Why the Poor are Mostly Deserving of their Fate

At 3:18 AM 5/17/96, snow wrote:
On Wed, 15 May 1996, Jim McCoy wrote:
There are two kinds of libertarians, those who hate the poor and those who don't. I always seem to meet the former, I am beginning to suspect the latter don't exist.
By the way, I certainly don't "hate the poor," as a class. More on this in a bit, but I certainly was not raised in a wealthy family, and I started my working career living in a tiny (and I do mean tiny) studio apartment in Santa Clara, CA.
Hi Mr. McCoy, My name is Petro, and I _am_ a poor libertarian (well, sort of a libertarian, I tend to think they are a little short sighted, and a little to authoritarian to me) Many of us ARE poor. We may not _like_ being poor, and some of us are working to get out of that situation, but most of us don't "hate" the poor. We (well, I) hate people with their hands out. This is everyone from poor people who _won't_ try to get out of their situation, to Multi-billion dollar corporations that recieve government grants for over seas advertising to old people who didn't plan for their "golden years" and expect us to provide the gold.
Agreed. I was a libertarian (and a Libertarian, I guess, as I voted for the first LP candidate, John Hospers, in 1972) even when I was poor, in college. (No car, and I declined to attend MIT or Stanford, both of whom had accepted me, as their costs would've been an unduly-large burden on my parents.) Once working and ensconced in my tiny little studio apartment, I worked my butt off, working 10 hour days, 6 days a week, and sometimes some 16 hour days (no overtime). I made it a point to save as much as I could, foregoing various immediate gratifications that many in my cohort were partaking of. By the time I'd been working for 6-8 years, things really started to pay off, financially and professionally. I put the money I'd saved into small companies I thought would do well...companies like Sun, Apple, Genentech, and, of course, my own company, Intel. By the time I'd worked there for 12 years, I'd accumulated enough in savings and investments to never work again. So I bailed out and have lived the last 10 years doing as I please. (Still sounds good to me.) My point? Some of it was luck, some of it was hard work, some of it was my native abilities. But I saw some of my fellow engineers fail to invest, fail to save...and they are mostly still working. And of course I saw many in the "larger community" who spent their paychecks, who saw their earnings go up their nose (remember, this was the 1970s and 80s), and who found as many ways as they could to avoid hard work. An important point is this: it wasn't all "luck." At least not in the sense of luck at a roulette wheel. In fact, nearly all of my cohorts who worked hard and invested wisely really did well. (And people starting out can do just as well, perhaps even faster than my cohort did...look at the 3-10x increases in stock prices in less than 2 years of so many companies!) The effects are obvious: some of those who failed to study, prepare, work, save, and invest are now seeking to use "democracy" to take away the assets of those who did all these things. Many of them talk about "privilege" and claim that "white males" got all the benefits, conveniently ignoring that the same benefits were available to any of the Asians, women, or, indeed, coloreds, who similarly studied, prepared, worked, saved, and invested. Some of them now claim that we libertarians "hate the poor," that we lack "compassion." I'm tempted to say "Fuck them," but that would be rude. Instead, I'll say that those who think "the poor" are being victimized by "the rich" should take a close look at how wealth is actually created. It is only partly "luck" that is responsible for success. I look at the vast number of new markets and new fortunes that have been created since I stopped working, and I am more convinced than ever that anyone who is willing to work in a field which is in demand and who keeps up with developments, works hard, shows initiative, etc., will do extremely well. Sadly, about 60% of the adult population of the U.S. doesn't think this way, doesn't have "the culture of success," and instead looks to the government to give them benefits, handouts, and jobs. These people are headed for the scrap heap. Strong crypto builds walls against this unruly mob. --Tim May Boycott "Big Brother Inside" software! We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay@got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Licensed Ontologist | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

It was understandable to be poor when all the world was poor. It is understandable to be poor in those nations today that make the accumulation of wealth a crime for most people. It is not understandable to be poor (for long) in the US where one can reliably get out of poverty simply by doing three simple things: 1) get a high school diploma 2) get married 3) get any job Only about 2 tenths of 1% of those who satisfy those three requirements incomes below the official poverty line. Like most libertarians, I dislike the government. I don't care what a person's income is. When I was self-supporting on an income of $200 a month in 1979, I was below the poverty level for a single person myself. I am not enamored of the rich or poor members of the dependendant classes of course. I try and keep in mind that 80-90% of the "take" in government programs for the "poor" goes to unpoor government employees. DCF

On Sat, 18 May 1996, Duncan Frissell wrote:
It was understandable to be poor when all the world was poor. It is understandable to be poor in those nations today that make the accumulation of wealth a crime for most people. It is not understandable to be poor (for long) in the US where one can reliably get out of poverty simply by doing three simple things:
1) get a high school diploma 2) get married 3) get any job
Only about 2 tenths of 1% of those who satisfy those three requirements incomes below the official poverty line.
Like most libertarians, I dislike the government. I don't care what a person's income is. When I was self-supporting on an income of $200 a month in 1979, I was below the poverty level for a single person myself. I am not enamored of the rich or poor members of the dependendant classes of course.
I try and keep in mind that 80-90% of the "take" in government programs for the "poor" goes to unpoor government employees.
DCF
I've done all these things - and rather more in the way of education. But while I don't fall on or near the poverty line, I'm still poor as a church mouse. What am I doing wrong? Sean Gabb.
participants (3)
-
Duncan Frissell
-
Sean Gabb
-
tcmay@got.net