Americans Life Expectancy

[Steve9347]

I just bought a Super Big Gulp of Diet Coke. See? I can make dumb decisions, too! However, it's all about moderation, and that's the lone badness I will enjoy today.

[iamshack]

I dunno, usually someone who's talking about lazy, irresponsible poors who should think before knocking up a bunch of women if they can't find the time to be healthy now didn't come from poverty. That doesn't mean you've never faced your own problems, just that you might not know what it's like to face the struggles of poverty.

 

 

 

Sharing what it was like for your grandfather or someone who isn't you to grow up in poverty can tell in interesting story, but that doesn't mean that you, personally, know what it's like to live in poverty in 2013 or any other time.

 

Things are different than they used to be and the inequality gap is growing, not shrinking. But I think you've highlighted another aspect of privilege--coming from a successful family. If you come from a well-to-do family full of entrepeneurs, it's going to be a hell of a lot easier for you to figure out how to start your own business right? Still going to be challenging, but you're going to start from a much better place than the kid who's entire neighborhood is blue-collar factory workers who are steadily losing their jobs to overseas plants. So how fair is it for you to judge that person for not reaching the same heights you did? What right do you have to judge them at all?

I'm not sure where you're getting this notion that I am saying everyone in poverty is there for the same reason. And that reason is because they are lazy and ignorant. I've never written that, not in this thread or any other. What I have tried to point out is that I don't believe that access to quality nutrition is the problem here. I've tried to point out that understanding what is healthy and what isn't healthy doesn't require a particularly high threshold schooling or other "privilege." What it does require is a desire to look out into the future a bit and realize that you would like to be on this earth for a while, and make the effort and be disciplined enough to make that a priority in your life. Perhaps those in poverty just don't have much incentive to do that.

 

That certainly doesn't mean that I believe I have the same perspective as a 15-year old single mother, or a child born into drug addiction, but it certainly doesn't take away the fact that I am also of the human species, with a brain, with a body, with instincts evolved over millions of years, either. I don't believe anyone here has seriously claimed that those in poverty don't have a different perspective than those of us with internet access on a Thursday afternoon. However, sharing common sense and rational thought about the subject is not suddenly made irrelevant by differences in perspective.

 

 

[Steve9347]

I don't get why there is such a disconnect in here. Everyone immediately goes to poverty and how poor people can't afford to eat healthy. Again, that's a completely incorrect statement. That's all I've been saying. Grabbing fast food is a cop out.

[StrangeSox]

As I said, it's not. But based on the discussion you were using that as an example to show that people just don't have any choice in the matter, when the real choice is not having ANY soda at all. People aren't FORCED to buy a bigger soda. Otherwise I agree with your statement.

 

Except that, again, I have said, very explicitly, the exact opposite thing many times throughout this thread. You've created this strawman entirely on your own and can't let it go.

 

I said that choices are constrained by what's available. I used the sizes of sodas offered at fast food restaurants over time as an easy example because this was about food at one point. You can apply this to virtually anything; I can't choose something that I can't buy. If no grocery store around me carries a certain product, I'm pretty much SOL. I'm forced to choose from a smaller or different set of options. That's it. That's all I said. Yet for some reason this basic description of "things available for purchase" is too absurd of a concept and keeps getting straw-manned into "liberals think no one is responsible for anything! you're forced to buy 128oz sodas!"

[StrangeSox]

Those arent really true statements.

 

If they sell 64 oz cokes, I can drink every 1 oz, I can drink 64 oz, so I can drink 7 oz if I want to.

 

If they sell 7 oz cokes and I want to drink 64 oz, I can buy 10 7 oz cokes.

 

Just because I bought 12 donuts, doesnt mean I have to eat 12 donuts as soon as I get home.

 

So change it to "purchase" and the point stands. Or change it from size to a particular product offered. I can't choose to by a McRib because McDonalds isn't selling it right now. My choices are constrained, I do not have complete and total agency to choose whichever item in the world I desire.

 

But as far as portions go, there's a psychological effect at play. Even if you'd have been perfectly satisfied with a 12oz drink, you're pretty damn likely to drink all 20oz if that's the standard size. It's just our physiology.

[Soxbadger]

I said that choices are constrained by what's available. I used the sizes of sodas offered at fast food restaurants over time as an easy example because this was about food at one point. You can apply this to virtually anything; I can't choose something that I can't buy. If no grocery store around me carries a certain product, I'm pretty much SOL. I'm forced to choose from a smaller or different set of options.

