Author Topic: Modern Day Slavery  (Read 18007 times)

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 12093
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Modern Day Slavery
« Reply #50 on: May 28, 2018, 01:44:01 PM »
waste, inefficiency, and unmeritocratic structures should be avoided.

Absolutely.

It's important to note though that capitalism is no more the solution to all of the above than is socialism.

jlcnuke

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 792
Re: Modern Day Slavery
« Reply #51 on: May 28, 2018, 02:39:05 PM »
Well, you acknowledge that income isn't a zero sumngaem, so perhaps you could explain why you still think wide varieties of income is "wrong". If one person making 100000 times more than someone else has no bearing on the ability of that second person to have a safe, healthy, productive, and profitable life... Then I can't see a problem personally.
OK, obviously 'slavery' is not the right term for what I'm railing against (and I apologize to anyone experiencing slavery, but I doubt many of them are reading the MMM Forums).  I'll admit that, but 'inequality' seems inadequate for a situation where the head of the organization makes several working lifetimes more per year than the rank and file.  That the situation continues to get worse year in and year out is cause to wonder how far it will ultimately go.  In a way, Mustachianism / FIRE is a response to people (who can afford to) bucking this system, which I'm very supportive of.

And yes, Capitalism is a better system than Socialism and Communism, but that doesn't mean we blindly follow it to the bitter end and give a free pass to aspects which ultimately do more harm than good.

And yes, incomes are not a zero sum game, but the focus is meant to be on continually rising income disparity.

Thanks for the discussion, sorry I have not participated much yet.

Sent from my XT1635-01 using Tapatalk


MrUpwardlyMobile

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 398
    • The Upwardly Mobile Life
Re: Modern Day Slavery
« Reply #52 on: May 28, 2018, 02:58:32 PM »
This aspect of Capitalism has always bothered me:  https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/25/business/highest-paid-ceos-2017.html

Quote
A Walmart employee earning the company’s median salary of $19,177 would have to work for more than a thousand years to earn the $22.2 million that Doug McMillon, the company’s chief executive, was awarded in 2017.

Sadly, that's not the most egregious example of how American CEO's earn vs. the rank and file employees.  If it's not outright slavery, then it is the moral equivalent. 

So then the only question left is, how much longer do we wait?  How many more multiples of lifetimes do you and your progeny sign up to endure, before we say 'enough'?  We are not only not playing a game that an average person can no longer 'win', we are playing a game that no longer benefits from everyone's participation.  Now we are being told that our superiors are winning for us and we are no longer encouraged to participate.

This is the kind of unproductive hyperbole that really accomplishes nothing. Working a crappy job that requires virtually no knowledge, skills, ability, or training should pay badly compared to running a massive corporation.  It’s like comparing apples with cows... you’re not even close.

The crazy thing is that this attitude becomes outrage when these menial unskilled jobs are replaced by automation.

scottish

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1209
  • Location: Ottawa
Re: Modern Day Slavery
« Reply #53 on: May 28, 2018, 03:48:21 PM »
yeah, I find that to be a combination of sad and puzzling.   I feel badly for the people who get whacked by automation.   It's like they can't quite grasp what's happening to them, when it's pretty obvious companies will be trying to replace their unskilled labour force with machines.

I'm pretty sure these people would like to have something meaningful they can do to support themselves.   Otherwise the automation just causes social problems.

maizeman

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2997
Re: Modern Day Slavery
« Reply #54 on: May 28, 2018, 03:48:36 PM »
The crazy thing is that this attitude becomes outrage when these menial unskilled jobs are replaced by automation.

Well that's the thing so many people don't seem to get about the whole minimum wage debate.

If the current minimum wage is $10, and we raise it to $20:

A) Some current minimum jobs just don't generate $20/hour worth of value to the employer, so those jobs go away.
B) Some current minimum jobs do generate $20 worth of value to the employer, but the cost of automating the job is some number between $10 and $20/hour, and those jobs also go away.
C) Some current minimum jobs do generate $20/hour worth of value to the employer and cannot be cost effectively automated even at $20/hour, so those jobs stay, but now all the people who used to have jobs in groups A and B are competing for jobs in class C, so if you're lucky* enough to get one of these job you're better off than before, and if not you're worse off before, decreasing income disparities on the low end of the scale.

*In addition, since many more people are competing for a smaller pool of new minimum wage jobs, employers don't have to worry as much about treating their employees well (since there are even more unemployed people waiting to take their place), so working conditions for minimum wage work, which generally suck to begin with, are likely to get even worse as the pay for minimum wage work goes up.

maizeman

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2997
Re: Modern Day Slavery
« Reply #55 on: May 28, 2018, 03:53:42 PM »
yeah, I find that to be a combination of sad and puzzling.   I feel badly for the people who get whacked by automation.   It's like they can't quite grasp what's happening to them, when it's pretty obvious companies will be trying to replace their unskilled labour force with machines.

I'm pretty sure these people would like to have something meaningful they can do to support themselves.   Otherwise the automation just causes social problems.

I share your feelings. But I do want to add one note of caution, which is that surveys have repeatedly shown* that people tend to underestimate how susceptible our own jobs are to automation, even as we're better able to perceive how others people's jobs might be replaced by computers and/or robots.

So we may each find out we are the people we're feeling sorry for at some point in the future.

* Source: http://www.pewinternet.org/2017/10/04/automation-in-everyday-life/
Quote
Overall, roughly three-quarters of Americans (77%) think it’s realistic that robots and computers might one day be able to do many of the jobs currently done by humans, ... At the same time, few of today’s workers expect that their own jobs or professions are at risk of being automated. In total, just 30% of workers think it’s at least somewhat likely that their jobs will be mostly done by robots or computers ...

nick663

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 245
  • Location: midwest
Re: Modern Day Slavery
« Reply #56 on: May 28, 2018, 04:41:15 PM »
In addition, if Wal-Mart treats their employees so terrible, why do they work there? With slavery, they would be forced to work there. They aren't, they can go seek different employment anytime they want. They are likely there because they don't have any marketable skills to get a job anywhere that pays more.

This is a somewhat facile argument. There are plenty of areas in the US where 1 or 2 employers like Wal-Mart have the population under their thumb, since there is nowhere else to work within a long commute distance. It's awfully easy for those of us with cushy middle-class or upper-middle-class jobs to say, "Just get another job". It's frequently not that easy. Similarly, "Develop better skills" is flippant and mean to people who just can't. Some people simply aren't able to, due to innate intelligence, mental health issues, etc.

I don't disagree at all with your last sentence, but I that the second one (bolded) was particularly interesting.

For most of its history the United States was faster at recovering from economic recessions and depressions than other countries (which mostly means european ones, since those are the ones where we have data from comparable time scales). One of the causes this is attributed to by some economists is that the United States is a big country, and, at least until recently, our population has been willing to (and able to) move to where the jobs are. So if unemployment is high in Virginia but economic growth is high in Oregon, a bunch of Virginian's move to Oregon, they find work (good for the people who move), unemployment rates in Virginia drop (good for the people who don't move), and the influx of workers helps the Oregon economy grow even faster (good for the people in Oregon).

No one has a definitive answer for why americans are so much less willing or able to move across state lines than they used to be.* But this historical pattern no longer holds true in the USA today, which may be part of why it took us so long to pull out of the great recession, and why a lot of parts of the country are still trapped in it.

Anyway, this is a long winded discussion, but I bring it up because my reaction if I, or anyone else I knew and cared about lived somewhere with only two employment options and one of them was walmart, my first response would be: move the heck out of there as fast as you can!

*Assorted possible explanations: Are people are still underwater on their mortgages? Are people substantially more likely to be supporting a disabled or nonworking parent or family member than in the past (meaning relocation would involved moving multiple households)? Is it as simple as the rise in two income households meaning moving requires finding two better jobs in the same place elsewhere in the country instead of one? Or the rise in divorces where the former spouse who moves out of states has to get judicial approval or risk losing a large proportion of their custody rights? Are the places with the most jobs places like san francisco and new york where housing policies might as well have been intentionally designed to keep out outsiders by driving up prices? (Not an exhaustive list.)
Interesting article on this subject:
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/12/24/upshot/24up-family.html

I think there is a component of this country going away from being a country of immigrants as well.  First generation immigrants have few roots put down and have obviously already made a huge move to better their life so the mindset is different than someone who has been here for generations.

EscapeVelocity2020

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1801
  • Age: 45
  • Location: Houston
    • EscapeVelocity2020
Re: Modern Day Slavery
« Reply #57 on: May 28, 2018, 08:43:18 PM »
Well, you acknowledge that income isn't a zero sumngaem, so perhaps you could explain why you still think wide varieties of income is "wrong". If one person making 100000 times more than someone else has no bearing on the ability of that second person to have a safe, healthy, productive, and profitable life... Then I can't see a problem personally.

We are all entitled to our own opinions on the matter of course, but across a single business it makes the average employees look pretty much worthless compared to the CEO.  I guess I take it personally that, if someone in my extended family or close friends worked as a cashier at WalMart, I would feel that they are treated very poorly.

