I did say that I used to work at a homeless shelter. So, I have seen homelessness up close on a daily basis.

Also, I used to live in slum areas in the central USA.

Yet, the existence of poverty is not being questioned. Its causes are.

I dont know by whom,,,there are plenty of causes, I dont see how any of them can be argued to not exist or not contribute,,,,

I too, volunteered to work on the streets for a mobile kitchen, and I have to agree that many were there because of drug and alcohol dependence. I wouldn't say it was universal, but it was the reason the majority were on the streets in my city. Others suffered mental and physical disabilities, but many of these individuals were prone to the same dependencies as well. Australia has excellent networks in place to deal with poverty and homelessness, and yet, many still find themselves on the street, and I can't help but wonder if drug & alcohol abuse is the primary factor.

I am citing the situation in my city and in my country, not the USA where many have been left homeless and unemployed since '08.

is that all? Shucks id gladly welcome more internet negativity than the realities.

there is clearly no 'one' problem or cause

but I think its easier to hone in on the scapegoat and be done than to truly dig and seek out answers,,,,,

Agreed, and it is easy to adopt a parochial view limited by one's experience, but although it can be considered anecdotal, in this case it shouldn't be dismissed either. Those working on the 'Coal-Face' often state that substance abuse is a widespread problem when dealing with first-world poverty.

I agree. I have also worked alongside and with impoverished, and my experience has not been that of widespread abuse but of unforeseen circumstances

probably different for many 'homeless' , but in america we have plenty of 'working poor' who are at least fortunate enough to have some shelter

albeit the shelter is often in deplorable conditions and unsafe environments and usually provided only for those with small children

we also have alot of poor who did the right things , and worked hard, but didnt have the connections or resources to spring back from unpredictable circumstances like a dead beat or abandoning partner, or a death, or a job loss,,,etc....

Those circumstances, although they exist here, aren't as widespread as the substance abuse, but we have many support services for the poor and those suffering abuse from spouses/parents. In some cases, individuals are on the street purely out of ignorance of the services available. But then, I'm sure many in your country would view some of our welfare and support systems as Socialist. Be that as it may, we enjoy a high standard of living and a basic wage concomitant with the cost of living.

ID take that form of 'socialism' over the free market screw the have nots system we have anyday,,,,

just my opinion,,,lol

Me too, just quietly.

Many cite the fact that the 'tipping' system for wage supplementation doesn't exist here and our basic hourly rate is much higher than the US as a result. However, that is a subjective analysis.

I am referring to what I have seen and personally dealt with in the USA. It isn't politically-correct to say that plenty of people live in poverty as a result of their own self-defeating behavior, but that is a part of reality.

Of course children living in poverty are not responsible for their living conditions.

Also, a person can become trapped in poverty as the result of the loss of work due to a medical problem.

If a woman is a stay-at-home mom, then she can end up in poverty because the man she depends on no longer provides for her.

there are many reasons, some personal that can only be dealt with personally

and some personal which are PROPOGATED by policy and made worse,,,

Are you saying that you dislike the free market because it doesn't provide equal results?

What policy?
Please give evidence of a policy that propagated a person's poverty.

Im saying I dont like the free market because it doesnt mix well with the egocentric CULTURE


and so , the bottom line is having a bigger overall pie, with no care whatsoever of how that pie is divided,, which becomes more and more disparate,,,,while those at the bottom continue to work just as hard and harder with little reward and those at the top continue to grow more and more wealth

What's troubling America? When you compare her to the rest of the world, not much...

So, when people earn wealth by investing their own money and sweat in growing their own businesses, complete with taking the risk of failing, somehow those people don't deserve what they earn?

Besides, plenty of people now at the top started at the bottom. They worked extra hours and delay gratification of fleshly desires in order to obtain financial success. Now that they are enjoying the fruits of their labor, they are vilified by others with wealth envy.

another claim I havent made

what people 'deserve' is a sensitive and subjective issue that I have no real interest in debating

but what WORKING people have been doing in AMerica, has been being productive in ways that benefit OTHERS as well as themself,,

whether they are working poor
the working middle class
or the wealthy

whether its because they invest or because they put in the sweat and hours to purchase the products or earn the profits for the owners and ceos

its a COLLECTIVE of people working and being productive, and its not a collective of people getting what they 'deserve' UNLESS those people are already wealthy or within the loop of wealth

that pie grows, but those who always got the biggest pieces get bigger pieces, whether they work harder or not

and those who made the pies or got smaller pieces cant seem to get a bigger piece even when they work as hard or HARDER,,,,

another claim I havent made

what people 'deserve' is a sensitive and subjective issue that I have no real interest in debating

but what WORKING people have been doing in AMerica, has been being productive in ways that benefit OTHERS as well as themself,,

whether they are working poor
the working middle class
or the wealthy

whether its because they invest or because they put in the sweat and hours to purchase the products or earn the profits for the owners and ceos

its a COLLECTIVE of people working and being productive, and its not a collective of people getting what they 'deserve' UNLESS those people are already wealthy or within the loop of wealth

that pie grows, but those who always got the biggest pieces get bigger pieces, whether they work harder or not

and those who made the pies or got smaller pieces cant seem to get a bigger piece even when they work as hard or HARDER,,,,

so as the pie grows, it makes no sense for the top to be growing so much more consistently than the bottom when there is no evidence that there is a significant increase in how much either has 'worked' or therefore 'deserves'

Being that the USA is a nation of states, I like to examine issues as they exist state by state.

For example, according to the most recent data provided by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, the states with an unemployment rate greater than 10% are Nevada (11.6%), Rhode Island (10.9%) and California (10.7%). In contrast, the three states with the lowest unemployment rates are North Dakota (2.9%), Nebraska (3.8%) and South Dakota (4.3%).

Why do the first 3 states have such high unemployment rates while the second 3 have such low unemployment rates?