In other words (pictures):
2. I would define wealth by splitting them into three different categories: material wealth, human wealth, and intellectual wealth. Material wealth basically means having financial stability and being able to buy/ invest in whatever you desire (name-brand clothing, cars, houses, stocks/bonds, etc.). Also, having enough to help others regarding finances whenever they need it. Human wealth means having healthy relationships (platonic and otherwise), having great physical health, possessing admirable character, ascribing to a faith of some sort, and possessing virtue, values, morals, and ethics. Lastly, intellectual wealth means having a good education, wisdom, intelligence, special skills, and unique ideas. A person who possesses a healthy balance between all three of these types of wealth is a most wealthy person in my personal opinion.
3. Most Americans greatly value wealth in different forms. The most common wealth to value is financial wealth because it contributes the most to the outward appearance by which we are judged by strangers. If you look like you have a lot of money, most people will assume that you are living well, no matter what the real truth is. Furthermore, we equate intelligence to a solid education which is also connected to wealth in the American mind. Consequently, a lack of intelligence usually means a lack of education which usually means a lack of financial stability (unless you're an entertainer of some sort in which case you can pay people to be intelligent for you). Considering this, Americans define poverty as a lack of education because it leads to a lack of financial stability because it's nearly impossible to get a decent-paying job without an education (unless, again, you have special abilities to entertain) which means no house, no car, etc. We as a society treat those who live in poverty three different ways. There are those who feel bad for them and will give them money or food when they are standing on the side of the street. Then there are those who blame them for all of America's problems and think that they are useless part of society. Finally, there are those who dedicate their time to helping people out of poverty by contributing to organizations, helping people get jobs, etc.
4. Personally, I think that the majority of Americans have the wrong idea about wealth. It is a common (mis)conception that happiness and material/monetary wealth go hand-in-hand. In other words, people believe that it is impossible to be truly happy until you're able to live in a nice house, drive a luxury vehicle, and wear name-brand clothing. However, I think true happiness comes from whatever fulfills an individual; it is up to personal interpretation. For example, my brother desires to live in a gigantic mansion and a have a 7-car garage full of luxury vehicles. However, my mom has said that she would be satisfied with just living comfortably where she doesn't have to worry about paying bills every month and she can take a vacation out of the country whenever she wants. She doesn't necessarily have to possess the extravagant and flashy version of everything she owns. These are two different definitions of wealth, yet, they would both make their respective people happy because it's what they personally desire.
In another respect, I would say that poverty is defined by an extreme lack in personal desires. Simple as that.
Ps. I'm really sorry if this post is all over the place. I'm extremely sleep-deprived lol.






I really like the idea of splitting wealth apart. I agree that wealth is a really broad term that can be used in many different ways and that there are specific kinds of wealth that someone may seek as part of the American Dream. I completely agree with the idea that Americans have the view that wealth=happiness when this is definitely not the case. Wealth doesn't bring happiness that is long lasting it may bring happiness for a short period of time but it is not sustainable. The people around start to change when someone starts becoming more fanatically wealthy. I like the way you redefined poverty I never would have thought about it like that.
ReplyDelete