# "Third World" area(s) within the United States?



## Locust (Apr 29, 2005)

Sexas said:


> I think I need to clear one thing, not all the Texas border towns are poor, place like McAllen, Edinburg, Mission, Laredo, Brownsville and El Paso have some of the highest job growth rate and Salary growth rate in the US. Also Texas border have one of the most beautiful beach in the US - South Padre Island and a wonderful national park - Big Band National Park.
> 
> South Padre Island



ehemmm

Then, not all 3rd world cities are poor....
You also have to consider socio-cutural aspects..


----------



## Justadude (Jul 15, 2004)

fredcalif said:


> Most of the Miami area.
> Hialeah, Little havana, liberty city, Overtown, Sweetwater, all of NW and so many places in Fort Lauderdale.
> 
> Durham, NC Biloxi, Gary, Newark, New Orleans. and so many other places, but most of them are in the South


Is that some kind of joke? Durham?? New Orleans?? Biloxi?? Newark?? Sure, all those places have gritty parts of town, but so does any city. Paris has gritty neighborhoods, for god's sake. But all the cities listed above also have massive blocks of affluence and culture that easily exceed any kind of seriously-considered "third world" definition.


----------



## TheKansan (Jun 22, 2004)

Well lets talk about what makes a thrid world area. 

Since even the worst cities in the US have electricty, running water, and gas for heat, I have a hard time comparing them to slums in developing countries. Also even the poorest of people in the US have access to social programs that are totally unavailable in some developing countries. Almost everywhere in the US has paved roads, and clean water. Even gravel roads in the countryside of the US are better than the dirt roads in some developing countries, that is if there are roads at all. Very few people in the US have to use outhouses and get their water from wells, and to many it is a matter of choice. The US is in no way third world. Yes there are cases of poverty, but let me ask you, would you rather be in poverty in a country like the US, or in certain developing countries?


----------



## Locust (Apr 29, 2005)

TheKansan:
If you compare a poor third world country with the US, the obviously US is better.
However, there are relatively ok-ish third world countries like Mexico, Brazil, etc
where a medium-upper level income people have DEFINITELY BETTER standard of living than low imcome people in the US.


----------



## DrJekyll (Sep 23, 2004)

I've heard that poverty rates in USA are very high for being the richest and more developed nation in the world, is that true?


----------



## Azn_chi_boi (Mar 11, 2005)

nope.. its like 12% .. I am not sure right off right now.

Gary isn't thrid world. Its industralize and a world class city is less than 30 miles away.


----------



## hudkina (Oct 28, 2003)

nevermind.


----------



## NWside (Oct 1, 2003)

Locust said:


> TheKansan:
> However, there are relatively ok-ish third world countries like Mexico, Brazil, etc
> where a medium-upper level income people have DEFINITELY BETTER standard of living than low imcome people in the US.


 So your trying to tell us people with more money live in better conditions then poor people? Groundbreaking....


----------



## Justadude (Jul 15, 2004)

DrJekyll said:


> I've heard that poverty rates in USA are very high for being the richest and more developed nation in the world, is that true?


It depends on how you classify poverty. There are two ways to do it: relative and absolute.

Most stats show relative poverty. You take your median national income and figure out how many people live substantially below it. In this measurement, the USA comes out looking somewhat badly because there is a huge gap between the richest and poorest people in America.

Occasionally you see absolute-poverty stats instead. In doing that, you take a certain fixed level of income and figure out how many people live under it -- for instance, how many people make the equivalent of $1 per day or less. In this measurement the USA does extremely well. A poor person in America might make $20,000 a year, which is well above the ordinary income you would find in a third-world country. 

This basically confirms what was being said below: there are places in America that are "poor" by our standards, but those standards are some of the highest in the world.


----------



## Azn_chi_boi (Mar 11, 2005)

I heard some of US's terrorities in the Pacfic and Carribean is like "Third-World"


----------



## DoctorZero2 (Mar 2, 2005)

^^^
Relative poverty may even rise if the income of the upper echelons rises significantly faster than the income of the masses, that is if nobody is really worse off in absolute terms. So a country may get "relatively" poorer over time even if everybody is having more and more in the pockets.


----------



## staff (Oct 23, 2004)

That is one big difference between the US and Western Europe (EU). While the US have several poor areas and slums, I don't think that phenomenon exists at all in EU (or at least I'd like to think so since I live in Sweden).


----------



## Wallbanger (Mar 8, 2005)

eomer said:


> What about South-Central in L.A ?


Well South Central has a nice part to it too. Its not all slums.
In Hawaii im sure there are some very poor areas, aswell as Southern Texas/Arizona/New Mexico, close to the mexican border.


----------



## Jonesy55 (Jul 30, 2004)

staff said:


> That is one big difference between the US and Western Europe (EU). While the US have several poor areas and slums, I don't think that phenomenon exists at all in EU (or at least I'd like to think so since I live in Sweden).


Yeah, right, no poor areas in the EU, what are you talking about?

Paris and London both have very poor areas as do many cities in Western Europe, there are also very poor places in rural areas especially Spain, Portugal and Southern Italy. If you use the same definition of poverty in Sweden and the USA(earning less than $20,000 per year say) there are also poor people in Sweden.

