "I've been on food stamps and welfare. Anybody help me out? No."

That's the thing that pisses the life out of me. Whenever you hear a politician talking about welfare it's code for saying BLACK PEOPLE. 

Just the other week I was reading about a largely Jewish town in NJ that had 20 some people arrested for Medicare fraud. The state decided to give them an amnesty, and then after getting backlash for seemingly going easy on a wealthy (and white) area, they lied and said that it was a "trial program." Funny how they never thought of doing any such programs in Newark.

paddedhat

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2042
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #3671 on: September 28, 2017, 09:37:58 AM »

It's called privilege. Very hard to see when you're the one benefiting. Very hard not to see when you're the one without it.

Unfortunately, this whole delusion is pretty common among the US conservative set. I know several older white men who would be eating from dumpsters if they were denied the benefits of our social safety net, yet are venomous toward those that are "abusing" the system, which they define as minorities, and any whites who fail to meet their moral standards. My favorite is a younger baby boomer acquaintance who has a wife with some extreme health issues, including new organs, that were required due to long term illegal drug use. She is on SS disability, and medicaid and would literally be dead without government handouts. They are both intolerant and righteous to an extreme, racists, and "Good Christians". Makes my fucking head hurt to even think about it. In their little minds, they are fully deserving of everything they get, since they earned it. If the exact same scenario was presented to them, with a black woman, with a history of long term drug abuse, and in need of organ transplants, they would be perfectly happy to advocate witholding treatment, since that person would be undeserving.

economista

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 247
  • Age: 28
  • Location: Colorado
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #3672 on: September 28, 2017, 09:54:53 AM »
There are definitely groups of people who believe that the term "welfare" only applies to getting cash hand-outs in the nature of the old welfare program in the US.  In reality, the biggest individual component of the welfare program in the US is the earned-income tax credit (as far as economic literature is concerned) and many people receive it even when they make too much to qualify for food stamps and other forms of aid.  My mom is a good example - growing up we lived in subsidized housing, we received food stamps, all of our clothes and most of our groceries came from the local food bank, and she even received emergency cash assistance to pay our utility bills every few months with the water and electric would get cut off, but she swears up and down that she never got "welfare".  She currently is on SSI and she is a giant, hypocritical conservative.

My entire family is full of hypocritical, Christian conservatives.  My cousin got married and her husband is in med school, therefore not earning any money at all.  She is a stay at home mom and they live off a combination of student loans, handouts from their parents, and a whopping $700 per month in food stamps.  However, my conservative, welfare-hating family sees nothing wrong with this situation.  In their eyes, she was a chaste virgin when she was married, she became a good, baby-making catholic who is staying home to raise her child (like ALL mothers are supposed to do) and they are simply going through a hard time so they are using the support systems that are set up to help people like them.  However, all of the no-good single mothers and lazy low-income fathers are abusing the system and their tax dollars shouldn't be used to support "those" kind of people.  It makes me sick.
Follow along on my journey toward becoming (semi) mustacian :) http://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/journals/economista's-journal/

TheGrimSqueaker

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1594
  • Location: A desert wasteland, where none but the weird survive
  • www.theliveinlandlord.com
    • The Live-In Landlord
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #3673 on: September 28, 2017, 10:08:02 AM »
They are likely the first people that are outraged that they aren't getting a bailout when the economy tanks...but still view a good portion of the population as "moochers."

This is a really interesting topic that was raised in something I read recently... I wish I could remember what it was. Basically, it's that there's a strong race- and class-based bias underlying those views. People who are 'like me' are doing the best they can and just need a hand getting back on their feet. People who are 'like them' are good-for-nothing layabouts who don't try, don't care, and need to be kicked off of government programs in order to save money for the 'deserving'.

Fascinating topic. I have a relative who spent years on workers' compensation before transitioning directly to social security. This individual is one of the staunchest conservatives I know and believes that everyone (else?) should have to bootstrap their way through life. They are against all sorts of social programs and view most of these things as handouts and the participants as moochers.

I do not understand how they cannot see the disconnect between their own (I assume valid) use of the programs in our state, and the people they rail against who also need these sort of programs.

Many of the boot-strappers I know benefited from scholarships, grants, and bursaries during their school years. They also tended to go to public universities that are heavily subsidized by tax dollars. What I don't understand is why they don't acknowledge the extent to which they benefited from the ladder they got to climb, and why they pretend that they did it all themselves.

What an odd way to frame an issue and marginalize "boot-strappers."

Another way would be to say that boot-strappers, a group to which you would conscript me, wonder why these publicly available resources are not recognized and utilized by those who are, for simplicity of argument "not boot-strappers."

It's not a secret, you know, the publicly funded universities and the like.

