What is another word for the have-nots?

Pronunciation: [ðə havnˈɒts] (IPA)

There are many synonyms for the term "the have-nots", which refers to people who lack the economic resources or social status enjoyed by others in a community or society. Some common synonyms for this term include the "disadvantaged", "underprivileged", "impoverished", "deprived", "marginalized", "oppressed", "excluded", and "dispossessed". Each of these terms emphasizes a different aspect of the experience of people who lack access to the resources and opportunities available to others, but all share an understanding that these individuals are at a significant disadvantage in society and are often in need of help and support to overcome the obstacles they face.

What are the hypernyms for The have-nots?

A hypernym is a word with a broad meaning that encompasses more specific words called hyponyms.
  • Other hypernyms:

    poor people, the dispossessed, the disadvantaged, the economically deprived, the impoverished, those in need, underprivileged people.

Famous quotes with The have-nots

  • In order to get our country back on track, we must focus first and foremost on reducing the gulf between the haves and the have-nots. This can only occur by reinvesting in the emotional and physical well-being of the American family in the full range of its expression.
    Paul Hokemeyer
  • The actual effect of Rawls’s theory is to undercut theoretically any straightforward appeal to egalitarianism. Egalitarianism has the advantage that gross failure to comply with its basic principles is not difficult to monitor, There are, to be sure, well-known and unsettled issues about comparability of resources and about whether resources are really the proper objects for egalitarians to be concerned with, but there can be little doubt that if person A in a fully monetarized society has ten thousand times the monetary resources of person B, then under normal circumstances the two are not for most politically relevant purposes “equal.” Rawls’s theory effectively shifts discussion away from the utilitarian discussion of the consequences of a certain distribution of resources, and also away from an evaluation of distributions from the point of view of strict equality; instead, he focuses attention on a complex counterfactual judgment. The question is not “Does A have grossly more than B?”—a judgment to which within limits it might not be impossible to get a straightforward answer—but rather the virtually unanswerable “Would B have even less if A had less?” One cannot even begin to think about assessing any such claim without making an enormous number of assumptions about scarcity of various resources, the form the particular economy in question had, the preferences, and in particular the incentive structure, of the people who lived in it and unless one had a rather robust and detailed economic theory of a kind that few people will believe any economist today has. In a situation of uncertainty like this, the actual political onus probandi in fact tacitly shifts to the have-nots; the “haves” lack an obvious systematic motivation to argue for redistribution of the excess wealth they own, or indeed to find arguments to that conclusion plausible. They don't in the same way need to prove anything; they, ex hypothesi, “have” the resources in question: “Beati possidentes.”
    Raymond Geuss

Word of the Day

Middle Class Populations
The antonyms for the term "Middle Class Populations" are "extreme poverty populations" and "wealthy high-class populations." Extreme poverty populations refer to people who suffer ...