Upthread, there was a comment that, even if the CEO made $0, it would only increase employee pay by $10 each.  However this is the sort of reasoning that I don't understand.  It's like saying, if all the employees just gave up another $10 in raise next year, the CEO could double his income, which is actually closer to what has been going on for the last 40 years.

I lived in Norway for a few years and it was pretty cool that bus drivers, teachers, and service workers made 'similar' salaries to doctors, pharmacists, and engineers.  People mostly do what they want to do with their lives.  Everyone's salaries are publicly available and you are somewhat shamed if you make multiples of others and enjoy conspicuous consumption.  Everyone has a pretty good life and good work / life balance (plenty of vacations, social programs to support young families, healthcare, and secondary education)...

I also lived in UAE for a few years and saw tremendous income disparity.  It was nauseating to see such extremes, although technically 'it worked'.  It made me appreciate that much more the balance America has enjoyed, but feels like this middle is disappearing and the UAE classes of rich and poor are crystallizing, maybe within a generation... 

EnjoyIt

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1137
Re: Modern Day Slavery
« Reply #58 on: May 28, 2018, 08:57:57 PM »
This aspect of Capitalism has always bothered me:  https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/25/business/highest-paid-ceos-2017.html

Quote
A Walmart employee earning the company’s median salary of $19,177 would have to work for more than a thousand years to earn the $22.2 million that Doug McMillon, the company’s chief executive, was awarded in 2017.

Sadly, that's not the most egregious example of how American CEO's earn vs. the rank and file employees.  If it's not outright slavery, then it is the moral equivalent. 

So then the only question left is, how much longer do we wait?  How many more multiples of lifetimes do you and your progeny sign up to endure, before we say 'enough'?  We are not only not playing a game that an average person can no longer 'win', we are playing a game that no longer benefits from everyone's participation.  Now we are being told that our superiors are winning for us and we are no longer encouraged to participate.

If you are in charge of a taco shop do you believe it is reasonable for you to make a couple of cents for each and every taco you sell?  Doesn't that motivate you to sell more tacos and therefor make more money for yourself and the business?  Do you think that the CEO of Starbucks deserves to make a fraction of a cent for each cup of coffee they sell?  It definitely would motivate him to open more stores, hire more people, and sell more coffee. Is it then fair for the CEO of Walmart to make a tiny tiny tiny fraction of a cent for each item Walmart sells? 

EscapeVelocity2020

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1801
  • Age: 45
  • Location: Houston
    • EscapeVelocity2020
Re: Modern Day Slavery
« Reply #59 on: May 28, 2018, 09:42:22 PM »
If you are in charge of a taco shop do you believe it is reasonable for you to make a couple of cents for each and every taco you sell?  Doesn't that motivate you to sell more tacos and therefor make more money for yourself and the business?  Do you think that the CEO of Starbucks deserves to make a fraction of a cent for each cup of coffee they sell?  It definitely would motivate him to open more stores, hire more people, and sell more coffee. Is it then fair for the CEO of Walmart to make a tiny tiny tiny fraction of a cent for each item Walmart sells?

I'm trying to get a feel for how other Mustachians feel about this.  So, in the Taco Shop example, I'd think that the workers making the tacos and people interacting with the customers are just as important as the CEO in their own way, and probably value money to incentivize them.  If you show that they are valued similar to managers and maybe up to 1/5 (so 20k vs. 100k per year) than the CEO, that seems reasonable.  If anything, the CEO has a better job (don't have to worried about being yelled at, injuring themself, or being fired) as well as many fringe benefits and perks.  Sure they shoulder a lot of responsibility, but that is what they are after chasing the top job.   

PDXTabs

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 684
  • Age: 35
  • Location: Vancouver, WA, USA
Re: Modern Day Slavery
« Reply #60 on: May 28, 2018, 09:56:03 PM »
There is a difference between a minimum safety net and no safety net. Basic regulation, over regulation and no regulation. Big government, smaller government and no government ( see anarchy, warlords, failed states).

waste, inefficiency, and unmeritocratic structures should be avoided.

I think everyone here can agree on that. But the current state of the US, and the Republican party platform, is way closer to Laissez Faire capitalism than it was from 1935~1980. Eisenhower and Nixon were way more liberal than Mitch McConnell or Paul Ryan. The Republican platform from 1950~1975 looks like something that a Clinton would push through Congress. Vote for whoever you want, but I'm only voting for Republicans if their policies look like a Eisenhower or a Nixon, not a Ryan or McConnell. I certainly don't want to go back to 1918 in the US (except that in 1918 you could discharge student loans in bankruptcy, and immigration was super liberal).

EDITed to add - and CEO pay is off the charts just since 1978: https://www.epi.org/publication/ceo-pay-has-grown-90-times-faster-than-typical-worker-pay-since-1978/
« Last Edit: May 28, 2018, 10:14:30 PM by PDXTabs »

jlcnuke

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 792
Re: Modern Day Slavery
« Reply #61 on: May 29, 2018, 05:33:17 AM »
I don't compare myself, or basey worth, on how much I make relative to someone else. As such, I am perfectly happy to make any multiple (whether much greater than or much worse than) of what some other person doing a different job is making.

Personally, I don't hear an explanation of why you think it's bad, just that it's different than other experiences you've had. I want a good explanation why government should get involved to prevent people from bring free to make their own decisions (whether it's a parent deciding how tiny a sliver of their income they'll give their children for chores or a board of directors deciding a CEOs salary). I have yet to hear one, or really any explanation of why high relative executive compensation is bad that doesn't sound like "well, a bunch of people will be jealous or feel bad if they compare themselves to some ok be in a completely different situation"

Sent from my XT1635-01 using Tapatalk


EscapeVelocity2020

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1801
  • Age: 45
  • Location: Houston
    • EscapeVelocity2020
Re: Modern Day Slavery
« Reply #62 on: May 29, 2018, 07:13:42 AM »
I don't compare myself, or basey worth, on how much I make relative to someone else. As such, I am perfectly happy to make any multiple (whether much greater than or much worse than) of what some other person doing a different job is making.

Personally, I don't hear an explanation of why you think it's bad, just that it's different than other experiences you've had. I want a good explanation why government should get involved to prevent people from bring free to make their own decisions (whether it's a parent deciding how tiny a sliver of their income they'll give their children for chores or a board of directors deciding a CEOs salary). I have yet to hear one, or really any explanation of why high relative executive compensation is bad that doesn't sound like "well, a bunch of people will be jealous or feel bad if they compare themselves to some ok be in a completely different situation"

But in both of the countries I discussed, Norway and UAE, the government is not involved in setting the salaries.  I never said the government should be involved, it is a social problem, but nowhere I know of does the government set CEO salaries.  The government may enact social programs as a reflection of what the people want, but ultimately the income disparity reflects what society wants or is willing to bear.  If enough people up and decide the measly pay at the bottom isn't worth it, labor either needs to be imported from 3rd world countries or companies have to raise salaries.  I prefer the latter.

use2betrix

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1085
Re: Modern Day Slavery
« Reply #63 on: May 29, 2018, 07:19:04 AM »
Ah yes, the obligatory entitlement thread.

You could find millions and millions of people around the world who would feel they hit the jackpot if they were allowed to come to America and work at Wal Mart.

To call it slavery is pathetic and degrading to so many people around the world who 1. Are actual slaves and 2. Would kill to have a job at Wal-Mart.

I’d be skeptical if the OP, or anyone who agrees with him/her, has ever actually traveled to poor countries outside the US and see what it’s like to “actually” be poor.

I’d place a safe bet that we have the most obese “poor” people in the world. I’d say Americans definition of poor is a gross overstatement. It’s amazing what some people here classify as poor.

When I was 16 I made $11/hr working in the kitchen at a nursing home. When I was 19 I was making $13.80 as a CNA (a decade ago). In addition, if someone is struggling to get by, why are they limiting themselves to 40 hr weeks like that’s some maximum threshold? I haven’t had a 40 hr/wk job in my career. Sure, it’s great for some people, but if you’re struggling, a person can work 60 hrs regularly no problem, just takes work ethic, and work ethic requires no intelligence or special schooling.

EscapeVelocity2020

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1801
  • Age: 45
  • Location: Houston
    • EscapeVelocity2020
Re: Modern Day Slavery
« Reply #64 on: May 29, 2018, 07:44:57 AM »
...
In highschool, I worked for a restaurant. A couple people quit that job so they could go work at Walmart instead. It was a $0.50 per hour pay difference($8.00 VS $7.50/hr), which they thought was awesome at the time. The restaurant gig was a fun job. However, working with people twice my age was a huge reminder that I had to finish HS and get a college degree, because I didn't want to still be there 20 years later.

I also worked at a restaurant in HS and got a 25 cent raise.  At the time, that seemed pretty great.  The 10 cent raise they dangled in front of me also seemed pretty awesome.  But that is the chilling part of starting at minimum wage (4.25/hr at the time), although those were reasonable % gains, you are already slipping down the ladder.  The idea of saving some of this money to 'go to college' to break the cycle is already off the radar for most folks in this situation.

