Hacker News Reader

Comment by jameskilton | Hacker News Reader

If you're being sarcastic, I would ask you stop using this statement as such. If not, and for those that think this is true, no. This statement is not only totally wrong but disrespectful and destructive.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2017/03/08/...

http://www.socialworkdegreecenter.com/10-common-misconceptio...

http://www.latimes.com/projects/la-na-pol-poverty-poll/

And there's plenty more research to go along with this. Please stop spreading this lie, even if it's just a joke.

View on HN

I was making fun of the douchebag parent comment. Agreed

Perhaps the better way of saying it is that most lazy people end up being poor, rather than most poor people end up being lazy.

I'm sorry but do the rich really work that hard ?

First of all, for the rich work is optional, which means they get to choose the work they do. That's why rich people tend to be actors and artists. Maybe at times they do work hard, but it's for their vanity and mental health not of necessity. Their hard work isn't why they're rich, they were born rich.

Rarely do you find rich people cleaning old-peoples arses in hospitals.

Most hard-working normal people earn just enough to get by and most rich people were born that way.

While technically true, "most lazy people end up being poor" is still misleading. Most lazy people stay where they are, and there are already more poor people than rich ones. Statements about the resulting correlation aren't as constructive as statements about causation would be. "Most lazy people don't advance" is probably about as close as one can get to the original statement without being offensive.

Have you talked to poor people lately?

I'm consistently shocked at how they choose to watch TV, do drugs, and quick to blame other people.

I try to help people and share opportunities that seem in line with their experience and skills... yet they do not leave their damn couch. Anectodal, yes

We really shouls just put a good UBC plan together and call it a day.

The #1 cause of bankruptcy in this country is medical bills. Nothing to do with being lazy.

I would reframe this as the cause being lack of health insurance and an emergency fund capable of paying the deductible on said insurance plus 6 months of expenses in the event you're not able to work. Those two things don't guarantee not going bankrupt, but I would imagine it would be a lot harder.

Another way to frame it is how well people can bounce back from a medical emergency. The poorer you are, the harder it is to come back to even where you were before the incident.

Medical bills get out of hand but blue collar workers often find themselves out of work, fired because they couldn't make it to work through no fault of their own.

Our society punishes people for being poor and it's disgusting that it's so hard to even get people to acknowledge this, much less try to fix it.

Yea, that's what the E-fund is for. What percentage of the people declaring medical bankruptcy had health insurance and an E-fund to cover the deductible plus 6 month's expenses?

Sometimes this is true. But there are large external factors that determine this other than how hard a person works. The dot-com crash and the recent financial crisis for example.

You should look into learned helplessness. When individuals have tried repeatedly to no avail, it's no wonder they sometimes stop trying.

Because rich people don't watch TV, don't do drugs, and NEVER blame the government/their boss/poor people for anything.

Almost all the rich people I've known have spent a significant portion of their lives doing coke, eating in fancy restaurants, being on holiday and hosting orgies.

Many of them are genuinely lovely people.

Are those four qualities what make them lovely people?

>I'm consistently shocked at how they choose to watch TV, do drugs, and quick to blame other people.

Much of this was mentioned in Hillbilly Elegy as well (he also brought sources). As well as a much higher rate of domestic problems which can affect kids and hinder their chances of escaping poverty.

so you went and had personal conversations about life and work ethic with the 45 million Americans that live below the poverty line?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com