They're not a secret at all. Yet that doesn't make them appropriate or accessible to all people or even necessarily to the majority. That's why there are a variety of government programs to address people with diverse sets of needs, some of which cannot be remedied with education alone.

The point I'm making is that the rugged individualist image is very fashionable, and that it's common for people to claim they "did it all themselves" when in reality they and their families have benefited more heavily from taxpayer funded initiatives than they care to admit.
I squeak softly, but carry a big schtick.

zolotiyeruki

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2225
  • Location: State: Denial
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #3674 on: September 28, 2017, 10:10:36 AM »
Wow, the venom towards conservatives and Christians is running pretty viciously in this thread.  Can we get it back on the topic of antimustachian relatives?

MrMoogle

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 947
  • Age: 32
  • Location: Huntsville, AL
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #3675 on: September 28, 2017, 10:32:45 AM »

It's called privilege. Very hard to see when you're the one benefiting. Very hard not to see when you're the one without it.

Unfortunately, this whole delusion is pretty common among the US conservative set. I know several older white men who would be eating from dumpsters if they were denied the benefits of our social safety net, yet are venomous toward those that are "abusing" the system, which they define as minorities, and any whites who fail to meet their moral standards. My favorite is a younger baby boomer acquaintance who has a wife with some extreme health issues, including new organs, that were required due to long term illegal drug use. She is on SS disability, and medicaid and would literally be dead without government handouts. They are both intolerant and righteous to an extreme, racists, and "Good Christians". Makes my fucking head hurt to even think about it. In their little minds, they are fully deserving of everything they get, since they earned it. If the exact same scenario was presented to them, with a black woman, with a history of long term drug abuse, and in need of organ transplants, they would be perfectly happy to advocate witholding treatment, since that person would be undeserving.

Conservative here.  I've been trying to understand some of this, and I think a lot of it comes from semantics.  "Privileged" seems derogatory, but "blessed" seems flattering, but they both basically mean the same thing: you have benefitted from things that are outside your direct control.  Many conservatives don't like to be called privileged but have no problem being called blessed. 

"Welfare" is also a negative term, I'm not sure what a similar positive term would be. 

This is from the conservative perspective.  From the liberal one, "privileged" and "welfare" could be positive, I'm not sure.

"Racism" is another term that seems to have different connotations between liberals and conservatives.  The subtle racism liberals are fighting and talk about seem mostly like a fact of life, but a negative fact of life.  Where to conservatives it's a term only used extremely negatively, and is mostly referred as overt racism. 

Another perspective related to this topic is liberals tend to be forward looking and conservatives tend to be backward looking (I say this in the least derogatory way possible).  So racism to conservatives is how the past has defined it, which is the whole white-hat KKK thing.  Liberals are talking about an ideal they have, where even the society doesn't have (subtle) racist trends. 

So the whole conversations about these things are from very different perspectives.

TheGrimSqueaker

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1594
  • Location: A desert wasteland, where none but the weird survive
  • www.theliveinlandlord.com
    • The Live-In Landlord
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #3676 on: September 28, 2017, 10:36:15 AM »
Wow, the venom towards conservatives and Christians is running pretty viciously in this thread.  Can we get it back on the topic of antimustachian relatives?

We're not off topic in this thread. The two people in the posts you mentioned were indeed talking about their anti-mustachian relatives. The relatives in question suffer from an extreme lack of generosity to others and blatant hypocrisy as well.
I squeak softly, but carry a big schtick.

ixtap

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 396
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #3677 on: September 28, 2017, 10:41:48 AM »
There is nothing subtle about the way black people are treated by police.

There is nothing subtle about Confederate flags and tiki torches.

There is nothing subtle about white people with safety nets who resent black people on exactly the same programs.

There is nothing subtle about people losing their jobs because their hair isn't right.

Shall I continue?

Just because a large segment of our society refuses to acknowledge a gaping hole does not make it a small hole.

MrMoogle

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 947
  • Age: 32
  • Location: Huntsville, AL
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #3678 on: September 28, 2017, 11:23:20 AM »
There is nothing subtle about the way black people are treated by police.

There is nothing subtle about Confederate flags and tiki torches.

There is nothing subtle about white people with safety nets who resent black people on exactly the same programs.

There is nothing subtle about people losing their jobs because their hair isn't right.

Shall I continue?

Just because a large segment of our society refuses to acknowledge a gaping hole does not make it a small hole.
You're talking about the 0.001% of the population that does that overt stuff, and yes I denounce it, and so do most conservatives.

Once you get to an equivalent of a "black section" at a café or a "white's only" drinking fountain that every single American walks by and ignores, then yes, I believe it is subtle. 