A generation or two ago, you could get a good job with a HS degree and hopping around a bit.  Eventually you gain enough practical skills, reputation, and network that you could bootstrap to middle class and send your kids to college.  As income disparity grows, social mobility declines and you now have those people at the bottom working 40 or more hours per week just to keep food on the table. 

We've seen parts of this discussed in the 9.9% is the new American aristocracy thread (The 0.1% get the majority of the income gains, the bottom 90% are losing wealth, but the 9.9% between these groups are complicit in sustaining this status quo since their holding steady at 60% of the nation's wealth).

And, to a lesser extent, the "Almost half of US families can't afford basics like rent and food'" thread.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 12093
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Modern Day Slavery
« Reply #65 on: May 29, 2018, 07:59:19 AM »
I’d place a safe bet that we have the most obese “poor” people in the world. I’d say Americans definition of poor is a gross overstatement. It’s amazing what some people here classify as poor.

Did you really just insinuate that obesity should be an indicator of wealth?

In most of the developed world it's extremely cheap to get calorie dense foods (This is true in the US, the UK, Canada, Australia, etc.).  It's much cheaper in fact than to get nutritious low calorie foods.  This food doesn't make you healthy or stronger.  It just makes you fat.

Your insinuation really does a disservice to a lot of people.  Yes, I'd argue that the poorest in the developed world are better off than the poorest in developing nations, sure.  That doesn't mean that the poor in developed countries have got it easy, or that they don't have extremely difficult problems to overcome to succeed though.

EscapeVelocity2020

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1801
  • Age: 45
  • Location: Houston
    • EscapeVelocity2020
Re: Modern Day Slavery
« Reply #66 on: May 29, 2018, 08:00:03 AM »
Ah yes, the obligatory entitlement thread.

You could find millions and millions of people around the world who would feel they hit the jackpot if they were allowed to come to America and work at Wal Mart.

To call it slavery is pathetic and degrading to so many people around the world who 1. Are actual slaves and 2. Would kill to have a job at Wal-Mart.

I’d be skeptical if the OP, or anyone who agrees with him/her, has ever actually traveled to poor countries outside the US and see what it’s like to “actually” be poor.

I’d place a safe bet that we have the most obese “poor” people in the world. I’d say Americans definition of poor is a gross overstatement. It’s amazing what some people here classify as poor.

When I was 16 I made $11/hr working in the kitchen at a nursing home. When I was 19 I was making $13.80 as a CNA (a decade ago). In addition, if someone is struggling to get by, why are they limiting themselves to 40 hr weeks like that’s some maximum threshold? I haven’t had a 40 hr/wk job in my career. Sure, it’s great for some people, but if you’re struggling, a person can work 60 hrs regularly no problem, just takes work ethic, and work ethic requires no intelligence or special schooling.

Yes, I am discussing 'economic slavery' and not actual slavery.  Having to work more than 40 hours per week just to get by while, at the same company the individual at the top makes 1,000x your income is a terrible first world injustice, in my opinion.  Saying that the folks at the bottom are entitled, unless compared to actual slaves (which is like comparing apples and oranges), is a surprise to me.

So are you saying that people making $20,000/yr working full time in America are entitled?

PDXTabs

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 684
  • Age: 35
  • Location: Vancouver, WA, USA
Re: Modern Day Slavery
« Reply #67 on: May 29, 2018, 08:07:41 AM »
I don't compare myself, or basey worth, on how much I make relative to someone else. As such, I am perfectly happy to make any multiple (whether much greater than or much worse than) of what some other person doing a different job is making.

Personally, I don't hear an explanation of why you think it's bad, just that it's different than other experiences you've had. I want a good explanation why government should get involved to prevent people from bring free to make their own decisions (whether it's a parent deciding how tiny a sliver of their income they'll give their children for chores or a board of directors deciding a CEOs salary). I have yet to hear one...

If you want to read a really good one please pick up a copy of The Vanishing Middle Class: Prejudice and Power in a Dual Economy by Peter Temin. My local library had a copy. But it basically comes down to political and economic power. That is, when it comes to allocating capital for future projects (and in the US elections are projects), it is a zero sum game.

mm1970

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5899
Re: Modern Day Slavery
« Reply #68 on: May 29, 2018, 02:08:16 PM »
Ah yes, the obligatory entitlement thread.

You could find millions and millions of people around the world who would feel they hit the jackpot if they were allowed to come to America and work at Wal Mart.

To call it slavery is pathetic and degrading to so many people around the world who 1. Are actual slaves and 2. Would kill to have a job at Wal-Mart.

I’d be skeptical if the OP, or anyone who agrees with him/her, has ever actually traveled to poor countries outside the US and see what it’s like to “actually” be poor.

I’d place a safe bet that we have the most obese “poor” people in the world. I’d say Americans definition of poor is a gross overstatement. It’s amazing what some people here classify as poor.

When I was 16 I made $11/hr working in the kitchen at a nursing home. When I was 19 I was making $13.80 as a CNA (a decade ago). In addition, if someone is struggling to get by, why are they limiting themselves to 40 hr weeks like that’s some maximum threshold? I haven’t had a 40 hr/wk job in my career. Sure, it’s great for some people, but if you’re struggling, a person can work 60 hrs regularly no problem, just takes work ethic, and work ethic requires no intelligence or special schooling.

Is it a race to the bottom?  A competition to see who is poorer? 

I recently read "$2 a day.  Living on almost nothing in America" and yes, there are people in the US who are really poor.

When I was in high school, I had a job too...making $3.35 an hour, whee!  It was $4.35 on Sundays.  Heck, during the summer one year I had two jobs, working 60 hours...one at $4 an hour at the gas company (digging ditches, washing trucks, loading pipe) and then 20 hours at night/ weekends bagging groceries.  But I was 19.  And not paying rent.  Gosh, there are people living like this today who are adults with families and for many of them, there's no way out.  They aren't lazy.  I don't understand why people have this binary thought about poverty. 

Does it make you feel better?  (Obviously they did something wrong.  They are stupid.  Or lazy.)  It's a sliding scale of intelligence, grit, hard work, mental health, age, physical health, and availability of jobs.  I am astonished at the number of people completely incapable of stepping into someone else's shoes.

And also: obesity is highly correlated with wealth.  Because the more money you have:
- less stressed = thinner
- more time for exercise
- more time to prepare food
- more money to buy food that is better for you, but costs more per calorie

I see the food that people get for free at school - luckily, our school system is very healthy and provides a lot of fruits and vegetables.  Imagine you are on a budget, and the food you can afford is carbs, carbs, and more carbs.  Gee...

maizeman

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2997
Re: Modern Day Slavery
« Reply #69 on: May 29, 2018, 02:31:47 PM »
And also: obesity is highly correlated with wealth.  Because the more money you have:
- less stressed = thinner
- more time for exercise
- more time to prepare food
- more money to buy food that is better for you, but costs more per calorie

That correlation is true in the USA, because we made a public policy decision years ago that being able to afford enough food to feed you and your family was no longer going to be an election issue. And we spend a fair bit of money every year to make this the case (both directly through foodstamps, and indirectly though all sorts of different farm subsidy programs).

Go most places outside the USA and the very poor aren't eating less-healthy food, they don't have enough to eat period.

There is a reason knowing the price of milk used to be a deadly serious question for political candidates. There's also a reason people don't ask it so much anymore.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 12093
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Modern Day Slavery
« Reply #70 on: May 29, 2018, 02:48:05 PM »
Go most places outside the USA and the very poor aren't eating less-healthy food, they don't have enough to eat period.

Not true at all.  Most developed countries (Canada, Australia, the UK, Italy, Spain, Poland, Czech Republic, etc.) have the same problem that the US does regarding povert.  It's been well researched:  https://www.researchgate.net/publication/266683973_Obesity_and_poverty_paradox_in_developed_countries.

PDXTabs

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 684
  • Age: 35
  • Location: Vancouver, WA, USA
Re: Modern Day Slavery
« Reply #71 on: May 29, 2018, 03:17:45 PM »
Go most places outside the USA and the very poor aren't eating less-healthy food, they don't have enough to eat period.

Most places outside the US that aren't Western Europe, perhaps. The US is alone in Western democracies in that we will let an able bodied citizen starve to death if they can't find a job. That is, if you have no children and are an able bodied person without a job you can not collect food stamps for more than three months even if you are looking for a job. This was part of the 1990s welfare reform. The requirement is waived from time to time during recessions.

maizeman

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2997
Re: Modern Day Slavery
« Reply #72 on: May 29, 2018, 03:18:47 PM »
Okay, fair enough and thanks for calling me on this.

When I was thinking of the "the rest of the world" I was picturing places like Egypt and Vietnam, but it's completely incorrect for me to have said everywhere outside the USA.

use2betrix

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1085
Re: Modern Day Slavery
« Reply #73 on: May 29, 2018, 03:19:11 PM »
I’d place a safe bet that we have the most obese “poor” people in the world. I’d say Americans definition of poor is a gross overstatement. It’s amazing what some people here classify as poor.

Did you really just insinuate that obesity should be an indicator of wealth?

In most of the developed world it's extremely cheap to get calorie dense foods (This is true in the US, the UK, Canada, Australia, etc.).  It's much cheaper in fact than to get nutritious low calorie foods.  This food doesn't make you healthy or stronger.  It just makes you fat.

