That you think fast food is much different from no food or that the buses the impoverished here ride are "safe" (or always air conditioned, for that matter) leads me to believe you haven't experienced poverty in America.

I have. It really tweaks me when people compare poverty in America favorably to poverty elsewhere.

Why do you think one needs to experience poverty to make accurate claims about it?

Like it or not, the statistics show that poor Americans don't work very much, they are well fed, and they have living conditions that are not drastically different from the rich and are much better than most of the world.

Feel free to try and prove me wrong. But I'm willing to gamble that all you've got is anecdotes, no stats.

Why do you think I think that? You haven't offered an argument to "prove wrong." You've offered assertions and antagonism. If your intent is to invite discussion, it isn't a very good attempt.

>> the statistics show that poor Americans don't work very much, they are well fed, and they have living conditions that are not drastically different from the rich

> You haven't offered an argument to "prove wrong."

Prove the assertion wrong then. You're the one who atagonised originally:

> leads me to believe you haven't experienced poverty in America

feel free to links some of those statistics.

I've done so many times. Here's a good summary.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12381938#12382336

And every time you're refuted as presenting an overly simplistic view, mistaking correlation for causation, and a having a host of other categorical and logical errors.

What you do when you link like that is make a "shotgun bullet-point argument:" you're presenting a set of loose, possibly related facts as though they're all mutually reinforcing studies leading to the same conclusions. There's no "there" there.

> That you think fast food is much different from no food

?