Poor people in the EU do have advantages over poor people in the US though, at least they all get good free healthcare and schools while better public transport and the different design of most cities means they don't have to buy and run a car


----------



## levinas by the store (Nov 28, 2004)

the important aspect of any country with poor people is that maneouverability of the people is defined by the context where they live,so no matter even if the people live in the so called richest country of the world,they are no well off like poor people elsewhere and it therefore become all the more damning when people of that country as in the case of states have limited and occasional public health care acess,then homelessness which is a horror in certain parts of states,as for the present poverty indices cite an increase in poverty in america by more than .3% ie it stands at 12.8% up from 12.5%the previous year.


----------



## Renkinjutsushi (Dec 4, 2004)

Indian reservations.


----------



## AcesHigh (Feb 20, 2003)

TheKansan said:


> Well lets talk about what makes a thrid world area.
> 
> Since even the worst cities in the US have electricty, running water, and gas for heat, I have a hard time comparing them to slums in developing countries. Also even the poorest of people in the US have access to social programs that are totally unavailable in some developing countries. Almost everywhere in the US has paved roads, and clean water. Even gravel roads in the countryside of the US are better than the dirt roads in some developing countries, that is if there are roads at all. Very few people in the US have to use outhouses and get their water from wells, and to many it is a matter of choice. The US is in no way third world. Yes there are cases of poverty, but let me ask you, would you rather be in poverty in a country like the US, or in certain developing countries?


what social programs in US?? US is the developed country with less social programs that exist!! You can get medical treatment for free in Brasil (good in some hospitals, not good in some others, terrible in others), but you will be left to die in US if you dont have a health insurance. Or they will just send you the bill later and you will have to sell your house to pay the hospital and doctors. The brazilian government PAYS any MEDICINE for ANYONE who cannot afford it. That includes also expensive HIV medicines for soropositives.

You can also get free university in Brasil. And the public universities are better than the private ones.


----------



## AcesHigh (Feb 20, 2003)

Justadude said:


> It depends on how you classify poverty. There are two ways to do it: relative and absolute.
> 
> Most stats show relative poverty. You take your median national income and figure out how many people live substantially below it. In this measurement, the USA comes out looking somewhat badly because there is a huge gap between the richest and poorest people in America.
> 
> ...



the poor in US definitly are poorer and live worse than low-middle class/middle class in Brasil. But the poor in Brasil live worse than poor people in US. There is also the miserable class... below poverty line.


----------



## Justadude (Jul 15, 2004)

AcesHigh said:


> what social programs in US?? US is the developed country with less social programs that exist!! You can get medical treatment for free in Brasil (good in some hospitals, not good in some others, terrible in others), but you will be left to die in US if you dont have a health insurance. Or they will just send you the bill later and you will have to sell your house to pay the hospital and doctors. The brazilian government PAYS any MEDICINE for ANYONE who cannot afford it. That includes also expensive HIV medicines for soropositives.


This is not an accurate picture of American healthcare. Poor people actually receive decent coverage, and nobody is "left to die". The worst-off are the low-middle class who have just enough money to afford healthcare, so they get charged for it even if it becomes a hardship. But the poor certainly are not kicked to the curb. I recently had a conversation with a homeless man who was given a free glucometer to help control his diabetes... does that happen in Brazil?



> You can also get free university in Brasil. And the public universities are better than the private ones.


While university is not always available in America (depends on your state and circumstances), community colleges are easily affordable.


----------



## juan_en_el_valle (May 10, 2005)

Sexas said:


> I think I need to clear one thing, not all the Texas border towns are poor, place like McAllen, Edinburg, Mission, Laredo, Brownsville and El Paso have some of the highest job growth rate and Salary growth rate in the US. Also Texas border have one of the most beautiful beach in the US - South Padre Island and a wonderful national park - Big Band National Park.
> 
> South Padre Island


Absolutely right!


----------



## Lee (Jun 2, 2003)

wjfox2002 said:


> Alabama and Mississippi are the two poorest states, but I don't think you could say they have parts which are "third world".


Especially considering that Mississippi, the poorest state, is no poorer than Spain in terms of income per head.


----------



## Lee (Jun 2, 2003)

I've been to Southern Alabama, and it was much nicer than I thought it would be. It wasn't highly populated, as there were many large farms, and an occasional town with row-houses. The beaches in Alabama's gulf islands are full of rich people with mansions. The beaches in themselves are some of the best in the US, with that beautiful white sand. There was this town called "Fairhope" which was an affluent town with a surprisingly active center, full of expensive shops. In fact, the eastern coast of Mobile Bay is a quiet, peaceful, where you see many family's on vacation going fishing or relaxing. 

Southern Mississippi looked pretty poor for US standards. Having said that, Biloxi is interesting and actually has some nice historical areas.


----------



## Lee (Jun 2, 2003)

This is the S. Alabama coast. 





































You can't sand like that anywhere else. The beaches are also empty.


----------



## DrJekyll (Sep 23, 2004)

I've never been to America and I don´t know so much about the subject we are discussing about. I just wanted to post some pics found in google. *Of course, these images don´t prove anything. I know we can find pics like this from any country in the world*, i just found interesting to post them here. 










^ navajo reservation 









^ Georgia, 1989. 









^ California 









^ New York 









^ South Carolina 









^ 1962









^ Arkansas, 1960's 










^ somewhere in America 









^ minneapolis 


















^ New York 









^ New York 


















^ Washington









^ San Diego 










^ poverty 









^ poverty rates

*** had to edit out a risque photo.


----------



## Talbot (Jul 13, 2004)

^^^ Ahhh dude were the old guys really necessary? Really?