The fact that I work with black people and value their work indicates that my problems are subtle.  And yes, I admit I have problems.

Maenad

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 106
  • Location: Minneapolis 'burbs
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #3679 on: September 28, 2017, 11:24:27 AM »
I'm not saying that it would be better overall if there weren't such safety nets, but I hate how passive it has made people.

I think this is putting the cart before the horse. I think the short-term thinking (which looks like passivity) is endemic to our species and has little to do with what safety nets are present. I know people who have literally said that they'll just live off of Social Security and the gov't will take care of them. I know far more who are just so focused on "today" that "tomorrow" doesn't get a moment of their time. And we all fall victim to that - how many of us are taking perfect physical care of ourselves, in preparation for old age? I have a list as long as my arm of things I "should" be doing to plan and prepare for the future, and it's barely getting shorter each year.

ixtap

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 396
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #3680 on: September 28, 2017, 12:04:00 PM »
There is nothing subtle about the way black people are treated by police.

There is nothing subtle about Confederate flags and tiki torches.

There is nothing subtle about white people with safety nets who resent black people on exactly the same programs.

There is nothing subtle about people losing their jobs because their hair isn't right.

Shall I continue?

Just because a large segment of our society refuses to acknowledge a gaping hole does not make it a small hole.
You're talking about the 0.001% of the population that does that overt stuff, and yes I denounce it, and so do most conservatives.

Once you get to an equivalent of a "black section" at a café or a "white's only" drinking fountain that every single American walks by and ignores, then yes, I believe it is subtle. 

The fact that I work with black people and value their work indicates that my problems are subtle.  And yes, I admit I have problems.
Trump did not make it through the primaries because .0001% of the population holds ones or more of those beliefs.

And African Americans should not fvcking be grateful that they aren't being lynched or forced to use separate water fountains . Especially since they ARE being lynched by men and women in blue.

zolotiyeruki

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2225
  • Location: State: Denial
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #3681 on: September 28, 2017, 12:18:01 PM »
I'm not saying that it would be better overall if there weren't such safety nets, but I hate how passive it has made people.

I think this is putting the cart before the horse. I think the short-term thinking (which looks like passivity) is endemic to our species and has little to do with what safety nets are present. I know people who have literally said that they'll just live off of Social Security and the gov't will take care of them. I know far more who are just so focused on "today" that "tomorrow" doesn't get a moment of their time. And we all fall victim to that - how many of us are taking perfect physical care of ourselves, in preparation for old age? I have a list as long as my arm of things I "should" be doing to plan and prepare for the future, and it's barely getting shorter each year.
I think of it as a bit of a vicious circle.  A problem is perceived (for example, "some old people can't support themselves"), so a program (in this example, Social Security) is created to "solve" the problem.  But while the program helps somewhat with the problem, it also creates perverse incentives by socializing the cost of individual decisions (people think the gov't will take care of them, so they save less on their own for retirement).  So the original problem actually grows ("now MORE old people don't have enough money for retirement!"), and the cycle repeats.

BFGirl

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 652
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #3682 on: September 28, 2017, 01:21:16 PM »
Oh god, gotta vent.

I have 98% visibility into my parent's finances (checking, credit cards, etc). Don't see the mortgage. Anyway, I set everything up into a seperate Quicken file on my computer so I can keep track of things. Dad isn't really trustworthy anymore and is easily taken by scammers. Mom is clueless and thinks she can't figure it out so doesn't even try.

So I downloaded transactions into Quicken yesterday and spent a bunch of time unduplicating it (I have no idea why it does that). Then start looking over stuff. As usual, spend way too much on groceries, then spend more on eating out. As usual, too much on Comcast. As usual, spending a crap ton of money on cigarettes.

Then I look at the credit cards. What, why is that card at $1k? I just worked with them to transfer the $13k balance to a promo 0% interest rate a few months ago, it should be in the drawer, not being used, at $0. Um, nope.

Ugh. My parents are hopeless. I love them dearly, but when SHTF (and it will, dad's got dementia and he's getting worse), they will be declaring bankruptcy, moving near me, and going cash only. Because clearly they can't manage credit.

Um...if your dad has dementia he isn't really capable of making sound monetary decisions.  Have you gotten powers of attorney and other planning documents done?  Would it be possible for you to take control of your parents' finances before it leads to financial ruin?
« Last Edit: September 28, 2017, 01:31:33 PM by BFGirl »

MgoSam

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3438
  • Location: Minnesota
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #3683 on: September 28, 2017, 01:34:13 PM »
I'm not saying that it would be better overall if there weren't such safety nets, but I hate how passive it has made people.