Your insinuation really does a disservice to a lot of people.  Yes, I'd argue that the poorest in the developed world are better off than the poorest in developing nations, sure.  That doesn't mean that the poor in developed countries have got it easy, or that they don't have extremely difficult problems to overcome to succeed though.

I’m not sure this even warrants a response.

Obesity is based on calories. If someone is obese, they are eating MORE calories than they NEED. The excess calories are purely converted to fat.

If they were poor, they couldn’t afford basic food and thus would be thin.

If someone is eating MORE than they NEED they become fat. Period.

It really is that basic. Poor people are not getting fat because they aren’t eating the right nutrients, it’s from eating too many calories.

use2betrix

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1085
Re: Modern Day Slavery
« Reply #74 on: May 29, 2018, 03:25:09 PM »
Ah yes, the obligatory entitlement thread.

You could find millions and millions of people around the world who would feel they hit the jackpot if they were allowed to come to America and work at Wal Mart.

To call it slavery is pathetic and degrading to so many people around the world who 1. Are actual slaves and 2. Would kill to have a job at Wal-Mart.

I’d be skeptical if the OP, or anyone who agrees with him/her, has ever actually traveled to poor countries outside the US and see what it’s like to “actually” be poor.

I’d place a safe bet that we have the most obese “poor” people in the world. I’d say Americans definition of poor is a gross overstatement. It’s amazing what some people here classify as poor.

When I was 16 I made $11/hr working in the kitchen at a nursing home. When I was 19 I was making $13.80 as a CNA (a decade ago). In addition, if someone is struggling to get by, why are they limiting themselves to 40 hr weeks like that’s some maximum threshold? I haven’t had a 40 hr/wk job in my career. Sure, it’s great for some people, but if you’re struggling, a person can work 60 hrs regularly no problem, just takes work ethic, and work ethic requires no intelligence or special schooling.

Is it a race to the bottom?  A competition to see who is poorer? 

I recently read "$2 a day.  Living on almost nothing in America" and yes, there are people in the US who are really poor.

When I was in high school, I had a job too...making $3.35 an hour, whee!  It was $4.35 on Sundays.  Heck, during the summer one year I had two jobs, working 60 hours...one at $4 an hour at the gas company (digging ditches, washing trucks, loading pipe) and then 20 hours at night/ weekends bagging groceries.  But I was 19.  And not paying rent.  Gosh, there are people living like this today who are adults with families and for many of them, there's no way out.  They aren't lazy.  I don't understand why people have this binary thought about poverty. 

Does it make you feel better?  (Obviously they did something wrong.  They are stupid.  Or lazy.)  It's a sliding scale of intelligence, grit, hard work, mental health, age, physical health, and availability of jobs.  I am astonished at the number of people completely incapable of stepping into someone else's shoes.

And also: obesity is highly correlated with wealth.  Because the more money you have:
- less stressed = thinner
- more time for exercise
- more time to prepare food
- more money to buy food that is better for you, but costs more per calorie

I see the food that people get for free at school - luckily, our school system is very healthy and provides a lot of fruits and vegetables.  Imagine you are on a budget, and the food you can afford is carbs, carbs, and more carbs.  Gee...

Hmm - I’m 100x more stressed making 200k than I ever was making 20k. More money = more responsibility which often = more stress.

When I get stressed I eat less due to... being stressed.

By the last week of April my SHORTEST work week of the year was 68 hrs. Yes - shortest week in 4 months was 68 hrs. I certainly don’t “need” the money, yet it’s too much to expect someone who “needs” the money to work over 40? Got it.

Not to mention, in those 4 months, I worked out several days a week EVERY week. I didn’t miss a single planned workout day despite 12 hr days. Between that and my CHEAP healthy diet, I’d argue I’m probably one of the most muscular/low body fat persons on this forum.

I’m basically a complete contradiction of all your statements. The difference? I’m not a lazy fuck who makes excuses for eating right and exercising regardless of my income or working hours. Your entire post is excuses, which is again, the problem with our country.

That cost of food analogy is a constant argument that has been proven wrong time and time again but used by people with no knowledge of nutrition.

Chicken is $2-$3/lb. Rice is dirt cheap. Oatmeal, dirt cheap. Frozen pizzas are like $8/ea nowadays. Cereal coats more than oatmeal.

I’m always baffled when people try and talk about nutrition with obviously having no knowledge of it. I’m sure that lack of knowledge is what also leads to our obesity problem.

“Let’s get this $8 frozen pizza for dinner because we can’t afford to eat healthy,” because, you know, 2 lbs of chicken and a ton of rice is the same price and will feed far more people.

Between that, and somehow calories not leading to obesity... but it’s food/nutrient density... this place kills me sometimes lol.
« Last Edit: May 29, 2018, 04:59:06 PM by use2betrix »

jlcnuke

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 792
Re: Modern Day Slavery
« Reply #75 on: May 29, 2018, 03:34:19 PM »
Ah yes, the obligatory entitlement thread.

You could find millions and millions of people around the world who would feel they hit the jackpot if they were allowed to come to America and work at Wal Mart.

To call it slavery is pathetic and degrading to so many people around the world who 1. Are actual slaves and 2. Would kill to have a job at Wal-Mart.

I’d be skeptical if the OP, or anyone who agrees with him/her, has ever actually traveled to poor countries outside the US and see what it’s like to “actually” be poor.

I’d place a safe bet that we have the most obese “poor” people in the world. I’d say Americans definition of poor is a gross overstatement. It’s amazing what some people here classify as poor.

When I was 16 I made $11/hr working in the kitchen at a nursing home. When I was 19 I was making $13.80 as a CNA (a decade ago). In addition, if someone is struggling to get by, why are they limiting themselves to 40 hr weeks like that’s some maximum threshold? I haven’t had a 40 hr/wk job in my career. Sure, it’s great for some people, but if you’re struggling, a person can work 60 hrs regularly no problem, just takes work ethic, and work ethic requires no intelligence or special schooling.

Yes, I am discussing 'economic slavery' and not actual slavery.  Having to work more than 40 hours per week just to get by while, at the same company the individual at the top makes 1,000x your income is a terrible first world injustice, in my opinion.  Saying that the folks at the bottom are entitled, unless compared to actual slaves (which is like comparing apples and oranges), is a surprise to me.

So are you saying that people making $20,000/yr working full time in America are entitled?


Making $20,000 USD/year puts a person in the top 4% worldwide based on income. With all the moaning and complaining about rich people, it seems we sometimes forget that "poor" in America is still "the elite" class in the world.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 12093
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Modern Day Slavery
« Reply #76 on: May 29, 2018, 06:37:08 PM »
I’d place a safe bet that we have the most obese “poor” people in the world. I’d say Americans definition of poor is a gross overstatement. It’s amazing what some people here classify as poor.

Did you really just insinuate that obesity should be an indicator of wealth?

In most of the developed world it's extremely cheap to get calorie dense foods (This is true in the US, the UK, Canada, Australia, etc.).  It's much cheaper in fact than to get nutritious low calorie foods.  This food doesn't make you healthy or stronger.  It just makes you fat.

Your insinuation really does a disservice to a lot of people.  Yes, I'd argue that the poorest in the developed world are better off than the poorest in developing nations, sure.  That doesn't mean that the poor in developed countries have got it easy, or that they don't have extremely difficult problems to overcome to succeed though.

I’m not sure this even warrants a response.

Obesity is based on calories. If someone is obese, they are eating MORE calories than they NEED. The excess calories are purely converted to fat.

If they were poor, they couldn’t afford basic food and thus would be thin.

If someone is eating MORE than they NEED they become fat. Period.

It really is that basic. Poor people are not getting fat because they aren’t eating the right nutrients, it’s from eating too many calories.

I didn't argue that people are getting fat because they aren't eating the right nutrients.  I argued that it's cheaper to eat high calorie food (particularly low nutrient, high calorie food that doesn't leave you feeling full for long - compounding the problem).

poor:  lacking sufficient money to live at a standard considered comfortable or normal in a society.

While not being able to meet your dietary needs certainly qualifies as poor, so does not being able to afford decent quality, nutritious food.

mm1970

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5899
Re: Modern Day Slavery
« Reply #77 on: May 29, 2018, 06:41:49 PM »
Quote
Hmm - I’m 100x more stressed making 200k than I ever was making 20k. More money = more responsibility which often = more stress.

When I get stressed I eat less due to... being stressed.

By the last week of April my SHORTEST work week of the year was 68 hrs. Yes - shortest week in 4 months was 68 hrs. I certainly don’t “need” the money, yet it’s too much to expect someone who “needs” the money to work over 40? Got it.

Not to mention, in those 4 months, I worked out several days a week EVERY week. I didn’t miss a single planned workout day despite 12 hr days. Between that and my CHEAP healthy diet, I’d argue I’m probably one of the most muscular/low body fat persons on this forum.

I’m basically a complete contradiction of all your statements. The difference? I’m not a lazy fuck who makes excuses for eating right and exercising regardless of my income or working hours. Your entire post is excuses, which is again, the problem with our country.