I've heard that Mississippi was pretty poor, but I have never personally seen it. And also McAllen and areas close to South Padre Island, TX are pretty poor.

And lmao at Presidio, TX, I never knew there was a place that bad in Texas, it looks like the set of a western movie.

And damn, ReddAlert made a killing.


----------



## pottebaum (Sep 11, 2004)

Many of those pictures were deceiving--a few of them were outdated, and a couple others seemed incredibly unlikely; if kids today were living in those conditions, they'd be taken in by the DHS.


----------



## lumpia (Apr 10, 2004)

DrJekyll said:


> :redx:
> ^ El Paso, 1980's


LOLOLOLOL woooooo! i've said it once and i'll say it again: elderly people suck! :lol:


----------



## PotatoGuy (May 10, 2005)

pottebaum said:


> Many of those pictures were deceiving--a few of them were outdated, and a couple others seemed incredibly unlikely; if kids today were living in those conditions, they'd be taken in by the DHS.


true


----------



## ReddAlert (Nov 4, 2004)

Talbot said:


> And damn, ReddAlert made a killing.


thank you


----------



## _UberGerard_ (Dec 23, 2004)

is that man what you americaners call "*******"? 
i have heard that word a lot and as i read, is like him
am i right?


----------



## Beacon (Mar 14, 2005)

One of the considerations for this debate is to consider the scale of the United States. It is the biggest developed nation in the world, and as a result, is bound to have some of the most extreme examples of the pros and cons of capitalism.

It is naive to claim that US poverty is comparable to third world countries, and shows disrespect to those people in the world who literally have nothing, in the slums of Mumbai, Darfour in Sudan, Bandah Acheh in Indonesia. The United States can still feed their population, and can send an ambulance if someone is dying in the middle of a road.

However, in a society that rewards the successful with greater riches than anywhere else, it also shuns the destitute, and tends to sweep them under the metaphorical carpet. One of the biggest contrasts I've seen is to catch a greyhound bus from North Hollywood, CA to Carson City, NV. Leaving perhaps the richest municipality in the world, it takes less than an hour to find yourself in Ridgecrest and Mojave, where there are literally trailer-park cities. People aren't starving there in the desert, but rather are mostly obese, from what I assume is a staple diet of junk food available at the myriad truck stops and take-away food restuarants. There are no trees or public spaces, just a human blot on a bleak expanse of windswept wasteland. It's hard to believe you are so close to the glitz and excess of Beverley Hills and Hollywood.

I've seen more homeless people in Paris railway stations, and more run-down areas in Northern England, but it seems that nowhere in Europe are the extremes more segregated than in the US. It's the attitude in the US that is extreme - wealth makes you a good person, and poverty makes you a loser.


----------



## Latin l0cO (Nov 8, 2004)

Poverty in the US is nowhere near third world poverty. You're much better off being homeless in the US than some third world nation. In the US its possible to be born poor and die rich. In other countries if you're born poor, thats how you'll live your entire life.


----------



## Jonesy55 (Jul 30, 2004)

Latin l0cO said:


> In the US its possible to be born poor and die rich. In other countries if you're born poor, thats how you'll live your entire life.


That's true of all developed countries though and most people who are born poor stay poor even in the US, a few rags to riches stories don't change that.

It would be interesting to know hao many people live on less than say $15,000 per year in the US and compare that proportion to other developed countries, measuring poverty using 60% of median income or whatever is useless as median income varies considerably from country to country.

Nowhere in the US is genuinely third world but some areas are very deprived that's for sure.


----------



## Rail Claimore (Sep 11, 2002)

^Well if there is anything the US differs in even with other developed countries, it's probably the number of people who are permanently in poverty. Few Americans are impoverished over the course of their entire lives. Rags to riches stories are rare, but rags to middle class is still very common in the US, especially with the immigrant populations. It's an ever-changing nation.

Take for example the current hispanic population and immigration to the US. While it is easy to look at statistics and see that hispanics continuously have only 1/2 the average income of blacks or 1/3 of what whites have (those numbers might not be exact), that doesn't imply a lack of social or economic mobility. Many of those hispanic families move from poor working class to middle class within a generation, but their former positions in the working class are replaced by more recent immigrants.

The US is not an economically egalitarian society (socialist), rather it's very socially egalitarian. The capitalist system of inequality of wealth is merely a reflection of that, not a cause, and to understand that, one needs to study American history post 1800.

I don't think the poor in the US live any worse, if at all, than the poor in Europe. Poor people in the US have access to gov't healthcare (Medicaid), and welfare compensation, provided they show some stable employment. If you're willing to work, the government does help you... but you have to be willing to work, and ease of employment is only guaranteed in a free market socially egalitarian society, where you aren't turned away from most jobs (the ones that don't require a college education) because of your address.


----------



## schreiwalker (May 13, 2005)

I'm not sure that the poor in the US don't live worse off than the poor in other countries. In Germany I'm told that there is often a disincentive to work because welfare checks are more generous than there already generous minimum wage. and the biggest difference is the healthcare. very few poor americans receive health care. 

incidentally, I grew up in poverty according to government statistics (though I did have health care and my childhood was quite happy). but I am now doing quite well for myself. I think the difference between me and many of my friends that are stuck back home is that I had the imagination to find a better life. It didn't hurt that I did well in school, and was encouraged to do so by my parents. what many people don't understand about poor america is that there is a culture there that's kind of self limiting. Its hard to escape. 

that being said, I agree with Rail and think its easier to become middle class in america than in many countries. If I am poor in america my last name does not necessarily give me away as poor, my accent can change, and the housing market is so fluid that we take it for granted that you can move anywhere (not the case in all countries). 

