Poor are not staying poor by their "struggle to prosper".
Poor are staying poor by keeping doing things that keeping them poor, like getting further down in debt, not acquiring new skills, not being productive and not expressing their creativity.
And of course rich have their habits as well.
Give money to poor guy, take all the money from rich guy and see where they are in in 5 years. Chances are they'll be back to their original platoes.
Taking all the money from a coddled, unemployed trust fund child would definitely have no effect on their solvency in the long-term, because money is entirely distributed based on merit.
Do you have any evidence for your claims? From what I have read and seen, the effects of poverty are often are a reinforcing, positive feedback loop. Here is a small example: financial struggles alone, irrespective of inherent talent or background, actual reduces one's cognitive ability on a day to day level [1]. How's that for being kicked while your down? And I'm sure I don't need to explain how privilege and wealth benefits those who are born into it.
I hope that someday, saying garbage like this is considered the same as saying that women aren't as good at math as men, or black people aren't as hardworking as the chinese.
> by keeping doing things that keeping them poor, like getting further down in debt, not acquiring new skills, not being productive and not expressing their creativity.
That's because they don't have the choice, or the chance, to do not do things. At least for the poor people in 3rd world countries. If they don't spend their entire day working for scraps, they (or more likely their children) could die the next day.
That's one theory. The evidence doesn't support it. Maybe the rich guy can get back to where he was with his track record and connections to build on (more likely if he earned the money in the first place rather than inheriting it), and of course if you just take cash and not other sources of wealth you probably haven't hurt the rich guy all that much. But when we have given money to poor people, they use it to improve their lives.
"In Dauphin, Man., the government gave more than 1,000 families a four-year guaranteed income to help keep them out of poverty. Crime rates and hospital visits dropped. Education enrolment surged. Nobody sat around in sweatpants eating Cheetos. They used the extra resources to make plans. "
"But just four years after the supplements began, Professor Costello observed marked improvements among those who moved out of poverty. The frequency of behavioral problems declined by 40 percent, nearly reaching the risk of children who had never been poor."
"Food consumption increased 20 percent, with a 42 percent reduction in the number of days children go without food. Recipients were also able to increase their ability to earn income. Revenue from raising livestock rose by 48 percent; total revenue from self-employment rose by 38 percent."
Again, for emphasis: total revenue from self-employment rose
"A year later, 11 of the 13 had roofs over their heads. (Some went to hostels; others to shelters.) They enrolled in classes, learned how to cook, got treatment for drug abuse and made plans for the future."
Poor are staying poor by keeping doing things that keeping them poor, like getting further down in debt, not acquiring new skills, not being productive and not expressing their creativity.
And of course rich have their habits as well.
Give money to poor guy, take all the money from rich guy and see where they are in in 5 years. Chances are they'll be back to their original platoes.
reply