Poverty in America

It just sounds like you are reacting to the last post that you read instead of having a consistent point of view. :frowning:

Do you have a point of view on it? You know, as opposed to simply arguing. :evilfun:

My biggest beef is with overpriced slummy apartments where they bring in desperate poor people who have no credit or job security to pay for unsafe/unsanitary living quarters in downtrodden neighborhoods. The slumlords know that they are going to get rent (maybe not all of it from each tenant), but they put no upkeep into those properties, so 90% of what they bring in is profit oriented. And those hellholes are usually overpriced by at least $100, some more, for what little they offer by way of conditions, amenities, neighborhood safety, pest control, working appliances, smoke detectors/fire extinguishers, safe stairways and building lighting, snow removal/lawn care, windows/doors that aren’t broken, roof maintenance, up to code electrical and plumbing, etc.

Lead paint and asbestos is just covered up, rather than removed.

That’s the nauseating part of supply and demand in a market economy. People who are desperate to get housing are exploited by landlords.

If there are rent controls, then the number of available housing units goes down and rents go up.

If there are no rent controls, then landlords can mercilessly gouge the tenants.

The only real solution is to educate and train people to earn enough money so that they have more control over their lives.

Or abandon the market and have complete government control over housing. :wink:

Why is everything an either or choice? Can’t a free market be loosely guided by socialistic requirements?

Socialism is the compromise between free market capitalism and communism. The USA has a version of socialism.

Honestly, a free market capitalism is too much for almost everyone to stomach. That’s why it doesn’t exist.

What’s the best mix of capitalism and socialism in this case of tenant vs. landlord and rental rates?

I don’t think that there is a simple answer to that question. A small number of landlords and tenants will abuse every system. The legal system is so slow and ineffective that abuse is encouraged rather than discouraged.

The practical/pragmatic answer is closer to the capitalist end of the spectrum rather than the socialist end. That’s simply because greed and self interest are faster and more responsive to needs than central planning.

Favored by housing court.

By example i mean that generally, poor people lack a strong social network.(Exceptions are still-insular recent immigrant groups.) But when they are trying get stuff (like occupancy for one more month, despite eviction) they often have a plethora of advocacy groups and knowledge among the group to help them beat the system. Which they usually can, for a while. I have met people who can’t hold a job for half a day but can sniff out a free ham sandwich on the other side of town.

A more productive social network would form if they would avail themselves of existing social institutions. Try to learn how to work the system rather than beat it short term. Today, I suggested to an out of work individual (long story) that he contact the ACLU. he had no idea what ACLU meant. I’m going to try to get him some free legal advice and have asked a colleague to call in a favor to try to get him a job. Despite that he lied to me, misrepresented his situation. Despite that he has lied to my colleague. And blown her off when he had an appointment. And wouldn’t think of thanking me if I got him straightened out. It’s difficult to help people when they lie to you, sometimes.

And he lied because I’m a guy in a tie and poor people are taught to mistrust and even despise those that are not poor. The way you, wendy, are trying to teach people. Social networks are built on trust and trustworthiness.

Evictions take time and money because tenants have more procedural rights than landlords.

The landlord tenant act is a federal law, that is mirrored in state law in all the states if I’m not mistaken. It favors the tenant. This is common knowledge.

Here we go with the inane accusations. When have I ever dissed a tie?

wendy, your overall thesis is that poverty is cause by too much wealth. If wealthy people would just hand more money over to poor people, there wouldn’t be any poor people. The examples are all over your posts. You claim that rich people are morally obligated to do this.

I have a lot of ties. I wear then to fancy dinners and think about all the people out there boiling rice. Then I order and extra drink so I can drink one for the rice boilers.

Long ago money was based on silver, gold, and copper.
And the rest was farm goods.

The present american capital system is a fantasy.
Like literally a thing made of pure fantasy,
which then can buy and sell real, non fantasy, such as food and water.

Gold isn’t worth any more than a piece of paper unless you need it for some industrial use.

That is true. Old world riches have to do with a large family and a large farm.

I exchanged a pile of scrap gold for paper… It seemed like a fair exchange at the time. The paper has been quite useful on a number of occasions.

I’ve always been a big fan of money.

I used to buy tons of silver eagles when the spot was low, then wait for it to go up a few bucks, tale it all to gun shows and sell it at a big premium to kooky old men who want precious metals that the government doesn’t know they have. Old men at gun shows get boners for shiny American made silver coins.

The ol’ silver eagle to elderly militiamen gambit. Classic.