 

And I think what people are arguing is that most people in the US have as good or better access to things like grocery stores etc, and probably have as much or more ability to choose different cheap products.

 

Which is why this makes no sense arguing about the US life expectancy rate. The US life expectancy rate is lower due to many reasons, but Im pretty sure "not having easy access to food" is not one of them.

[StrangeSox]

I don't get why there is such a disconnect in here. Everyone immediately goes to poverty and how poor people can't afford to eat healthy. Again, that's a completely incorrect statement. That's all I've been saying. Grabbing fast food is a cop out.

 

Poverty can make it difficult to be healthy for multiple reasons, but you're right that this discussion isn't necessarily about poverty.

[iamshack]

Why Can’t More Poor People Escape Poverty? A radical new explanation from psychologists.

 

snippet:

So Sqwert, should there be no responsibility whatsoever? Should we not use rational or sympathetic thought in trying to determine some of the causes of this? Are white or affluent people not allowed to try and help determine an appropriate solution because they lack perspective?

 

 

[StrangeSox]

Which is why this makes no sense arguing about the US life expectancy rate. The US life expectancy rate is lower due to many reasons, but Im pretty sure "not having easy access to food" is not one of them.

I agreed with this back on page 2!

 

but this is the internet, when do things ever stay on topic past the first page?

[Soxbadger]

So change it to "purchase" and the point stands. Or change it from size to a particular product offered. I can't choose to by a McRib because McDonalds isn't selling it right now. My choices are constrained, I do not have complete and total agency to choose whichever item in the world I desire.

 

But as far as portions go, there's a psychological effect at play. Even if you'd have been perfectly satisfied with a 12oz drink, you're pretty damn likely to drink all 20oz if that's the standard size. It's just our physiology.

 

All of these arguments so are irrelevant that I dont even know where to begin. You arent even arguing ease of access in the US versus different countries, you are arguing US v US, for some unknown reason. Secondly, its our physiology? What type of cop out is that. Its like saying if I get paid $100, Ill immediately spend it, so I should only get $20 because I cant control myself.

 

What type of backwards logic is that. If you do not have the self control to stop eating, drinking or doing anything, than it is not going to matter what rules we make, you will simply find another way to lose control. At some point people need to be the ones who say "Im not hungry anymore, Im going to throw this away."

[StrangeSox]

So Sqwert, should there be no responsibility whatsoever? Should we not use rational or sympathetic thought in trying to determine some of the causes of this? Are white or affluent people not allowed to try and help determine an appropriate solution because they lack perspective?

At least cross-culturally, imposing outside solutions typically is doomed to failure. It's imperialist, and if you don't actually understand what you're trying to change, you're probably going to be ineffective at worst if not outright damaging.

[iamshack]

At least cross-culturally, imposing outside solutions typically is doomed to failure. It's imperialist, and if you don't actually understand what you're trying to change, you're probably going to be ineffective at worst if not outright damaging.

Again, this is not imperialism or imposing the British monarch's desires on the people of India.

 

I mean, come on...at some point you put the stakeholders in a room and try to help alleviate a problem. We are all stakeholders...no one is saying exclude those in poverty from the discussion.

 

Would it be better if we all talked about how terrible it would be for those not in poverty to try and help rectify the situation than to actually attempt to do something about it? This just gets ridiculous after a point...

 

 

 

 

[StrangeSox]

All of these arguments so are irrelevant that I dont even know where to begin. You arent even arguing ease of access in the US versus different countries, you are arguing US v US, for some unknown reason. Secondly, its our physiology? What type of cop out is that. Its like saying if I get paid $100, Ill immediately spend it, so I should only get $20 because I cant control myself.

 

This is actually a problem with escaping poverty that I've read about. You're so used to money coming into one hand and being handed over with the other that any extra money is quickly spent because you know it's going to be gone soon regardless. Even when someone's moved up into a middle-class life, they still have these tendencies. It's something they grew up with and learned and it's hard to un-learn what you did when you were young whatever your background is.

 

If you're talking about our food culture and weight gain, it seems silly not to regard increased portion sizes and to regard what our brains want to do regardless of conscious thought. If you're served a 12oz steak instead of a 10oz steak, you're probably going to eat all 12oz. Or, at least, you'll have to make a conscious choice to stop eating, to overpower your unconscious desire to finish what's there because for generations we didn't know when the next meal would come. So you've got to overpower a natural tendency there. If you got the 10oz, you finish your plate and you're not any more hungry than if you had eaten the 12oz. It's not a "cop-out" to understand and recognize these factors. It's not making excuses because I really don't see it as a moral issue that needs to be excused. If, on the whole, portion sizes have been increasing, it only makes sense to look at that impact. Those portion sizes aren't increasing on their own in some organic, uncontrollable process but through a collection of decisions society/companies/individuals make.