I think this is putting the cart before the horse. I think the short-term thinking (which looks like passivity) is endemic to our species and has little to do with what safety nets are present. I know people who have literally said that they'll just live off of Social Security and the gov't will take care of them. I know far more who are just so focused on "today" that "tomorrow" doesn't get a moment of their time. And we all fall victim to that - how many of us are taking perfect physical care of ourselves, in preparation for old age? I have a list as long as my arm of things I "should" be doing to plan and prepare for the future, and it's barely getting shorter each year.
I think of it as a bit of a vicious circle.  A problem is perceived (for example, "some old people can't support themselves"), so a program (in this example, Social Security) is created to "solve" the problem.  But while the program helps somewhat with the problem, it also creates perverse incentives by socializing the cost of individual decisions (people think the gov't will take care of them, so they save less on their own for retirement).  So the original problem actually grows ("now MORE old people don't have enough money for retirement!"), and the cycle repeats.

More and more I am starting to see this as how the world works.

Take seat belts, great idea and I believe that everyone should have them on (unsure whether or not you should be ticketed for not wearing it though), but I read a case study that indicated that due to the perceived safety that the belt provides, drivers have become more reckless...and as a result car fatalities increased after the widespread adoption of seat belts. I read this case study over a decade ago so can't find it, but I'll try to google around for it later.

zolotiyeruki

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2225
  • Location: State: Denial
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #3684 on: September 28, 2017, 02:36:57 PM »
I think of it as a bit of a vicious circle.  A problem is perceived (for example, "some old people can't support themselves"), so a program (in this example, Social Security) is created to "solve" the problem.  But while the program helps somewhat with the problem, it also creates perverse incentives by socializing the cost of individual decisions (people think the gov't will take care of them, so they save less on their own for retirement).  So the original problem actually grows ("now MORE old people don't have enough money for retirement!"), and the cycle repeats.

More and more I am starting to see this as how the world works.

Take seat belts, great idea and I believe that everyone should have them on (unsure whether or not you should be ticketed for not wearing it though), but I read a case study that indicated that due to the perceived safety that the belt provides, drivers have become more reckless...and as a result car fatalities increased after the widespread adoption of seat belts. I read this case study over a decade ago so can't find it, but I'll try to google around for it later.
I heard the same thing, except it was about the big push for kids to always wear bike helmets--after the big push, hospitals saw a significant increase in bike-related head injuries, because people (not just kids) were less careful when riding with a helmet.

Goldielocks

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4544
  • Location: BC
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #3685 on: September 28, 2017, 02:55:48 PM »

More and more I am starting to see this as how the world works.

Take seat belts, great idea and I believe that everyone should have them on (unsure whether or not you should be ticketed for not wearing it though), but I read a case study that indicated that due to the perceived safety that the belt provides, drivers have become more reckless...and as a result car fatalities increased after the widespread adoption of seat belts. I read this case study over a decade ago so can't find it, but I'll try to google around for it later.

Hmm.  interesting.  I heard a similar story, except the topic was airbags -- how they were first installed to quickly deactivate b/c people were still not wearing seatbelts, and these airbags caused the front seat kid injuries, but an airbag used with a seat belt needs to be much less powerful, as the seatbelt is sufficient for lower speed accidents.

Anyway, the same presentation discussed how people rely on safety nets and then speed more / take riskier actions...  I don't recall anything about more deaths after seatbelts, though, because that one seems obvious that seatbelts reduce deaths...?   Maybe the car with seatbelts speeds then hits another car without seatbelts?   IDK.. ?

ETA:  Found it! TIME article.  Yep, about SEATBELTS.

http://content.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1564465,00.html

http://john-adams.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2006/SAE%20seatbelts.pdf 
 "..protecting car occupants from the consequences of bad driving encourages bad driving."  John Adams, June 1982, SAE

On reading the entire statistical study and hypothesis, it is very interesting to note the correlation between aggressive driving and traffic deaths...  This is shown through the decline in deaths related to the 1973 oil crisis, and attention to fuel conservation (aka less aggressive driving) that likely triggerred the initial drop in the index for all countries.  One country comment was about the introduction of drunk driving laws reducing deaths.

 I wonder, too, if the 1970's showed a demographic trend of fewer drivers under the age of 21?   e.g., like crime statistics, crash fatality numbers fall according to the demographics of the population, and that demographic trend masks any smaller impacts that wearing seatbelts may cause.?
http://www.iihs.org/iihs/topics/t/teenagers/fatalityfacts/teenagers

« Last Edit: September 28, 2017, 04:15:41 PM by Goldielocks »

economista

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 247
  • Age: 28
  • Location: Colorado
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #3686 on: September 28, 2017, 03:12:18 PM »

More and more I am starting to see this as how the world works.