I mean, lets look at the evidence. Every successive year the US has as many immigrants as anywhere in the world(13 million came in the '90s, more than any other decade in history). Most of these people are unskilled laborers, many of whom are poorer than the poorest americans. Furthermore, the poor in our society have the highest birthrates. So every year there is a guaranteed increase in impoverished people relative to rich people, yet the rate of poverty usually does not rise. Instead, it stays roughly the same. to put it simply, poor people are leaving poverty in America every year, the poverty rate just doesn't reflect this because more poor people keep coming (I like immigration, for the record). 

though like any place, it could certainly help poor people out a little more.


----------



## DarkLite (Dec 31, 2004)

whatever u say, Alabama, and states like that cannot cannot cannot compare to Africa in terms of poverty, its a fact, the USA is a very easy place to make more money than in Africa


----------



## Chad (Oct 10, 2002)




----------



## levinas by the store (Nov 28, 2004)

what's so deceiving about these pictures...i dont understand but one thing is sure im apalled by what i have seen in those pictures,even though some of the picutres being dated....they aint dated that enough to not form a judgement bout american poor.common being the richest and most developed nation in the world how come that happened i mean look at the condition, its real sad,why dont americans have courage enough to accept that yeah there are third world conditions which exist even today,a poor man's maneouvrebility is defined by the context in which he lives,social network he maintains and given the reach of socially deprived in america the condition is real apalling in a country which boasts of world's most billionaires,look at your social security, affirmative action and health benefits,i can cite hundred instances of people who at time when they needed health benefits didnt receive at all,in certain cases people werent able to access health cos of rigid professionalism of medical fraternity which according to them were simply inaccessible,a case study done in mid nineties on income disparity levels between people of upper manhattan and harlem was eye popping with people in certain class of upper manhattan enjoying a salary of $200,000 per annum and certain class of poor enjoying a meagre $5000 per annum in the later,how far the story has changed under present govt's regime.........i read somewhere this year that america has topped even brazil in a survey of income disparity,if that's not enough to apprise of american poor i would like you people to make aware of the INFAMOUS TUSKEGEE EXPERIMENT DONE SELECTIVELY ON SEXUALLY ACTIVE BLACK POPULATION BEFORE SYPHILIS CURE WAS FOUND IN 1920S WHICH NOW FINDS MENTION IN MOST OF THE MEDICAL ETHICS BOOKS,WHAT WAS REALLY AMAZING BOUT THIS WHOLE PHENOMENA WAS THE SILENCE ON THE PART OF GOVT EVEN AFTER 40 YRS OF CURE AS THE PEOPLE WERENT TREATED EVEN AFTER CURE WAS FOUND,WHAT HAPPENED TO THESE POOR BLACK FOLKS AND THEIR FAMILIES STILL RECUPERATING FROM THE EFFECTS OF THAT INFAMOUS TRIAL,THERE ARE SIMILAR OTHER CASES IN THE PAST WHEN GOVT TRIED VARIOUS POPULATIONS SELECTIVELY,THEN HOW ABOUT THE VILOLENCE THAT AFFLICTS MOST OF AMERCIAN CITIES......CONTEXT CHANGES EVERYTHING.


----------



## DarkLite (Dec 31, 2004)

how right u are, levinasbythestore


----------



## parallax (Feb 25, 2004)

Nothing like 3rd world, but i must say, by Dutch / Northern European standards, close to 40 million people living in poverty IS a large number by all means.

Nothing like that over here.


----------



## levinas by the store (Nov 28, 2004)

there are third world conditions in america that do exist,people living in poverty in america has increased by point 3 percent as it now stands at 12.8% up from earlier at 12.5%. read my earlier post


----------



## reluminate (Aug 3, 2004)

fredcalif said:


> Most of the Miami area.
> Hialeah, Little havana, liberty city, Overtown, Sweetwater, all of NW and so many places in Fort Lauderdale.
> 
> Durham, NC Biloxi, Gary, Newark, New Orleans. and so many other places, but most of them are in the South


Please. Most people in the so-called "third world" can only dream of living in palces like those. We sometimes lose track of how good we have it here - even those living in conditions that we find horrible are living better lives than anyone in sub-saharan africa. We need to put things in perspective.


----------



## archifreese (May 5, 2005)

parallax said:


> Nothing like 3rd world, but i must say, by Dutch / Northern European standards, close to 40 million people living in poverty IS a large number by all means.
> 
> Nothing like that over here.


yes but by dutch/northern european standards that would be a large country, the netherlands only has 17 million (approx.) total people and germany has a little over 80 million, give them a population of 300 million plus and it doesnt seem like such a big number. Though it is still big.


----------



## VansTripp (Sep 29, 2004)

South Central LA has middle class and upper class region.

Alot of low income families are very closer to beaches in LA like Compton, Inglewood and South Central LA. Inglewood has middle class and few upper class region as well. I thinks that Compton has middle class region too.

