SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the how-much-less-do-I-have-than-others dept.
Since social scientists and economists began measuring poverty, the definition has never strayed far from a discussion of income.
New research from Georgia Tech economist Shatakshee Dhongde shows there are multiple components of poverty that more accurately describes a household's economic condition. Dhongde looks at "deprivation" more than simply low income, and her work finds that almost 15 percent of Americans are deprived in multiple dimensions.
"This study approaches poverty in a new way," said Dhongde, who recently published "Multi-Dimensional Deprivation in the U.S." in the journal Social Indicators Research.
"We tried to identify what is missing in the literature on poverty, and measure deprivation in six dimensions: health, education, standard of living, security, social connections, and housing quality. When you look at deprivation in these dimensions, you have a better picture of what is really going on with households, especially in developed countries like the United States."
(Score: 2) by t-3 on Monday November 21 2016, @10:09AM
So your whole point is that people who have kids and can't take care of them are stupid - but we shouldn't give them a chance to NOT have a child when they can't take care of it because that's WRONG. And oh no, the body of the unborn fetus is being used for SCIENCE! (how evil!!) It's obviously a liberal conspiracy to defraud you of your hard-earned SS and use it to pay for climate research and welfare for brown people!
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday November 21 2016, @12:54PM
You're reading far to much into my posts. I have asked specifically why I must fund condoms, the pill, IUD's, tubal ligations, abortions, etc for poor people. Did you not suggest early on that I choose a non-profit, and fund it, to provide all of those things? My question is, why must I fund these things?
If I am to made responsible for the reproductive health of the poor masses, then maybe I should assume some authority over their reproductive rights? In effect, you are inviting me to become the authority over the poor's reproductive rights? Oh boy - EUGENICS IS GOOD!! WE GONNA GET RID OF THE HUMAN WEEDS NOW!!*
*Margarite Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, a racist bitch who hated Negro weeds.
http://liveaction.org/research/margaret-sanger-quotes-history-and-biography [liveaction.org]
"And in 1939, Sanger went to work “cultivating the garden.” She initiated the Negro Project to weed out the unfit from the black population. In bringing birth control to the then largely poor (i.e. unfit) population of the South, with a few influential black ministers promoting the project as the solution to poverty, Sanger hoped to significantly reduce the black population. Martin Luther King, Sr., as the eldest son of nine children born into poverty in a family of sharecroppers, would have made the perfect target for “elimination.” But his birth had already taken place."
Thinking this shit over, no, I don't want to be a Mararite Sanger, thank you very much. Being the asshole that I am, I don't really like a lot of people. But some of the people I do like happen to be black. Others are Mexican. Yet others are American Indians. Just think - if Sanger had her way, all those fuckiing weeds would be gone, and there would be fewer people for me to like!
Just, no thank you.