Take seat belts, great idea and I believe that everyone should have them on (unsure whether or not you should be ticketed for not wearing it though), but I read a case study that indicated that due to the perceived safety that the belt provides, drivers have become more reckless...and as a result car fatalities increased after the widespread adoption of seat belts. I read this case study over a decade ago so can't find it, but I'll try to google around for it later.

Hmm.  interesting.  I heard a similar story, except the topic was airbags -- how they were first installed to quickly deactivate b/c people were still not wearing seatbelts, and these airbags caused the front seat kid injuries, but an airbag used with a seat belt needs to be much less powerful, as the seatbelt is sufficient for lower speed accidents.

Anyway, the same presentation discussed how people rely on safety nets and then speed more / take riskier actions...  I don't recall anything about more deaths after seatbelts, though, because that one seems obvious that seatbelts reduce deaths...?   Maybe the car with seatbelts speeds then hits another car without seatbelts?   IDK.. ?

ETA:  Found it! TIME article.  Yep, about SEATBELTS.

http://content.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1564465,00.html

http://john-adams.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2006/SAE%20seatbelts.pdf 
 "..protecting car occupants from the consequences of bad driving encourages bad driving."  John Adams, June 1982, SAE

Freakonomics did an episode about this in regards to football helmets.  As helmets have gotten safer (in the sense of preventing skull fractures) the players have gotten more violent, thus leading more concussions (which aren't prevented by current helmet designs).  http://freakonomics.com/2015/08/13/the-dangers-of-safety-full-transcript-2/

Edit: After looking back through the transcript, they talk about seatbelts and safety standards in cars too :)
« Last Edit: September 28, 2017, 03:14:08 PM by economista »
Follow along on my journey toward becoming (semi) mustacian :) http://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/journals/economista's-journal/

kayvent

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 519
  • Location: Canada
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #3687 on: September 28, 2017, 03:52:05 PM »
So this is actually the opposite of this thread but my excitement has been too much. My mother, who has always been poor with money, recently asked me to teach her some things about budgeting. She's agreed to help me set-up YNAB with her. It won't be mustachian but I believe I can save her lots of money by getting her to track and notice her expenses. (I recently found out that she spends more per week on food than my household.)

My problem/experience with food stamps was working at a grocery and seeing tons of crap being bought. I would never buy the soda and chips myself 1. I couldn't afford it 2. It's so bad for you. I just wish government money only went to healthy foods. Too many people are malnourished in this country to be wasting money on coke and Doritos.

I will beg to differ. People on foodstamps have a miserable life. For a single person to be on foodstamps, they'd be making sub-14500 gross or under 12000 net. We're on the MMM forum; even us super-frugal, do-it-yourselfers don't can't live that cheaply. I've seen threads on this forum. We think it is incredibly frugal to only spend 22K. To many of us, living on 12K is unimaginable.

I am going to confer to Orwell's The Road to Wigan Pier (1937) argument on this subject of poor people buying unhealthy food while on the dole. If you're living that type of subsistence living, it is only natural to want to escape that misery. Even if it is just for a moment while drinking pop or having a bag of crisps. I don't begrudge suffering people taking a pain killer.
« Last Edit: September 28, 2017, 03:54:43 PM by kayvent »

zolotiyeruki

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2225
  • Location: State: Denial
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #3688 on: September 28, 2017, 03:57:20 PM »
Freakonomics did an episode about this in regards to football helmets.  As helmets have gotten safer (in the sense of preventing skull fractures) the players have gotten more violent, thus leading more concussions (which aren't prevented by current helmet designs).  http://freakonomics.com/2015/08/13/the-dangers-of-safety-full-transcript-2/

Edit: After looking back through the transcript, they talk about seatbelts and safety standards in cars too :)
I wonder how much research has been done with regards to head injuries in rugby vs American football.

Gronnie

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 136
  • Age: 31
  • Location: Midwest
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #3689 on: September 28, 2017, 05:02:29 PM »
My problem/experience with food stamps was working at a grocery and seeing tons of crap being bought. I would never buy the soda and chips myself 1. I couldn't afford it 2. It's so bad for you. I just wish government money only went to healthy foods. Too many people are malnourished in this country to be wasting money on coke and Doritos.

I will beg to differ. People on foodstamps have a miserable life. For a single person to be on foodstamps, they'd be making sub-14500 gross or under 12000 net. We're on the MMM forum; even us super-frugal, do-it-yourselfers don't can't live that cheaply. I've seen threads on this forum. We think it is incredibly frugal to only spend 22K. To many of us, living on 12K is unimaginable.