I have said, Miami is highest poverty on nation but Talladega in Alabama looks dump and poverty to me, worse than Miami. If it's not in Miami then Detroit for good.


----------



## Housing Critic3 (Jun 13, 2005)

Alabama


----------



## eklips (Mar 29, 2005)

archifreese said:


> yes but by dutch/northern european standards that would be a large country, the netherlands only has 17 million (approx.) total people and germany has a little over 80 million, give them a population of 300 million plus and it doesnt seem like such a big number. Though it is still big.



He was meaning in percentage, the poverty rate in the US is much higher then in Dutchland


----------



## Ubo (Oct 8, 2003)

The poor in the United States have it much worse then here in Europe, there's no point even questioning that. The standards of poverty you see in the United States is not evident in the rich western European nations, I fail to see why Poland is mentioned seeing as Poland is far poorer country then the United States.


----------



## DarkLite (Dec 31, 2004)

gary looks third world so does compton


----------



## jmanh54 (Jun 18, 2005)

Years ago, I read somewhere that for several years Peace Corps training was held in particularly poor, predominately Latino neighborhoods of San Antonio, TX. So, I formed the impression that these neighborhoods approached Third World conditions as much as anywhere in the U.S. But, maybe the training was held there just for training in communicating with Spanish speaking people. I don't know.


----------



## reluminate (Aug 3, 2004)

Ubo said:


> The poor in the United States have it much worse then here in Europe, there's no point even questioning that. The standards of poverty you see in the United States is not evident in the rich western European nations.


I'm not challenging you, but I'm curious to know what you back up your opinion with?


----------



## eklips (Mar 29, 2005)

For the rest of Europe it's not the case but for france there is something called minimum wage for those who work (SMIC) and the unemployed get a little bit of state money (RMI), the low incomes in the States are much lower then the SMIC, and there is no such thing as the RMI for those who don't


----------



## VansTripp (Sep 29, 2004)

How about Harlem and Bronx?


----------



## djm19 (Jan 3, 2005)

In the US we have unemployment checks for the unemployed and we have minimum wage.


----------



## Guest (Jun 19, 2005)

virtual said:


> For the rest of Europe it's not the case but for france there is something called minimum wage for those who work (SMIC) and the unemployed get a little bit of state money (RMI), the low incomes in the States are much lower then the SMIC, and there is no such thing as the RMI for those who don't


The UK has a minimum wage too. It's currently at £4.85 (around $9.20) an hour. That means someone working a 40 hour week would make £10,088 ($19,170) on minimum wage. We also have Working Tax Credit for people on low pay to give them extra money, Unemployment Benefit and Income Support for those with no job, Child Tax Credit and Child Benefit for those with children, Housing Benefit for people on low pay... How can you say it's not the case for the rest of Europe?


----------



## eklips (Mar 29, 2005)

EarlyBird said:


> The UK has a minimum wage too. It's currently at £4.85 (around $9.20) an hour. That means someone working a 40 hour week would make £10,088 ($19,170) on minimum wage. We also have Working Tax Credit for people on low pay to give them extra money, Unemployment Benefit and Income Support for those with no job, Child Tax Credit and Child Benefit for those with children, Housing Benefit for people on low pay... How can you say it's not the case for the rest of Europe?


Ky fault, I actually meant "it's maybe not the case..."

Sorry for this


----------



## Ubo (Oct 8, 2003)

asohn said:


> I'm not challenging you, but I'm curious to know what you back up your opinion with?


With the fact that you don't see any slums in the rich western European countries that are remotly comparable to those in the United States. European countries are welfare-states and the United States isn't. If you're poor in Europe, you have many benefits that the United States lacks. It isn't just a mere welfare check but allowances and social security in daily living such as transport, health, work and education. If you don't know already, privitisation leads to costly requirments and harder access to necessities. Social benefits are very limited for the poor and unemployed in the United States. The cost of living may be lower then in some European countries and tax might be lower but a responsible person knows that it doesn't make up for social security at the end of the day. A good comparison is a poor person in the north-east of the USA where living standards are supposidly high and a poor person in Scandinavia. A poor young person in Sweden (if you call it poor that is) at birth is guaranteed to go to the best school accesible to him/her if they please, the opportunity to go to the same hospital as the Prime Minister goes to if they live close enough, and access to those luxuries that are common among every young Swede. Those are benefits every low payed working class Swede has access to, such as a part time cleaner. Whereas that the same poor child in New Jersey and you'll have his or her parents working over time and limited time for holidays and social time, the person will attend a very average school and not that which suits the student seeing, scholarships will have to be recieved which is not the norm (they hardly exist in Sweden seeing as most are high standard state-schools), he or she will be in big trouble should a costly operation be needed. At school that person will see unfairness seeing as others have so much that he doesn't. The thing with egalitarianism is that a child that didn't choose to be born to a cleaner will not be that short of a person that was luckily born to a doctor. Now that person's parents most definatly have it better aswell. A safe job due to real trade unionism, very decent housing, they don't have to work as much, and yes a reduction in tax, a place where they can take their children for free while they're working and not worrying about being insured should something happen to them. Now obviously everywhere in western Europe isn't as good as Scandinavia, but everywhere in the US isn't as good as the north-east either. Thats not to say that all Americans have it bad, but the poorer ones most certainly have it very bad.


