What I don't really get is how we ended up with such different perspectives on the politics of financial issues, given some of his experiences. How can you do what he's done, make the mistakes he's made, and still think that being broke is solely about being personally irresponsible?

There is often a disconnect between theory and reality. One anecdotal story: I have a brother-in-law of the anarchist/libertarian persuasion. He hates the government. He's an electrician for, wait, wait, yes, the government. (municipal mass transit) He hates paying taxes. His paycheck comes, in part from, wait, wait, yes, taxes. I have pointed out this apparent discrepancy - but only once - because he becomes completely irrational when talking about it.

In that same vein, some people latch on to a particular economic theory - or religion - or philosophy - and don't consider the obvious contradictions within, the bad parts, or the good parts of other, competing ideas. This also goes for liberals, communists, neo-conservatives, Randists, Catholics, anarchists, and so on.

This particular poster is a radical, in his own way, and I would not expect him to change his political stripes based on his own personal situation or misfortune. (No, I'm not saying that everyone who suffers financial reverses should automatically become a welfare statist, pure socialist, or communist either.)

I do find it funny (not ha-ha funny) that someone in this position - many many someone's in this position - are those who holler loudest about "let me invest my own Social Security because I'll do better", completely ignoring the possibility (likelihood of at least some, given the size of the sample) that a significant number will end up destitute, and will have nothing left but the advice of some who say "Well you can always get a job at Wal-Mart", pretending that 3,500 Wal-Marts can employ the 20 million 70+ year olds when things get tight.

Still, I don't expect "evidence" to sway their opinions, if "personal experience" hasn't done so. There are some, like my brother-in-law for instance, who will never consider an alternative, even if it comes up and smacks them square in the face. Indeed, they will somehow pervert the experience into "If only the government hadn't taken all that money from me I'd be doing fine", even as they cash their meager Social Security check to buy themselves some groceries to eat while they sit and listen and dittohead the radio talk shows which convince them to continue voting against their own interests.