 

What type of backwards logic is that. If you do not have the self control to stop eating, drinking or doing anything, than it is not going to matter what rules we make, you will simply find another way to lose control. At some point people need to be the ones who say "Im not hungry anymore, Im going to throw this away."

 

You need to consciously overrule your natural desire to stop eating what's on your plate (up to a point, obviously you can eat to the point where your subconscious says "this is enough.")

[Soxbadger]

I cant speak for generations, I can only speak with anecdotes about my life.

 

When I was a kid we didnt throw food away "There are children starving in Africa" or "Waste not want not." When my dad was a child he didnt throw food away "There are starving children in Europe." Yet somehow we are both able to exert some semblance of self control.

 

Whether that is ordering sensibly (do I really need a bowl of chili as a side for a 1/2 lb burger) or it is not eating all of the food in front of you (should I save this half of my food for later because its unnecessary for me to eat more.)

 

I do not think that I am some sort of special human that has the ability to make decisions that normal people cant make. In fact I believe that I am just like other people in that I too make stupid decisions that are costly, may harm me physically, may cost me money.

 

And that is ultimately the point. As long as we allow people to make choices, they are going to make bad ones. It doesnt matter the size of the drink or the fries, what matters is the mentality of the person.

 

I truly believe that those who think that change is possible, can do it. And those who think that it is impossible or that there are some barriers, cant do it. This isnt about money either. There are plenty of people with more money than they can spend in a lifetime who cant change, because they dont believe they can.

Edited January 10, 2013 by Soxbadger

[StrangeSox]

Again, this is not imperialism or imposing the British monarch's desires on the people of India.

 

I mean, come on...at some point you put the stakeholders in a room and try to help alleviate a problem. We are all stakeholders...no one is saying exclude those in poverty from the discussion.

 

Would it be better if we all talked about how terrible it would be for those not in poverty to try and help rectify the situation than to actually attempt to do something about it? This just gets ridiculous after a point...

 

"Cultural imperialism" doesn't mean actual state-sponsored imperialism and colonization, it means imposing your culture onto someone else's. It's a broad issue and I understand it a little better in regards to cross-country issues.

 

I'd love to do something to help with the violence in Chicago. It's a tragedy. But if I was some wealthy guy and set up a foundation to implement a bunch of policies I'd thought would be great, it'd probably fail spectacularly. Because I don't know the people or the culture, the scope of the problems, how people interact and the connections that are formed, etc. That doesn't mean I could never learn, but I'd need a PhD in sociology before I'd be comfortable saying that I have solutions. And even then, I'd never have the lived experiences that the people actually in the community have. They'll always have a hell of a lot more knowledge and credibility than I would. So what could I do? I can find some organizations run in that way, from the bottom-up and from people actually in the community, and donate my time or money.

 

People tend to resent outsiders coming in, telling them why they're failing/immoral/bad, and telling them that they know how to fix it. It actually can be a problem with liberalism, though not in the way ss2k5 tried to paint it, and it's why I wouldn't necessarily self-identify as a liberal.

[StrangeSox]

If we want an example of the huge, gigantic influence that culture can have on our actions, look no further than what we did during WWII. People scrimped and saved and rationed as much as they could. They collected huge amounts of junk metal for recycling, linens, etc. Ultimately, yes, it's a bunch of individuals making some sort of a choice, but what choices you can make (forced rationing, limited supplies) and what choices you ultimately want to make are going to be influenced by what you see around you (everyone support the war!)

 

This doesn't mean nobody's responsible for anything. It only means that judging for not making the same choices you made without recognizing what influenced and enabled you to make your choices and what influenced and enabled them to make their choices is unhelpful and ignorant at best.

[Soxbadger]

I dont judge anyone. If my best friend wants to drink 12 Mt Dew a day and eat out for every meal, that is on him. Ill do the right thing and show him the South Park episode where Mt Dew rips apart Cartman, but that is it.

 

[iamshack]

"Cultural imperialism" doesn't mean actual state-sponsored imperialism and colonization, it means imposing your culture onto someone else's. It's a broad issue and I understand it a little better in regards to cross-country issues.