----------



## DarkLite (Dec 31, 2004)

i agree,Ubo, the reason why USA wont adopt those welfare laws is that many ppl will be very mad if the USA taxes them out


----------



## reluminate (Aug 3, 2004)

Ubo said:


> With the fact that you don't see any slums in the rich western European countries that are remotly comparable to those in the United States. European countries are welfare-states and the United States isn't. If you're poor in Europe, you have many benefits that the United States lacks. It isn't just a mere welfare check but allowances and social security in daily living such as transport, health, work and education. If you don't know already, privitisation leads to costly requirments and harder access to necessities. Social benefits are very limited for the poor and unemployed in the United States. The cost of living may be lower then in some European countries and tax might be lower but a responsible person knows that it doesn't make up for social security at the end of the day. A good comparison is a poor person in the north-east of the USA where living standards are supposidly high and a poor person in Scandinavia. A poor young person in Sweden (if you call it poor that is) at birth is guaranteed to go to the best school accesible to him/her if they please, the opportunity to go to the same hospital as the Prime Minister goes to if they live close enough, and access to those luxuries that are common among every young Swede. Those are benefits every low payed working class Swede has access to, such as a part time cleaner. Whereas that the same poor child in New Jersey and you'll have his or her parents working over time and limited time for holidays and social time, the person will attend a very average school and not that which suits the student seeing, scholarships will have to be recieved which is not the norm (they hardly exist in Sweden seeing as most are high standard state-schools), he or she will be in big trouble should a costly operation be needed. At school that person will see unfairness seeing as others have so much that he doesn't. The thing with egalitarianism is that a child that didn't choose to be born to a cleaner will not be that short of a person that was luckily born to a doctor. Now that person's parents most definatly have it better aswell. A safe job due to real trade unionism, very decent housing, they don't have to work as much, and yes a reduction in tax, a place where they can take their children for free while they're working and not worrying about being insured should something happen to them. Now obviously everywhere in western Europe isn't as good as Scandinavia, but everywhere in the US isn't as good as the north-east either. Thats not to say that all Americans have it bad, but the poorer ones most certainly have it very bad.


You bring up many valid points, but I think you might underestimate the ammount of aid given to the poor. Poor people are eligible for significant financial aid to pay for college, and there are many scholarships available to poorer students. But nothing comes free here. If you're poor, you still have to work hard to get scholarships, certain types of aid, etc. Also, it's sometimes hard to udnerstand our mentality here in America. Call me naive, but I honestly believe that if one works hard enough, he can overcome poverty. I know plenty of people who's parents came to America pennyless, and now live very prospoerous lives. My ancestors came here with nothing, and through hard work, we became prosperous. And that was 100 years ago, when welfare was barely existent. And, by the way, I live in New Jersey, and poverty is a big problem around here (Was that just a guess or are you farmiliar with the state?).

As a side note, there was a large piece in the New York Times today about Social Security. It dealt with alot of the issues brought up here.


----------



## scguy (Sep 11, 2002)

lotrfan55345 said:


> In the "3rd world" cities I have visited (Bangkok, Manila, Jakarta, Mexico City), the general "look and feel" of the area is generally better or comparible with Gary, Indiana.


Are you kidding me? I was in Mexico city as a kid and to some of its' poorest parts. Unless Gary Indiana has MILES and MILES of unpaved dirt roads with hundreds of thousands of SHACKS about to fall over and dirty, nasty dogs shitting in the street...then they are comparable.

Ive seen North Paris too....at least by train, and it was pretty rundown looking but NOTHING like Mexico city.

Some "third world" countries I have been to seem very clean, modern and wealthy, like Costa Rica. I was pleased to find that many of the people of this country live happily in a middle class. 

Areas Ive been to in the USA would be bordertowns in Texas and rural Appalachia, like many have said here before.


----------



## levinas by the store (Nov 28, 2004)

levinas by the store said:


> what's so deceiving about these pictures...i dont understand but one thing is sure im apalled by what i have seen in those pictures,even though some of the picutres being dated....they aint dated that enough to not form a judgement bout american poor.common being the richest and most developed nation in the world how come that happened i mean look at the condition, its real sad,why dont americans have courage enough to accept that yeah there are third world conditions which exist even today,a poor man's maneouvrebility is defined by the context in which he lives,social network he maintains and given the reach of socially deprived in america the condition is real apalling in a country which boasts of world's most billionaires,look at your social security, affirmative action and health benefits,i can cite hundred instances of people who at time when they needed health benefits didnt receive at all,in certain cases people werent able to access health cos of rigid professionalism of medical fraternity which according to them were simply inaccessible,a case study done in mid nineties on income disparity levels between people of upper manhattan and harlem was eye popping with people in certain class of upper manhattan enjoying a salary of $200,000 per annum and certain class of poor enjoying a meagre $5000 per annum in the later,how far the story has changed under present govt's regime.........i read somewhere this year that america has topped even brazil in a survey of income disparity,if that's not enough to apprise of american poor i would like you people to make aware of the INFAMOUS TUSKEGEE EXPERIMENT DONE SELECTIVELY ON SEXUALLY ACTIVE BLACK POPULATION BEFORE SYPHILIS CURE WAS FOUND IN 1920S WHICH NOW FINDS MENTION IN MOST OF THE MEDICAL ETHICS BOOKS,WHAT WAS REALLY AMAZING BOUT THIS WHOLE PHENOMENA WAS THE SILENCE ON THE PART OF GOVT EVEN AFTER 40 YRS OF CURE AS THE PEOPLE WERENT TREATED EVEN AFTER CURE WAS FOUND,WHAT HAPPENED TO THESE POOR BLACK FOLKS AND THEIR FAMILIES STILL RECUPERATING FROM THE EFFECTS OF THAT INFAMOUS TRIAL,THERE ARE SIMILAR OTHER CASES IN THE PAST WHEN GOVT TRIED VARIOUS POPULATIONS SELECTIVELY,THEN HOW ABOUT THE VILOLENCE THAT AFFLICTS MOST OF AMERCIAN CITIES......CONTEXT CHANGES EVERYTHING.


