[neveroffensive]

No, it's a massive statement, and I think you're being intellectually dishonest to assert it's not. The counterargument is also a huge statement, none of us are saying it's not.

The only reason the counterargument is slightly more palatable is because it conforms to Occam's Razor.

> because they consciously and continuously choose to be poor is ridiculous on its face

This is a blatant straw man. We are saying they don't make wise choices for a myriad of reasons, not that they intentionally choose to be poor.

Edit:

If you make bad choices in life the end result will be poverty. That doesn't mean you chose poverty consciously.

[Zungaron]

You can make bad choices and still end up rich. That's the entire premise behind the lottery.

You can also make good choices and end up poor. A great example of this is anyone who got a law degree before the recession.

[djtriptych]

Sure. All of us here would have made the correct hundred thousand or so choices and avoided the enormous number of traps and inherent dangers of poverty.

We would have gone from poor five year olds to wealthy 30 year olds by force of will.

We would have had the energy and resources and parental support to source our food, health, shelter, and education for our first 18 years because we make such great decisions.

Or: we believe we _are_ good because we _have_ it good.

Tell me again about Occam?

[linkmotif]

> This is a blatant straw man.

Totally. And then dismissing something as "ridiculous on its face" without following up as to why? :(

[djtriptych]

No one wishes poverty on themselves.