I am going to confer to Orwell's The Road to Wigan Pier (1937) argument on this subject of poor people buying unhealthy food while on the dole. If you're living that type of subsistence living, it is only natural to want to escape that misery. Even if it is just for a moment while drinking pop or having a bag of crisps. I don't begrudge suffering people taking a pain killer.

Or a "single" mother has a couple of kids and gets housing, food stamps, Medicaid, etc. Father lives with the family and has a FT job, but father and mother aren't married and father claims his address is elsewhere (parent's or friend's house, etc). This is an extremely common scenario, and if they weren't gaming the system they wouldn't be eligible for all these handouts.

Gin1984

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4363
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #3690 on: September 28, 2017, 09:24:37 PM »
My problem/experience with food stamps was working at a grocery and seeing tons of crap being bought. I would never buy the soda and chips myself 1. I couldn't afford it 2. It's so bad for you. I just wish government money only went to healthy foods. Too many people are malnourished in this country to be wasting money on coke and Doritos.

I will beg to differ. People on foodstamps have a miserable life. For a single person to be on foodstamps, they'd be making sub-14500 gross or under 12000 net. We're on the MMM forum; even us super-frugal, do-it-yourselfers don't can't live that cheaply. I've seen threads on this forum. We think it is incredibly frugal to only spend 22K. To many of us, living on 12K is unimaginable.

I am going to confer to Orwell's The Road to Wigan Pier (1937) argument on this subject of poor people buying unhealthy food while on the dole. If you're living that type of subsistence living, it is only natural to want to escape that misery. Even if it is just for a moment while drinking pop or having a bag of crisps. I don't begrudge suffering people taking a pain killer.

Or a "single" mother has a couple of kids and gets housing, food stamps, Medicaid, etc. Father lives with the family and has a FT job, but father and mother aren't married and father claims his address is elsewhere (parent's or friend's house, etc). This is an extremely common scenario, and if they weren't gaming the system they wouldn't be eligible for all these handouts.
I love for you to show any evidence of this being common.  It is a common myth, started by Reagan, but there is no actual basis.

shelivesthedream

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2147
  • Location: UK
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #3691 on: September 29, 2017, 12:53:14 AM »
My problem/experience with food stamps was working at a grocery and seeing tons of crap being bought. I would never buy the soda and chips myself 1. I couldn't afford it 2. It's so bad for you. I just wish government money only went to healthy foods. Too many people are malnourished in this country to be wasting money on coke and Doritos.

I will beg to differ. People on foodstamps have a miserable life. For a single person to be on foodstamps, they'd be making sub-14500 gross or under 12000 net. We're on the MMM forum; even us super-frugal, do-it-yourselfers don't can't live that cheaply. I've seen threads on this forum. We think it is incredibly frugal to only spend 22K. To many of us, living on 12K is unimaginable.

I am going to confer to Orwell's The Road to Wigan Pier (1937) argument on this subject of poor people buying unhealthy food while on the dole. If you're living that type of subsistence living, it is only natural to want to escape that misery. Even if it is just for a moment while drinking pop or having a bag of crisps. I don't begrudge suffering people taking a pain killer.

Or a "single" mother has a couple of kids and gets housing, food stamps, Medicaid, etc. Father lives with the family and has a FT job, but father and mother aren't married and father claims his address is elsewhere (parent's or friend's house, etc). This is an extremely common scenario, and if they weren't gaming the system they wouldn't be eligible for all these handouts.
I love for you to show any evidence of this being common.  It is a common myth, started by Reagan, but there is no actual basis.

Some people are inexplicably desperate to think the worst of others.

Goldielocks

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4544
  • Location: BC
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #3692 on: September 29, 2017, 02:17:37 AM »
My problem/experience with food stamps was working at a grocery and seeing tons of crap being bought. I would never buy the soda and chips myself 1. I couldn't afford it 2. It's so bad for you. I just wish government money only went to healthy foods. Too many people are malnourished in this country to be wasting money on coke and Doritos.

I will beg to differ. People on foodstamps have a miserable life. For a single person to be on foodstamps, they'd be making sub-14500 gross or under 12000 net. We're on the MMM forum; even us super-frugal, do-it-yourselfers don't can't live that cheaply. I've seen threads on this forum. We think it is incredibly frugal to only spend 22K. To many of us, living on 12K is unimaginable.

I am going to confer to Orwell's The Road to Wigan Pier (1937) argument on this subject of poor people buying unhealthy food while on the dole. If you're living that type of subsistence living, it is only natural to want to escape that misery. Even if it is just for a moment while drinking pop or having a bag of crisps. I don't begrudge suffering people taking a pain killer.

