Do those who live in the not-so-best of neighborhoods tend to have better morals than those who live in prosperity?

Asked by: Adam2
  • When I lived in Brooklyn, I've always felt more at home in Bushwick than in Boro Park

    In Bushwick people don't have everything that those who are better off do, but the people in Bushwick are nicer than the folks in Boro Park, generally. Jerry Seinfeld who came from there is an exception. But I do tend to find Bushwick folks more chill. But I guess it can be culture too. Bushwick is Puerto Rican and Catholic. Boro Park is Jewish/Protestant, so maybe it's just that I can't relate.

  • The prominent crime rates would say no

    Poverty correlates pretty strongly with crime rates. It is when people have all that they need, but not too much more, that they generally just keep up with their own life.

    Looking at poverty stricken neighbourhoods, desperation and downright need tend to drive people to do things that they normally wouldn't. Sad but true.

  • Not necessarily the case

    Morality can be many things but being nice pales in comparison to the other things and in fact some of the worst people will be nice because it's easy while otherwise being immoral. It tends to fool people. Morality is not screwing people over whether with violence or financial fraud. It's also helping people in need. In some cases poorer people may be more moral than the wealthier, but then there are poor neighborhoods that are infested with gangs and have problems with violence. That isn't moral. Also while some wealthy people are like Enron there are wealthy people who don't practice financial fraud and who give generously to charities such as Bill Gates. Those wealthy people need to step up campaign contributions in the next elections in light of the recent supreme court rulings. We don't want just corrupt wealthy people donating to candidates.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.