i need people to reply for this post which lot of people seemed to have overlooked


----------



## Mike19 (Feb 5, 2005)

miami is not the poorest, city in the Us anymore, that title was taken away a few years ago and since then Miami has been climbing in the "wealth rankings". Crime is dropping and the economy is booming, the unemployment figures released this week are at 4.2%, lower than the Us average, the price of homes has risen over 14% per year in the last 5 years. the household income has increased at double digit rates as well. Skyscrapers are going up everywhere, illegal immigrations is down to a trickle. Miami is poised to be the secretariat of the FTAA (if the treaty is apporved). In only four years, miami´s bond rate in has increased for a CC- to a AA+A+. Just think about school, thats good. So i think Miami is far from a third world country. Of course there are bad parts, jsut like chicago, ny,la and all large cities. but that doesnt make it third world. And as for the US If Alabama and mississippi are the poorest sates. But third world also means that there is a lack of hope and they are perpetually stuck in tha position. If those ppl from mississippi and alabama moved elsewhere they could be quite affluent. 

Finally about social programs. the EU growth rate is about 1.6% the US is about 3.5% 
EU unemployment is at about 9% US is at under 5%
Of the larger countries in the EU, the ones that spend less on social programs are spain and england, and they are the ones that are growing the fastest.

but i digress. back to Miami (srry but i have to defend my hometown)

here is a ranking of the richest cities in the world. Notice Miami is number 20 out of the largest and richest cities in the world. not very thrd world now is it.
http://www.citymayors.com/economics/richest_cities.html


----------



## reluminate (Aug 3, 2004)

levinas by the store said:


> i need people to reply for this post which lot of people seemed to have overlooked


Maybe if it made some sort of sense people might reply to it...


----------



## eklips (Mar 29, 2005)

Mike19 said:


> miami is not the poorest, city in the Us anymore, that title was taken away a few years ago and since then Miami has been climbing in the "wealth rankings". Crime is dropping and the economy is booming, the unemployment figures released this week are at 4.2%, lower than the Us average, the price of homes has risen over 14% per year in the last 5 years. the household income has increased at double digit rates as well. Skyscrapers are going up everywhere, illegal immigrations is down to a trickle. Miami is poised to be the secretariat of the FTAA (if the treaty is apporved). In only four years, miami´s bond rate in has increased for a CC- to a AA+A+. Just think about school, thats good. So i think Miami is far from a third world country. Of course there are bad parts, jsut like chicago, ny,la and all large cities. but that doesnt make it third world. And as for the US If Alabama and mississippi are the poorest sates. But third world also means that there is a lack of hope and they are perpetually stuck in tha position. If those ppl from mississippi and alabama moved elsewhere they could be quite affluent.
> 
> Finally about social programs. the EU growth rate is about 1.6% the US is about 3.5%
> EU unemployment is at about 9% US is at under 5%
> ...



Once again, growth and unemployment rate should be seen in their context, an unemployed in a welfare state will have a much better life then in a free-market one, and a the poorest of workers in a welfare state, with minimum wages and work-time, have things much easier then in a free-market one, everybody heard about the "working poors" in those countries.
So unemployment should not be the only thing to look at.


No concerning growth, growth just means more "things" where produced or done then in the previous year, it can mean weapon building, or cigarettes, which have also negative aspects, and a country can experience economic growth without seing it's poverty decrease (an we are heading straight into an ecological catastrophy if we don't start thinking otherwise and if we don't stop with this growth madness).


----------



## levinas by the store (Nov 28, 2004)

asohn said:


> Maybe if it made some sort of sense people might reply to it...


why dont u better clarify where it didnt make sense or you have rather made up your mind to not make sense!


----------



## VansTripp (Sep 29, 2004)

Mike19 said:


> miami is not the poorest, city in the Us anymore, that title was taken away a few years ago and since then Miami has been climbing in the "wealth rankings". Crime is dropping and the economy is booming, the unemployment figures released this week are at 4.2%, lower than the Us average, the price of homes has risen over 14% per year in the last 5 years. the household income has increased at double digit rates as well. Skyscrapers are going up everywhere, illegal immigrations is down to a trickle. Miami is poised to be the secretariat of the FTAA (if the treaty is apporved). In only four years, miami´s bond rate in has increased for a CC- to a AA+A+. Just think about school, thats good. So i think Miami is far from a third world country. Of course there are bad parts, jsut like chicago, ny,la and all large cities. but that doesnt make it third world. And as for the US If Alabama and mississippi are the poorest sates. But third world also means that there is a lack of hope and they are perpetually stuck in tha position. If those ppl from mississippi and alabama moved elsewhere they could be quite affluent.
> 
> Finally about social programs. the EU growth rate is about 1.6% the US is about 3.5%
> EU unemployment is at about 9% US is at under 5%
> ...