That cost of food analogy is a constant argument that has been proven wrong time and time again but used by people with no knowledge of nutrition.

Chicken is $2-$3/lb. Rice is dirt cheap. Oatmeal, dirt cheap. Frozen pizzas are like $8/ea nowadays. Cereal coats more than oatmeal.

I’m always baffled when people try and talk about nutrition with obviously having no knowledge of it. I’m sure that lack of knowledge is what also leads to our obesity problem.

“Let’s get this $8 frozen pizza for dinner because we can’t afford to eat healthy,” because, you know, 2 lbs of chicken and a ton of rice is the same price and will feed far more people.

Between that, and somehow calories not leading to obesity... but it’s food/nutrient density... this place kills me sometimes lol.

You seriously aren't telling me that making $200k is so much more stressful than not knowing where your next meal is coming from?  Or whether you will have a roof over your head?

Yay, you an anecdote.  The plural of anecdote =/= data, and "I'm different so therefore you are wrong", or "I did it so everyone can" is utter bullshit.

The people that I see who are overweight aren't buying $8 pizzas, they are buying 25-50 lb bags of beans and rice.

Some reading material, if you'd like to read data.  By people who study such things.  Not just sit at their desk collecting a paycheck wondering why all those poor, lazy fuckers are so damned fat.

https://academic.oup.com/ajcn/article/79/1/6/4690070

https://scholars.org/brief/why-poverty-leads-obesity-and-life-long-problems

DreamFIRE

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1311
Re: Modern Day Slavery
« Reply #78 on: May 29, 2018, 06:46:07 PM »
I’d place a safe bet that we have the most obese “poor” people in the world. I’d say Americans definition of poor is a gross overstatement. It’s amazing what some people here classify as poor.

Did you really just insinuate that obesity should be an indicator of wealth?

In most of the developed world it's extremely cheap to get calorie dense foods (This is true in the US, the UK, Canada, Australia, etc.).  It's much cheaper in fact than to get nutritious low calorie foods.  This food doesn't make you healthy or stronger.  It just makes you fat.

Your insinuation really does a disservice to a lot of people.  Yes, I'd argue that the poorest in the developed world are better off than the poorest in developing nations, sure.  That doesn't mean that the poor in developed countries have got it easy, or that they don't have extremely difficult problems to overcome to succeed though.

I’m not sure this even warrants a response.

Obesity is based on calories. If someone is obese, they are eating MORE calories than they NEED. The excess calories are purely converted to fat.

If they were poor, they couldn’t afford basic food and thus would be thin.

If someone is eating MORE than they NEED they become fat. Period.

It really is that basic. Poor people are not getting fat because they aren’t eating the right nutrients, it’s from eating too many calories.

No matter how poor they claim to be, they still manage to feed their faces plenty.

mm1970

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5899
Re: Modern Day Slavery
« Reply #79 on: May 29, 2018, 06:46:50 PM »
Ah yes, the obligatory entitlement thread.

You could find millions and millions of people around the world who would feel they hit the jackpot if they were allowed to come to America and work at Wal Mart.

To call it slavery is pathetic and degrading to so many people around the world who 1. Are actual slaves and 2. Would kill to have a job at Wal-Mart.

I’d be skeptical if the OP, or anyone who agrees with him/her, has ever actually traveled to poor countries outside the US and see what it’s like to “actually” be poor.

I’d place a safe bet that we have the most obese “poor” people in the world. I’d say Americans definition of poor is a gross overstatement. It’s amazing what some people here classify as poor.

When I was 16 I made $11/hr working in the kitchen at a nursing home. When I was 19 I was making $13.80 as a CNA (a decade ago). In addition, if someone is struggling to get by, why are they limiting themselves to 40 hr weeks like that’s some maximum threshold? I haven’t had a 40 hr/wk job in my career. Sure, it’s great for some people, but if you’re struggling, a person can work 60 hrs regularly no problem, just takes work ethic, and work ethic requires no intelligence or special schooling.

Yes, I am discussing 'economic slavery' and not actual slavery.  Having to work more than 40 hours per week just to get by while, at the same company the individual at the top makes 1,000x your income is a terrible first world injustice, in my opinion.  Saying that the folks at the bottom are entitled, unless compared to actual slaves (which is like comparing apples and oranges), is a surprise to me.

So are you saying that people making $20,000/yr working full time in America are entitled?


Quote
Making $20,000 USD/year puts a person in the top 4% worldwide based on income. With all the moaning and complaining about rich people, it seems we sometimes forget that "poor" in America is still "the elite" class in the world.

That info is pretty useless without cost of living included.

https://www.expatistan.com/cost-of-living/country/ranking

DreamFIRE

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1311
Re: Modern Day Slavery
« Reply #80 on: May 29, 2018, 06:48:33 PM »
Ah yes, the obligatory entitlement thread.

You could find millions and millions of people around the world who would feel they hit the jackpot if they were allowed to come to America and work at Wal Mart.

To call it slavery is pathetic and degrading to so many people around the world who 1. Are actual slaves and 2. Would kill to have a job at Wal-Mart.

I’d be skeptical if the OP, or anyone who agrees with him/her, has ever actually traveled to poor countries outside the US and see what it’s like to “actually” be poor.

I’d place a safe bet that we have the most obese “poor” people in the world. I’d say Americans definition of poor is a gross overstatement. It’s amazing what some people here classify as poor.

When I was 16 I made $11/hr working in the kitchen at a nursing home. When I was 19 I was making $13.80 as a CNA (a decade ago). In addition, if someone is struggling to get by, why are they limiting themselves to 40 hr weeks like that’s some maximum threshold? I haven’t had a 40 hr/wk job in my career. Sure, it’s great for some people, but if you’re struggling, a person can work 60 hrs regularly no problem, just takes work ethic, and work ethic requires no intelligence or special schooling.

Yes, I am discussing 'economic slavery' and not actual slavery.  Having to work more than 40 hours per week just to get by while, at the same company the individual at the top makes 1,000x your income is a terrible first world injustice, in my opinion.  Saying that the folks at the bottom are entitled, unless compared to actual slaves (which is like comparing apples and oranges), is a surprise to me.

So are you saying that people making $20,000/yr working full time in America are entitled?


Making $20,000 USD/year puts a person in the top 4% worldwide based on income. With all the moaning and complaining about rich people, it seems we sometimes forget that "poor" in America is still "the elite" class in the world.

I feel like a king now making $100K/yr.   LOL

nnls

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1135
  • Location: Perth, AU
Re: Modern Day Slavery
« Reply #81 on: May 29, 2018, 08:18:59 PM »
This seems like a good place to put this link: 

http://slaveryfootprint.org/

How many slaves work for you?  (Hint: A LOT more than you think.)

I got 30, I was expecting it to be more to be honest (though would prefer if it was zero)

DreamFIRE

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1311
Re: Modern Day Slavery
« Reply #82 on: May 29, 2018, 08:34:29 PM »
This seems like a good place to put this link: 

http://slaveryfootprint.org/

How many slaves work for you?  (Hint: A LOT more than you think.)

I got 30, I was expecting it to be more to be honest (though would prefer if it was zero)

I can't even find low pay low skilled workers around here to help me with things like lawn work or digging trenches.  I certainly don't have any slaves.

EscapeVelocity2020

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1801
  • Age: 45
  • Location: Houston
    • EscapeVelocity2020
Re: Modern Day Slavery
« Reply #83 on: May 29, 2018, 09:50:06 PM »
Quote
Hmm - I’m 100x more stressed making 200k than I ever was making 20k. More money = more responsibility which often = more stress.

When I get stressed I eat less due to... being stressed.

By the last week of April my SHORTEST work week of the year was 68 hrs. Yes - shortest week in 4 months was 68 hrs. I certainly don’t “need” the money, yet it’s too much to expect someone who “needs” the money to work over 40? Got it.

Not to mention, in those 4 months, I worked out several days a week EVERY week. I didn’t miss a single planned workout day despite 12 hr days. Between that and my CHEAP healthy diet, I’d argue I’m probably one of the most muscular/low body fat persons on this forum.

I’m basically a complete contradiction of all your statements. The difference? I’m not a lazy fuck who makes excuses for eating right and exercising regardless of my income or working hours. Your entire post is excuses, which is again, the problem with our country.

That cost of food analogy is a constant argument that has been proven wrong time and time again but used by people with no knowledge of nutrition.

Chicken is $2-$3/lb. Rice is dirt cheap. Oatmeal, dirt cheap. Frozen pizzas are like $8/ea nowadays. Cereal coats more than oatmeal.

I’m always baffled when people try and talk about nutrition with obviously having no knowledge of it. I’m sure that lack of knowledge is what also leads to our obesity problem.

“Let’s get this $8 frozen pizza for dinner because we can’t afford to eat healthy,” because, you know, 2 lbs of chicken and a ton of rice is the same price and will feed far more people.

Between that, and somehow calories not leading to obesity... but it’s food/nutrient density... this place kills me sometimes lol.

You seriously aren't telling me that making $200k is so much more stressful than not knowing where your next meal is coming from?  Or whether you will have a roof over your head?

