In a discussion about what kind of time consuming and physically demanding things the poor ought to be doing with their copious free time, it's hardly fair to consider those who are ineligible to work because of disability, etc. And if the point is to cast the poor as a bunch of lazy layabouts, it doesn't make much sense either to include those who are currently poor, unemployed, AND seeking employment.
The point isn't to cast them as anything. It's to use data to solve problems.
Some people live comfortably and healthily on less than minimum wage - some don't. Some very wealthy people live unhealthily and save less than the poor.
And it is fair to consider all people who may be unhealthy because they would suffer as well. Does my friend on disability for autism and Asperger's not deserve consideration?
Your tone and argument goes far beyond the scope of what has been said. The fact is that even among non-working poor health is still an issue - meaning that the reason for the lack of health is unlikely to be the necessity of work.
Scroll up - we are discussing why people are unhealthy. I claimed lack of free time is not the reason poor people don't cook healthy meals, eat a healthy number of calories, and get some exercise. All the cited numbers support this point.