You just prove with wrong inform but Miami is most poorest on nation in it's city proper, not in Miami-Dade County.

Honestly, I'm shocked that inform had gave on Miami about most poorest ciy on nation (USA).


----------



## Mike19 (Feb 5, 2005)

No, the CITY OF MIAMI


----------



## Mike19 (Feb 5, 2005)

Blink182 said:


> You just prove with wrong inform but Miami is most poorest on nation in it's city proper, not in Miami-Dade County.
> 
> Honestly, I'm shocked that inform had gave on Miami about most poorest ciy on nation (USA).



No, the CITY OF MIAMI is no longer the poorest city in the nation. i didnt mean the metro area, i meant the city, it is no longer the poorest.

READ THIS: http://msnbc.msn.com/id/6080044/

VIRTUAL, i didnt just look at one thing, i looked at a few, unemployment rate is a huge factor in measuring the economic strength of the city. Also, the wage rate of grotwth in wages, and in household value. If i had looked at one thing then u would be right, howeer i noted several factors that you failed to examine,they show the growth in importance and strength of the economy in miami.The high-tech industry here is booming, turism levels are at an all time high, most of the job growth is in the service sector.Wut you say is true in theory but it doesnt apply to the changes taking place in miami.


----------



## VansTripp (Sep 29, 2004)

Mike19 said:


> No, the CITY OF MIAMI is no longer the poorest city in the nation. i didnt mean the metro area, i meant the city, it is no longer the poorest.
> 
> READ THIS: http://msnbc.msn.com/id/6080044/
> 
> VIRTUAL, i didnt just look at one thing, i looked at a few, unemployment rate is a huge factor in measuring the economic strength of the city. Also, the wage rate of grotwth in wages, and in household value. If i had looked at one thing then u would be right, howeer i noted several factors that you failed to examine,they show the growth in importance and strength of the economy in miami.The high-tech industry here is booming, turism levels are at an all time high, most of the job growth is in the service sector.Wut you say is true in theory but it doesnt apply to the changes taking place in miami.


Wow. Cleveland is most poorest on nation. :runaway: 

Thanks for information clearly. kay:


----------



## Mike19 (Feb 5, 2005)

no prob


----------



## Detroit_Mahn (May 3, 2005)

First-World, Second-World and Third-World have a lot more to do with the state of a country, its economy, etc. than the way it looks. 

Besides many of the small towns in the Appalachians; and, maybe a few border towns down south. The US doesn't really have what you'd call "Third-World". A ghetto isn't third-world. All you have to do is look in a National Geographic or do some Google searching to see the intensity of poverty and misfortune of actual Third-World countries, some of it is, frankly, incomparible.


----------



## scguy (Sep 11, 2002)

Thank you Detroit Mahn^^^
Seems like everyone takes for granted what they have...hell, even if you are living in the projects in Gary or a trailer park in Hooterville West Virginia...you still have it much better than Most of the 3rd world.


----------



## Beacon (Mar 14, 2005)

Mike19 said:


> here is a ranking of the richest cities in the world. Notice Miami is number 20 out of the largest and richest cities in the world. not very thrd world now is it.
> http://www.citymayors.com/economics/richest_cities.html


That's a strange and selective list. Apparently, my hometown does not even make the list, and has lower take home wages than Lagos and Bratislava, which I find very hard to believe. These lists are always incomplete and innaccurate.


----------



## reluminate (Aug 3, 2004)

scguy said:


> Thank you Detroit Mahn^^^
> Seems like everyone takes for granted what they have...hell, even if you are living in the projects in Gary or a trailer park in Hooterville West Virginia...you still have it much better than Most of the 3rd world.


Thats what I've been trying to say all along....


----------



## Sexas (Jan 15, 2004)

^ Thank you god!! Finally some smart people in the room, that's why I try to say, we American don't have third world area, we have clean running water, power, foods and onE of the best money system. We have roads, bus, airport, and car for sale. We have policemen, firemen and school, we have freedom and law. People just take things for granted... and people just don't understand some country in Africa look like: No clean water, no foods, no freedom, no jobs, no protection from police or fireman, no school... DO WE HAVE ANY AREA IN US LOOK LIKE THAT???


----------



## afastest (Jul 3, 2005)

DrJekyll said:


> *Of course, these images don´t prove anything. I know we can find pics like this from any country in the world*
> 
> 
> 
> ...


No, there are few countries where you can't find pictures like this from.


----------



## Guest (Jul 4, 2005)

I've never seen anything like that anywhere in the UK.


----------



## Jonesy55 (Jul 30, 2004)

The Mississippi delta was the poorest place I saw in the US, houses little better than shacks, people hanging around seemingly with nothing to do dressed in tatty clothes, very unhealthy looking, no services, no public transport etc.



Washington Post said:


> Poverty Tightens Grip On Mississippi Delta
> Number of Young Rural Poor Rises, Study Says
> 
> By Robert E. Pierre
> ...


----------



## 12231989 (Jun 29, 2005)

There is some pretty ghetto looking neiborhoods around central phoenix
On the news they said that there are 12,000 homeless people


----------



## 12231989 (Jun 29, 2005)

those people in Mississippi could just move


----------



## Tubeman (Sep 12, 2002)

I stayed in a Native American town called Kayenta in (I think) Arizona, that seemed pretty Third World to me.


----------