Yay, you an anecdote.  The plural of anecdote =/= data, and "I'm different so therefore you are wrong", or "I did it so everyone can" is utter bullshit.

The people that I see who are overweight aren't buying $8 pizzas, they are buying 25-50 lb bags of beans and rice.

Some reading material, if you'd like to read data.  By people who study such things.  Not just sit at their desk collecting a paycheck wondering why all those poor, lazy fuckers are so damned fat.

https://academic.oup.com/ajcn/article/79/1/6/4690070

https://scholars.org/brief/why-poverty-leads-obesity-and-life-long-problems

Sorry to sound cheesy, but I have to give this response a standing ovation.  If I'd witnessed this in real time, I would reflexively have leapt to my feet and applauded this response vigorously.

I just hope people to open their eyes to what is going on over their heads.  Even people feeling like they are finally 'winning' recently are probably losing ground to the forces unleashed by the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.  Yes, it was a massive tax cut to the 0.1% and business owners, and no, it was not even close to paid for by future tax revenue. 

Radagast

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1241
  • Location: West of the Mountains, East of the Sea
Re: Modern Day Slavery
« Reply #84 on: May 29, 2018, 11:16:13 PM »
Quote
Government interference on this matter is rooted in socialism - specifically a need to control (prevent for moral reasons) the slave market.  The US system (like every functioning economic system in the world) is a mix of both capitalist and socialist ideas, holding each other in check.  Capitalism tends to provide drive to create/innovate, socialism tends to provide protection for the people.  Go to far into either direction, and your economic system will eventually run into trouble.
While I agree with this...
In a purely capitalist system, you would be allowed to buy slaves. 
Capitalism seems to have been the force that allowed eradication of slavery, or at least countries abandoned it in approximately the same order they became capitalist. I suppose it could be an indirect effect, and actually capitalism allowed industrialization, which made machine labor economically preferable to human labor, which ended slavery.

nnls

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1135
  • Location: Perth, AU
Re: Modern Day Slavery
« Reply #85 on: May 29, 2018, 11:20:03 PM »
This seems like a good place to put this link: 

http://slaveryfootprint.org/

How many slaves work for you?  (Hint: A LOT more than you think.)

I got 30, I was expecting it to be more to be honest (though would prefer if it was zero)

I can't even find low pay low skilled workers around here to help me with things like lawn work or digging trenches.  I certainly don't have any slaves.

I am sure a couple have made the stuff you own though

use2betrix

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1085
Re: Modern Day Slavery
« Reply #86 on: May 30, 2018, 04:36:08 AM »
Quote
Hmm - I’m 100x more stressed making 200k than I ever was making 20k. More money = more responsibility which often = more stress.

When I get stressed I eat less due to... being stressed.

By the last week of April my SHORTEST work week of the year was 68 hrs. Yes - shortest week in 4 months was 68 hrs. I certainly don’t “need” the money, yet it’s too much to expect someone who “needs” the money to work over 40? Got it.

Not to mention, in those 4 months, I worked out several days a week EVERY week. I didn’t miss a single planned workout day despite 12 hr days. Between that and my CHEAP healthy diet, I’d argue I’m probably one of the most muscular/low body fat persons on this forum.

I’m basically a complete contradiction of all your statements. The difference? I’m not a lazy fuck who makes excuses for eating right and exercising regardless of my income or working hours. Your entire post is excuses, which is again, the problem with our country.

That cost of food analogy is a constant argument that has been proven wrong time and time again but used by people with no knowledge of nutrition.

Chicken is $2-$3/lb. Rice is dirt cheap. Oatmeal, dirt cheap. Frozen pizzas are like $8/ea nowadays. Cereal coats more than oatmeal.

I’m always baffled when people try and talk about nutrition with obviously having no knowledge of it. I’m sure that lack of knowledge is what also leads to our obesity problem.

“Let’s get this $8 frozen pizza for dinner because we can’t afford to eat healthy,” because, you know, 2 lbs of chicken and a ton of rice is the same price and will feed far more people.

Between that, and somehow calories not leading to obesity... but it’s food/nutrient density... this place kills me sometimes lol.

You seriously aren't telling me that making $200k is so much more stressful than not knowing where your next meal is coming from?  Or whether you will have a roof over your head?

Yay, you an anecdote.  The plural of anecdote =/= data, and "I'm different so therefore you are wrong", or "I did it so everyone can" is utter bullshit.

The people that I see who are overweight aren't buying $8 pizzas, they are buying 25-50 lb bags of beans and rice.

Some reading material, if you'd like to read data.  By people who study such things.  Not just sit at their desk collecting a paycheck wondering why all those poor, lazy fuckers are so damned fat.

https://academic.oup.com/ajcn/article/79/1/6/4690070

https://scholars.org/brief/why-poverty-leads-obesity-and-life-long-problems

Even in this post you make the exact same claim I did. Regardless of what they are eating.. beans and rice or pizza, the fact is, if they are obese they are eating TOO MUCH. They aren’t wondering “where their meal is coming from” if they obviously have the ability to eat more than they need, making them overweight or obese.

Heck - down in Texas on multiple occasions walking into grocery stores, I’ve been confronted by people offering to sell their EBT (food stamp) cards at a discounted rate. Yeah poor and struggling to get by, yet they are provided free government benefits. Or the gentleman in Alabama who came in my office and quit saying “with how many kids I have, I get too many government benefits to make it worthwhile for me to lose by working.” He was making $14/hr working 56 hrs/wk with full benefits. Do the math.

Are there starving people out there? You bet, and it’s very sad that anyone would have to go hungry, but the overweight poor people are not starving and should be passing their excess around, or saving their money not buying it.


Lmoot

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 639
    • Journal
Re: Modern Day Slavery
« Reply #87 on: May 30, 2018, 05:47:20 AM »
I’d place a safe bet that we have the most obese “poor” people in the world. I’d say Americans definition of poor is a gross overstatement. It’s amazing what some people here classify as poor.

Did you really just insinuate that obesity should be an indicator of wealth?

In most of the developed world it's extremely cheap to get calorie dense foods (This is true in the US, the UK, Canada, Australia, etc.).  It's much cheaper in fact than to get nutritious low calorie foods.  This food doesn't make you healthy or stronger.  It just makes you fat.

Your insinuation really does a disservice to a lot of people.  Yes, I'd argue that the poorest in the developed world are better off than the poorest in developing nations, sure.  That doesn't mean that the poor in developed countries have got it easy, or that they don't have extremely difficult problems to overcome to succeed though.

I’m not sure this even warrants a response.

Obesity is based on calories. If someone is obese, they are eating MORE calories than they NEED. The excess calories are purely converted to fat.

If they were poor, they couldn’t afford basic food and thus would be thin.

If someone is eating MORE than they NEED they become fat. Period.

It really is that basic. Poor people are not getting fat because they aren’t eating the right nutrients, it’s from eating too many calories.

I didn't argue that people are getting fat because they aren't eating the right nutrients.  I argued that it's cheaper to eat high calorie food (particularly low nutrient, high calorie food that doesn't leave you feeling full for long - compounding the problem).

poor:  lacking sufficient money to live at a standard considered comfortable or normal in a society.

While not being able to meet your dietary needs certainly qualifies as poor, so does not being able to afford decent quality, nutritious food.

@use2betrix

Food isn't valued per calorie

Eating too much and consuming too many calories IS NOT THE SAME THING. When I started eating healthier I consumed way more food, while taking in less calories.

It is no secret that in the US, unhealthy/prepackaged/prepared foods which are higher in calorie-density, tend to be cheaper. Processed fats are cheap because they can last longer since most processed fats come from far away 3rd world countries which are not paid well (farmers).

Someone can get fat eating 3 Big Macs and fries everyday. Meanwhile someone else can go through half a chicken, cup of whole grains/quinoa seed, half an avocado ($$$) mixed-greens salad ($$$), a large omelette filled with vegetables, 1/2 cup of yogurt/cottage cheese, handful of nuts ($$$) and several pieces of fruit. Which is "more" food? And which diet do you think is going to cost more on average? Compare one diet of cheap processed fats (fast food), to the other which also contains fat, but from more expensive sources, and supplemented with plenty of other sources of calories (fruits, veggies, seeds/grains, dairy, fresh meat).

Yes eating healthy can be cheaper, but it involves time (learning how to cook from scratch, with items pre-planned and bought on sale, then stored properly until future use). Since most of us are pressed for time (whether you are wealthy or not), those who don't make time to eat healthy but are earning a good income, can at least afford to buy healthy prepared foods (more $$$).
« Last Edit: May 30, 2018, 05:58:44 AM by Lmoot »

boarder42

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7854
Re: Modern Day Slavery
« Reply #88 on: May 30, 2018, 06:24:21 AM »
No work to do?  I disagree. There is much work to do. The tasks have changed but still exist. We no longer need a ferrier to shoe our horses or a wheel right to provide the wheels for our wagon. However we need controls engineers to program production lines to make the goods we purchase and store clerks to complete the transactions. Adapt- those that can move forward in this economy.

Control engineers fall into the category ChpBstrd was discussing where there is plenty of demand, but not all the people who are losing jobs in factories or mid-level white collar office work are going to have the right combination of abilities and intelligences to become control engineers.