Or a "single" mother has a couple of kids and gets housing, food stamps, Medicaid, etc. Father lives with the family and has a FT job, but father and mother aren't married and father claims his address is elsewhere (parent's or friend's house, etc). This is an extremely common scenario, and if they weren't gaming the system they wouldn't be eligible for all these handouts.
I love for you to show any evidence of this being common.  It is a common myth, started by Reagan, but there is no actual basis.

Yeah,  when I read that I thought how fortunate the kids were to have a dad at home, and I would be happy to support that, for sure.

Raenia

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 373
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #3693 on: September 29, 2017, 05:56:50 AM »

I will beg to differ. People on foodstamps have a miserable life. For a single person to be on foodstamps, they'd be making sub-14500 gross or under 12000 net. We're on the MMM forum; even us super-frugal, do-it-yourselfers don't can't live that cheaply. I've seen threads on this forum. We think it is incredibly frugal to only spend 22K. To many of us, living on 12K is unimaginable.

Not to be contrary, but I have lived on ~12k net, and I currently live on a hair over ~15k.  I not only can and did, I still had a good life doing it.  It's not the low expenses that make it a miserable life, it's the constant worry due to lack of buffer space for emergencies.

TomTX

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2599
  • Location: Texas
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #3694 on: September 29, 2017, 06:46:58 AM »

I will beg to differ. People on foodstamps have a miserable life. For a single person to be on foodstamps, they'd be making sub-14500 gross or under 12000 net. We're on the MMM forum; even us super-frugal, do-it-yourselfers don't can't live that cheaply. I've seen threads on this forum. We think it is incredibly frugal to only spend 22K. To many of us, living on 12K is unimaginable.

Not to be contrary, but I have lived on ~12k net, and I currently live on a hair over ~15k.  I not only can and did, I still had a good life doing it.  It's not the low expenses that make it a miserable life, it's the constant worry due to lack of buffer space for emergencies.

I just re-read the original post. That's $12k per person, right? And that means something like $50/week in SNAP benefits, plus housing assistance, health insurance, etc?

Whoops. I just checked the Texas SNAP rules. It's actually $19.9k for a single, $33.7k for a family of 3.

The $33.7k is gross income (before taxes) - but I don't think EITC is "income"

That doesn't sound miserable.
Credit card signup bonuses:

$150 bonus on $500 spend for Chase Freedom:
https://www.referyourchasecard.com/2/MU4TDQ1N3K

$50 bonus (no min spend, just use it once) plus double all cash back at the end of 1 year for Discover, including the initial $50:
https://refer.discover.com/s/37e3u

$500 bonus on $4,000 spend for Chase Sapphire Preferred:
https://www.referyourchasecard.com/6/Z8JIP66H7G

merula

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 801
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #3695 on: September 29, 2017, 07:25:49 AM »
There is nothing subtle about the way black people are treated by police.

There is nothing subtle about Confederate flags and tiki torches.

There is nothing subtle about white people with safety nets who resent black people on exactly the same programs.

There is nothing subtle about people losing their jobs because their hair isn't right.

Shall I continue?

Just because a large segment of our society refuses to acknowledge a gaping hole does not make it a small hole.
You're talking about the 0.001% of the population that does that overt stuff, and yes I denounce it, and so do most conservatives.

Once you get to an equivalent of a "black section" at a café or a "white's only" drinking fountain that every single American walks by and ignores, then yes, I believe it is subtle. 

The fact that I work with black people and value their work indicates that my problems are subtle.  And yes, I admit I have problems.
Trump did not make it through the primaries because .0001% of the population holds ones or more of those beliefs.

And African Americans should not fvcking be grateful that they aren't being lynched or forced to use separate water fountains . Especially since they ARE being lynched by men and women in blue.

I think you may have misunderstood what MrMoogle was saying. I agree with you that the current executive branch situation shows that there is a lot of racism in the US even without separate water fountains or lunch counters, and the actions of police against POC is horrific.

I think MrMoogle agrees with you too.

The overt stuff gets routinely denounced, by conservatives as well as liberals. (See: Republican leaders who denounced both the Charlottesville marches and Trump's reaction). Five years ago I would have said we were past the point of even needing to talk about the overt stuff, because it was so marginalized. Now, I would say we need to continue to address it so that it doesn't keep rearing its ugly head, but our focus should be on the more pervasive and subtle kinds of racism.

When MrMoogle says "The fact that I work with black people and value their work indicates that my problems are subtle.  And yes, I admit I have problems.", I hear him saying that he values black people, and presumably other minorities, but recognizes that ingrained racism can still affect his actions in ways that negatively impact those people. That's a hard thing to say, but it's true of all white people. Despite our best intentions, we don't fully understand what it's like to be on the other side, and that gap causes problems.

mm1970

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4647
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #3696 on: September 29, 2017, 11:24:04 AM »
My problem/experience with food stamps was working at a grocery and seeing tons of crap being bought. I would never buy the soda and chips myself 1. I couldn't afford it 2. It's so bad for you. I just wish government money only went to healthy foods. Too many people are malnourished in this country to be wasting money on coke and Doritos.

