[bilalnpe]

I don't have an issue with using the term poor to describe people lacking money but it has other definitions and uses.

The second and third definitions I get from define:poor on Google are:

- worse than is usual, expected, or desirable; of a low or inferior standard or quality.

- (of a person) considered to be deserving of pity or sympathy.

I suspect these might be why the term is discouraged.

[usrbinbash]

So what? Natural language is complicated, because a) It does something very complicated, and b) it is the result of a complex process.

Yes, many words have more than one meaning. That's one of the many reasons why we need formal, context-free, specialized languages to communicate our will to machines effectively.

But humans are not machines. We can do context, and we can use words that mean more than one thing. We can also deal with misunderstandings much better than an automaton.

And this newspeak even fails at the goal of providing an unambiguous: Unless context is provided, a person who makes 6 figures a year is "financially disadvantaged" when compared to a billionaire. But noone would mistake someone earning 6 figures with someone who is poor.

[ThunderSizzle]

Are you seriously asserting when people say "poor people", they do so in a non-poverty manner and use it instead to describe people as inferior?

Also, people in poverty should be deserving of sympathy and charity. Is that now suddenly offensive that people should want to help others that are less fortunate than themselves? If you are in a position where you need help, part of your responsibility is to humble yourself and let people help you (while not eradicating you're personal responsibility either). Someday you may be the one to give charity, and it's also just as insulting and disheartening when your charity is rejected out of pride.

[schroeding]

In German the word for poor ("arm"), while there is some connection to pity like in English (one can be "arm dran", "poorly off"), can't be used to describe bad / undesirable quality.

It was still replaced with "sozial schwach" (literally "socially weak", but actually means financially weak, people who don't have much money) in many contexts, especially by politicians and journalists.

(Thankfully, there is a push against "sozial schwach", to use "arm" again - it's a horrible phrase)

[noah_buddy]

In ten years, the shoes become economically disadvantaged too