In contrast, a larger proportion of the population can learn to run a cash register, yet the need for store clerks is facing downward pressure from two directions:

On the one hand lots of big box retailers are moving to self-checkout lanes where one person might supervise and troubleshoot enough self checkout registers to do the work of 4-6 clerks in the old days.

Yet at the same time online retail is dramatically reducing the amount of spending that happens at brick and mortar stores. In 2017, 105M square feet of retail space closed in the USA. In 2018, we've already lost another 75M square feet of retail space from January to April, which puts us on pace to lose 225M square feet of retail space over the entire calendar year. To translate that into job losses a good rule of thumb is about 2.5 employees per 1,000 square ft of retail space.

this is a completely different topic - more suited for robots and their impact on the future - but very interestind data that you should go post over there.  this is why i believe basic income will have to be paid to people to just be alive in the not too distant future.

EscapeVelocity2020

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1801
  • Age: 45
  • Location: Houston
    • EscapeVelocity2020
Re: Modern Day Slavery
« Reply #89 on: May 30, 2018, 07:00:55 AM »
Capitalism seems to have been the force that allowed eradication of slavery, or at least countries abandoned it in approximately the same order they became capitalist. I suppose it could be an indirect effect, and actually capitalism allowed industrialization, which made machine labor economically preferable to human labor, which ended slavery.

Unbridled Captitalism lead to slavery and monopolies.  Have you not read Upton Sinclair, The Jungle?  Does history really have to repeat itself because we are too lazy to educate ourselves on what happened in the past?  'Machine labor', even in modern times, is not yet cheaper than underpaid humans.  How would capitalism eradicate slavery, if humans are essentially free labor (other than room and board)?

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 12093
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Modern Day Slavery
« Reply #90 on: May 30, 2018, 07:31:24 AM »
Quote
Government interference on this matter is rooted in socialism - specifically a need to control (prevent for moral reasons) the slave market.  The US system (like every functioning economic system in the world) is a mix of both capitalist and socialist ideas, holding each other in check.  Capitalism tends to provide drive to create/innovate, socialism tends to provide protection for the people.  Go to far into either direction, and your economic system will eventually run into trouble.
While I agree with this...
In a purely capitalist system, you would be allowed to buy slaves. 
Capitalism seems to have been the force that allowed eradication of slavery, or at least countries abandoned it in approximately the same order they became capitalist. I suppose it could be an indirect effect, and actually capitalism allowed industrialization, which made machine labor economically preferable to human labor, which ended slavery.

When government artificially creates rules and limits freedom of a market for the betterment of the people, it is acting in a socialist manner.  Ending slavery by law artificially limits the ability to buy slaves by government decree - not free market choice.  It is a regulation of the means of production, distribution, and exchange of slaves.  Therefore by definition it is a socialist rather than capitalist action.  You could try to make the argument that it would not be economically feasible to own slaves after industrialization and thus capitalism would have solved the problem . . . but the 40.3 million people currently in slavery around the world (including 150 billion dollars worth of slavery related commerce that goes on today in the US alone) demonstrate how incorrect that theory is. https://www.antislavery.org/slavery-today/modern-slavery/

TornWonder

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 57
  • Age: 35
  • Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Re: Modern Day Slavery
« Reply #91 on: May 30, 2018, 08:10:36 AM »
The main problem that arises from income and wealth inequality is those with more using their financial power to subvert the will of the people through government lobbying/bribing.  Some people think that the best way to prevent this is to limit how much wealth one person can have in relation to others.  Other people (myself included) think that the best way to prevent this is to limit how much control the government has over the people.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 12093
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Modern Day Slavery
« Reply #92 on: May 30, 2018, 08:12:52 AM »
The main problem that arises from income and wealth inequality is those with more using their financial power to subvert the will of the people through government lobbying/bribing.  Some people think that the best way to prevent this is to limit how much wealth one person can have in relation to others.  Other people (myself included) think that the best way to prevent this is to limit how much control the government has over the people.

The benefit of limiting the control that government has over people, is that it allows those with wealth to avoid bribes and simply use wealth/power to directly do anything they want.  Much more efficient subversion of the common good.

canuckystan

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 9
Re: Modern Day Slavery
« Reply #93 on: May 30, 2018, 08:22:23 AM »
People who complain about CEO salaries have generally never done the job.  It's a 24/7 job that requires immense amounts of IQ and EQ and decisions that will have ripple effects through countless families and communities.  A CEO typically has 10-20 bosses (i.e., the board of directors), board committees, numerous angry stakeholders, lawsuits to deal with, big suppliers, government regulators, and enough stress to kill a horse.  It's absolutely nothing like the life of a front line 9-5 worker, and a good CEO adds value far, far beyond his or her compensation.  But the great thing is, a front line worker can become a CEO through hard work and intelligence.  Once of Canada's largest banks had a CEO for years who started as a teller in a local branch.  I believe Walmart is known for promoting from within for those willing to put in the work.   

Pay 'disparity' is easy to talk about, but 'work disparity' is the underlying reason for the pay differential. If you ask the front line worker if he or she is willing to put 60 hour weeks for 20 years to get ahead and have a shot at the c-suite, my bet is that most would want nothing to do with it.  But they still think the CEO should be paid less so they get more.

use2betrix

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1085
Re: Modern Day Slavery
« Reply #94 on: May 30, 2018, 08:49:16 AM »
I’d place a safe bet that we have the most obese “poor” people in the world. I’d say Americans definition of poor is a gross overstatement. It’s amazing what some people here classify as poor.

Did you really just insinuate that obesity should be an indicator of wealth?

In most of the developed world it's extremely cheap to get calorie dense foods (This is true in the US, the UK, Canada, Australia, etc.).  It's much cheaper in fact than to get nutritious low calorie foods.  This food doesn't make you healthy or stronger.  It just makes you fat.

Your insinuation really does a disservice to a lot of people.  Yes, I'd argue that the poorest in the developed world are better off than the poorest in developing nations, sure.  That doesn't mean that the poor in developed countries have got it easy, or that they don't have extremely difficult problems to overcome to succeed though.

I’m not sure this even warrants a response.

Obesity is based on calories. If someone is obese, they are eating MORE calories than they NEED. The excess calories are purely converted to fat.

If they were poor, they couldn’t afford basic food and thus would be thin.

If someone is eating MORE than they NEED they become fat. Period.

It really is that basic. Poor people are not getting fat because they aren’t eating the right nutrients, it’s from eating too many calories.

I didn't argue that people are getting fat because they aren't eating the right nutrients.  I argued that it's cheaper to eat high calorie food (particularly low nutrient, high calorie food that doesn't leave you feeling full for long - compounding the problem).

poor:  lacking sufficient money to live at a standard considered comfortable or normal in a society.

While not being able to meet your dietary needs certainly qualifies as poor, so does not being able to afford decent quality, nutritious food.

@use2betrix

Food isn't valued per calorie

Eating too much and consuming too many calories IS NOT THE SAME THING. When I started eating healthier I consumed way more food, while taking in less calories.

It is no secret that in the US, unhealthy/prepackaged/prepared foods which are higher in calorie-density, tend to be cheaper. Processed fats are cheap because they can last longer since most processed fats come from far away 3rd world countries which are not paid well (farmers).

Someone can get fat eating 3 Big Macs and fries everyday. Meanwhile someone else can go through half a chicken, cup of whole grains/quinoa seed, half an avocado ($$$) mixed-greens salad ($$$), a large omelette filled with vegetables, 1/2 cup of yogurt/cottage cheese, handful of nuts ($$$) and several pieces of fruit. Which is "more" food? And which diet do you think is going to cost more on average? Compare one diet of cheap processed fats (fast food), to the other which also contains fat, but from more expensive sources, and supplemented with plenty of other sources of calories (fruits, veggies, seeds/grains, dairy, fresh meat).

Yes eating healthy can be cheaper, but it involves time (learning how to cook from scratch, with items pre-planned and bought on sale, then stored properly until future use). Since most of us are pressed for time (whether you are wealthy or not), those who don't make time to eat healthy but are earning a good income, can at least afford to buy healthy prepared foods (more $$$).

Again - our topic is overweight/obesity. That IS determined by calories. You can get just as fat eating all the “healthy” foods you mentioned, if you eat enough of it. Someone can also lose weight by “just” eating McDonald’s, if they eat the right amount of it.

Honestly, your post is just filled with petty excuses. I can’t really argue that yes, it takes time to bake a chicken breast or put some rice in the microwave.

I’m baffled at some of the arguments here. Like cooking basic food takes so much skill and knowledge and time. How somehow I can do all of it working 60-70 hrs a week yet no “poor” person who “shouldn’t have to” work more than 40 hrs, can possibly find the time to do? Some people are apparently just so fucking lazy that it’s too much to ask them to cook something. Get real.

Amazing that on a forum that places so much value on biking everywhere and doing “work” yourself, that people can justify that it’s too much to expect poor people to cook their own food. That logic is facepunch worthy.