I will beg to differ. People on foodstamps have a miserable life. For a single person to be on foodstamps, they'd be making sub-14500 gross or under 12000 net. We're on the MMM forum; even us super-frugal, do-it-yourselfers don't can't live that cheaply. I've seen threads on this forum. We think it is incredibly frugal to only spend 22K. To many of us, living on 12K is unimaginable.

I am going to confer to Orwell's The Road to Wigan Pier (1937) argument on this subject of poor people buying unhealthy food while on the dole. If you're living that type of subsistence living, it is only natural to want to escape that misery. Even if it is just for a moment while drinking pop or having a bag of crisps. I don't begrudge suffering people taking a pain killer.

Or a "single" mother has a couple of kids and gets housing, food stamps, Medicaid, etc. Father lives with the family and has a FT job, but father and mother aren't married and father claims his address is elsewhere (parent's or friend's house, etc). This is an extremely common scenario, and if they weren't gaming the system they wouldn't be eligible for all these handouts.
The thing is "everyone knows someone who knows someone" who is cheating the system.  But few people know anyone who is cheating the system.

I will say this:
- my sister's SIL has 2-3 kids, is on welfare, doesn't work, lives with her mom.  I know someone who knows someone.
- I used to work with a woman who had Section 8 housing.  She was a hard worker.  Had 2 jobs.  The second job meant that her rent went up/ voucher went down.  However, she *did* live with her boyfriend (illegally) who worked under the table.  Eventually she traded her 2 jobs for one higher paying job and bought a condo.  Last I checked her adult daughter was in school and was able to get a Section 8 voucher.  That was years ago.  So at least she got off welfare.
- I have, at times, worked with men who lived with their girlfriends and kids, but didn't marry.  In some cases, it's because the kids could get medicaid or food stamps.  (Sometimes both parents worked.) One of my coworkers asked out loud if he should put his kids on his insurance instead of medicaid?  But it would cost him money.  (Not a lot.)

However, studies have shown these cases to be few and far between.

I'll say something else.  Welfare does suck.  We were poor growing up but never eligible, to my knowledge, for welfare and food stamps.  It sucked and we had weeks with a bare cupboard and 16 cents till pay day.  I just finished reading a book This House Protected by Poverty by Frances Ransley.  Basically her life as a single parent with 4 kids, on welfare, unable to work for much of it because of a disability, but ineligible for disability pay.  A very eye opening look into Poverty and welfare, at least what it was like back in the 1980s.

It sucked.  It was hard to pay the bills. It was inordinately hard to get off of, when you consider the need for childcare, and the numerous hoops that you have to jump through to keep your paperwork up to date, to get school paid for, childcare paid for so that you can go to school, etc.

Imma

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 295
  • Location: Europe
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #3697 on: September 29, 2017, 12:50:10 PM »
I'm not saying that it would be better overall if there weren't such safety nets, but I hate how passive it has made people.

I think this is putting the cart before the horse. I think the short-term thinking (which looks like passivity) is endemic to our species and has little to do with what safety nets are present. I know people who have literally said that they'll just live off of Social Security and the gov't will take care of them. I know far more who are just so focused on "today" that "tomorrow" doesn't get a moment of their time. And we all fall victim to that - how many of us are taking perfect physical care of ourselves, in preparation for old age? I have a list as long as my arm of things I "should" be doing to plan and prepare for the future, and it's barely getting shorter each year.

I don't really think that before safety nets people made better, long-term focused decisions. More people just starved to death.

dandarc

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2883
Link to my journal, so I can find it quickly - http://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/journals/dandarc's-journal/

Cassie

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3728
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #3699 on: September 29, 2017, 03:42:04 PM »
I was a social worker for awhile and M1970 is so right. Lots of reason for poverty and very difficult to escape. It takes a lot of support, money and time.  I had a friend on welfare that had 2 kids and wanted to go back to school. Her Mom died and she lost her free babysitter.  My husband & I babysat for free for 3 years, I enlisted her Dad and my Mom as backups since both were retired.  Then her last year they cut her food stamps because of her financial aid. She had to pay for books & tuition with that $.  She thought she was going to have to quit so she could feed her kids. We were far from rich but helped her with food as did her Dad.  We did not buy each other gifts so her kids had some gifts under the tree.  She graduated and got a job. It was awesome. However, look at the long term commitment and the number of people and money it took to make this happen.