 

I'd love to do something to help with the violence in Chicago. It's a tragedy. But if I was some wealthy guy and set up a foundation to implement a bunch of policies I'd thought would be great, it'd probably fail spectacularly. Because I don't know the people or the culture, the scope of the problems, how people interact and the connections that are formed, etc. That doesn't mean I could never learn, but I'd need a PhD in sociology before I'd be comfortable saying that I have solutions. And even then, I'd never have the lived experiences that the people actually in the community have. They'll always have a hell of a lot more knowledge and credibility than I would. So what could I do? I can find some organizations run in that way, from the bottom-up and from people actually in the community, and donate my time or money.

 

People tend to resent outsiders coming in, telling them why they're failing/immoral/bad, and telling them that they know how to fix it. It actually can be a problem with liberalism, though not in the way ss2k5 tried to paint it, and it's why I wouldn't necessarily self-identify as a liberal.

Some solutions do not require a PhD.

 

Honestly, I give up...you are just so afraid of offending anyone that has been disadvantaged in any way that you would rather sit by idly...

 

And teaching someone about the benefits of certain eating habits is not imperialism...it is human.

[Soxbadger]

Alleged benefits of eating healthy.

 

If were going to be imperialists, lets do it right this time. Question everything, trust no one!

[StrangeSox]

You don't need to sit idly by, but I think you'd need to understand that "hey, maybe that suburban white dude who cares about violence in Chicago but hasn't lived it and isn't really impacted by it doesn't really know enough to address it!" It's more about empowering those within trying to make change than trying to impose what you think is the best solution from the outside, because that's routinely not going to work.

 

This got broader than health/eating a long time ago, so there's no need to keep going back to that one specific topic as if that's the only thing I'm talking about here. You specifically responded to BS's post about poverty in general. In regards to poverty, I'd say that no, having a bunch of affluent white people who never lived in poverty telling people in poverty how to get out is not going to help anything.

[iamshack]

You don't need to sit idly by, but I think you'd need to understand that "hey, maybe that suburban white dude who cares about violence in Chicago but hasn't lived it and isn't really impacted by it doesn't really know enough to address it!" It's more about empowering those within trying to make change than trying to impose what you think is the best solution from the outside, because that's routinely not going to work.

 

This got broader than health/eating a long time ago, so there's no need to keep going back to that one specific topic as if that's the only thing I'm talking about here. You specifically responded to BS's post about poverty in general. In regards to poverty, I'd say that no, having a bunch of affluent white people who never lived in poverty telling people in poverty how to get out is not going to help anything.

When did we tell those in poverty how to get out?

 

What you are suggesting is that our thoughts/observations are worthless because we have a different perspective.

 

I don't believe that for a minute.

 

 

 

 

[StrangeSox]

You're right, you didn't. You said "try and help." There's nothing wrong with that. I pointed out that it's important to remember that, if you're coming from outside of a problem, you should remain conscious and aware of that. Too often well-intentioned programs or foundations fail to achieve what they're trying to do because they try to impose an external solution with little or not cooperation and partnership, assuming that they know the correct and superior way.

 

edit: I mean, really, how much is some white suburban kid who was actually brought to tears by The Interrupters really going to know about the problems and root causes of the violence in Chicago? How much are people from that community going to listen to someone outside coming in and telling them how they're doing everything wrong? It doesn't lead to product developments 999/1000.

Edited January 10, 2013 by StrangeSox

[iamshack]

You're right, you didn't. You said "try and help." There's nothing wrong with that. I pointed out that it's important to remember that, if you're coming from outside of a problem, you should remain conscious and aware of that. Too often well-intentioned programs or foundations fail to achieve what they're trying to do because they try to impose an external solution with little or not cooperation and partnership, assuming that they know the correct and superior way.

Look, I agree with you...I am not going to charge into a poor area and start yelling at its inhabitants to stop eating that junkfood and start eating raspberry smoothies. I get that.

 

You'd certainly want to talk with the people living there and hear their realities and their problems and the like...but I don't think you have to get a PhD in sociology or be in poverty yourself before you might come up with some useful ideas.

[StrangeSox]

The PhD in sociology was an slight exaggeration to illustrate that you should do an awful lot of work trying to understand a problem if it's not in your community and your background before you presume to start telling them how to solve their problems.

[BigSqwert]

A whole thread on healthy eating and no discussion on the subsidies given to the crappiest food out there? It's no wonder unhealthy food is cheap.