AnswerIs42

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 137
Re: Modern Day Slavery
« Reply #95 on: May 30, 2018, 09:22:10 AM »
Again - our topic is overweight/obesity. That IS determined by calories. You can get just as fat eating all the “healthy” foods you mentioned, if you eat enough of it. Someone can also lose weight by “just” eating McDonald’s, if they eat the right amount of it.

I suggest doing a little scientific experiment and giving this a try.

For the first two weeks, eat nothing but chicken and vegetables, but you're allowed to eat as much of them as you like.
For the next two weeks, go to McDonalds every day and have one Big Mac, large fries, large sugary drink, and you're not allowed to eat anything else for the rest of the day.

I'd guess that in the first two weeks, you won't actually want to eat too much, you'll end up losing some weight, and you'd really have to force-feed yourself if you wanted to put on weight. And in the second two weeks you'll be stupidly hungry and still end up not losing weight.

I do take your point about basic cooking not being too hard or expensive, though. Chicken and vegetables is a very cheap, easy, tasty, and healthy meal (which I tend to cook for myself pretty much every other day).

mak1277

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 748
Re: Modern Day Slavery
« Reply #96 on: May 30, 2018, 09:26:21 AM »
People who complain about CEO salaries have generally never done the job.  It's a 24/7 job that requires immense amounts of IQ and EQ and decisions that will have ripple effects through countless families and communities.  A CEO typically has 10-20 bosses (i.e., the board of directors), board committees, numerous angry stakeholders, lawsuits to deal with, big suppliers, government regulators, and enough stress to kill a horse.  It's absolutely nothing like the life of a front line 9-5 worker, and a good CEO adds value far, far beyond his or her compensation.     

This is very true.  I'm a mid-level executive at my company, and there isn't enough money in the world to get me to aspire to being a CEO of a public company.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 12093
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Modern Day Slavery
« Reply #97 on: May 30, 2018, 09:43:49 AM »
Again - our topic is overweight/obesity. That IS determined by calories. You can get just as fat eating all the “healthy” foods you mentioned, if you eat enough of it. Someone can also lose weight by “just” eating McDonald’s, if they eat the right amount of it.

Honestly, your post is just filled with petty excuses. I can’t really argue that yes, it takes time to bake a chicken breast or put some rice in the microwave.

I’m baffled at some of the arguments here. Like cooking basic food takes so much skill and knowledge and time. How somehow I can do all of it working 60-70 hrs a week yet no “poor” person who “shouldn’t have to” work more than 40 hrs, can possibly find the time to do? Some people are apparently just so fucking lazy that it’s too much to ask them to cook something. Get real.

Amazing that on a forum that places so much value on biking everywhere and doing “work” yourself, that people can justify that it’s too much to expect poor people to cook their own food. That logic is facepunch worthy.

You keep making assumptions about people and basing your arguments on them.

One assumption is that people know how to cook food.  It sounds stupid.  My parents always cooked food at home, so I saw them making meals every night.  Eventually my mom and dad showed me the basics of chopping things up, reading a recipe, and creating a meal.

I also know people who eat out nearly every night.  They can't cook, so their kids have never learned to cook properly.  They have trouble with slicing an onion, don't know the difference between browning and burning something in a pan, don't know how to add seasonings to a dish to taste.  They've never followed a simple recipe before.  They can't even name all the common vegetables you find at a store.  Can they learn?  Absolutely.  But they will waste a lot of food, take forever to cook most things, and make a lot of terrible meals in the meantime.  If you're pretty well off, this is something that you can deal with.  If you're very poor, the risk of wasting your weekly food money on something that takes forever and may well be inedible once complete is a pretty strong deterrent.

Not everyone is lucky enough to know how to eat healthy foods, or know much about diet at all.  Again, because my parents cooked at home every night, and we generally ate healthy food I ended up having an intuitive sense of what is good for me.  Potato chips are basically the same as a baked potato, right?  This is a question I was asked by a guy in university . . . and he wasn't joking.  Some schools and parents don't teach much about food and nutrition . . . and this is another hurdle that many poor people must overcome.

Another assumption is that people have easy access to healthy food.  If you don't own a car, getting around on public transit can be a difficult and time consuming experience.  You're likely to find yourself limited to the stores within walking distance of where you live . . . and there are many places where there aren't any decent grocery stores nearby.  This means that you end up not having access to the same selection of fresh vegetables and unprocessed meats that are healthier to eat.


Now, obviously none of these issues are insurmountable, but they do exist. They make it more difficult for people who are very poor to eat healthy food than it is for you or me.  I'm not saying that poor people should give up, or should stop striving to better their situation at all.  I'm arguing that we need a little compassion when considering their situation . . . as it is materially different from ours.

EscapeVelocity2020

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1801
  • Age: 45
  • Location: Houston
    • EscapeVelocity2020
Re: Modern Day Slavery
« Reply #98 on: May 30, 2018, 10:04:11 AM »
People who complain about CEO salaries have generally never done the job.  It's a 24/7 job that requires immense amounts of IQ and EQ and decisions that will have ripple effects through countless families and communities.  A CEO typically has 10-20 bosses (i.e., the board of directors), board committees, numerous angry stakeholders, lawsuits to deal with, big suppliers, government regulators, and enough stress to kill a horse.  It's absolutely nothing like the life of a front line 9-5 worker, and a good CEO adds value far, far beyond his or her compensation.     

This is very true.  I'm a mid-level executive at my company, and there isn't enough money in the world to get me to aspire to being a CEO of a public company.

I don't think I'd mind being CEO of an established company.  You basically get to fly around the country for free and make sure things are going well.  From time to time, you have to be the public face telling investors what they want to hear.  You get to solicit input and decide what to do next.  People below you then do all the dirty work like firing and reorganizing to carry out your wishes.  I really don't see how CEO's have it so poorly.  Certainly very few of them are voluntarily hitting the ER button, although they are well beyond FI.
« Last Edit: May 30, 2018, 10:55:12 AM by EscapeVelocity2020 »

canuckystan

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 9
Re: Modern Day Slavery
« Reply #99 on: May 30, 2018, 10:07:17 AM »
This is all way off base.  If you read the latest research, poor people buy junk food primarily because they can't afford any other types of indulgences for themselves or their kids.  In other words, they believe that they have limited ability to put smiles on their kids' faces (and their own) so they say yes to junk food a lot more than wealthy people (who presumably give their kids activities, bikes, skis, whatever and have an easier time saying no to oreos and coke).

It's not really about the ability to cook or even the cost of junk food versus rice and beans.  It's a human connection thing.

Again - our topic is overweight/obesity. That IS determined by calories. You can get just as fat eating all the “healthy” foods you mentioned, if you eat enough of it. Someone can also lose weight by “just” eating McDonald’s, if they eat the right amount of it.

Honestly, your post is just filled with petty excuses. I can’t really argue that yes, it takes time to bake a chicken breast or put some rice in the microwave.

I’m baffled at some of the arguments here. Like cooking basic food takes so much skill and knowledge and time. How somehow I can do all of it working 60-70 hrs a week yet no “poor” person who “shouldn’t have to” work more than 40 hrs, can possibly find the time to do? Some people are apparently just so fucking lazy that it’s too much to ask them to cook something. Get real.

Amazing that on a forum that places so much value on biking everywhere and doing “work” yourself, that people can justify that it’s too much to expect poor people to cook their own food. That logic is facepunch worthy.

You keep making assumptions about people and basing your arguments on them.

One assumption is that people know how to cook food.  It sounds stupid.  My parents always cooked food at home, so I saw them making meals every night.  Eventually my mom and dad showed me the basics of chopping things up, reading a recipe, and creating a meal.

I also know people who eat out nearly every night.  They can't cook, so their kids have never learned to cook properly.  They have trouble with slicing an onion, don't know the difference between browning and burning something in a pan, don't know how to add seasonings to a dish to taste.  They've never followed a simple recipe before.  They can't even name all the common vegetables you find at a store.  Can they learn?  Absolutely.  But they will waste a lot of food, take forever to cook most things, and make a lot of terrible meals in the meantime.  If you're pretty well off, this is something that you can deal with.  If you're very poor, the risk of wasting your weekly food money on something that takes forever and may well be inedible once complete is a pretty strong deterrent.

Not everyone is lucky enough to know how to eat healthy foods, or know much about diet at all.  Again, because my parents cooked at home every night, and we generally ate healthy food I ended up having an intuitive sense of what is good for me.  Potato chips are basically the same as a baked potato, right?  This is a question I was asked by a guy in university . . . and he wasn't joking.  Some schools and parents don't teach much about food and nutrition . . . and this is another hurdle that many poor people must overcome.

Another assumption is that people have easy access to healthy food.  If you don't own a car, getting around on public transit can be a difficult and time consuming experience.  You're likely to find yourself limited to the stores within walking distance of where you live . . . and there are many places where there aren't any decent grocery stores nearby.  This means that you end up not having access to the same selection of fresh vegetables and unprocessed meats that are healthier to eat.


Now, obviously none of these issues are insurmountable, but they do exist. They make it more difficult for people who are very poor to eat healthy food than it is for you or me.  I'm not saying that poor people should give up, or should stop striving to better their situation at all.  I'm arguing that we need a little compassion when considering their situation . . . as it is materially different from ours.