American, 50% of our citizens are poor or low income. Shame!

[SAT2]

Back at you.

 

[Lumpy 1]

You can't eat a TV, or wear a TV, or drive it to look for work.

Neat! sounds like something they wouldn't have if they couldn't afford the later. Oh wait... they can? Nuts!

The fixation on TVs and microwaves is idiotic. People have lost their jobs. They still have the things that they had before they lost their jobs.

How do Democrats explain Obama and the Democrats concentrating on their socialist programs over jobs in the first 2 years of his Presidency?

 

[SAT2]

Is it possible for you folks to distinguish between actual socialism and any social program?

 

[Lumpy 1]

Is it possible for you folks to distinguish between actual socialism and any social program?

Sooo.. you're answering my question with a different question... what a rip off...

 

[SAT2]

Is it possible for you folks to distinguish between actual socialism and any social program?

Sooo.. you're answering my question with a different question... what a rip off...

Have you stopped beating your wife?

 

[Lumpy 1]

Is it possible for you folks to distinguish between actual socialism and any social program?

Sooo.. you're answering my question with a different question... what a rip off...

Have you stopped beating your wife?

..

 

[expat_panama]

...a record number of Americans — nearly 1 in 2 — have fallen into poverty or are scraping by on earnings that classify them as low income...

That's what Wry got from a Yahoo leftist. Here's what we get from USA QuickFacts from the US Census Bureau:

Persons below poverty level, 2009 14.3%

 

[SAT2]

Again, the claim is poor and low income. Which means that you look at more than just those below the poverty line. Low income was defined as 100 to 199% of the poverty line.

The poverty line is currently $22,350 yearly income for a family of four. So the story is about those with about $44,253 and less for a family of four. Not just those at or below the poverty line.

 

[expat_panama]

...Low income was defined as 100 to 199% of the poverty line...

Using that definition has more people with 'low incomes' whenever we reduce that 'income inequality' people are complaining about.

 

[Wry Catcher]

...a record number of Americans — nearly 1 in 2 — have fallen into poverty or are scraping by on earnings that classify them as low income...

That's what Wry got from a Yahoo leftist. Here's what we get from USA QuickFacts from the US Census Bureau:

Persons below poverty level, 2009 14.3%

So? Nearly 1 in 2 have fallen into poverty OR ARE SCRAPING BY ON EARNINGS THAT CLASSIFY THEM AS LOW INCOME. I'm sorry for shouting but it seems the best way to draw attention to the substance of the article linked.

Posting (only) 14.3% of Americans offers little insight into who, where, and why. The question to ask next is how many American citizens does 14.3% represent (about 30 million Americans); since we might infer many of those in poverty or of low income are children and single moms we get to the essence of the matter: What should be done and who should do it?

 

[SAT2]

You keep shouting. It gets through, but it gets through slowly.

 

[Wry Catcher]

You keep shouting. It gets through, but it gets through slowly.

Thanks. It gets through to some; the willfully ignorant and callous conservatives don't give a shit nor care about other Americans (or other human beings, animals or the environment).

 

[Dr.House]

...a record number of Americans — nearly 1 in 2 — have fallen into poverty or are scraping by on earnings that classify them as low income...

That's what Wry got from a Yahoo leftist. Here's what we get from USA QuickFacts from the US Census Bureau:

Persons below poverty level, 2009 14.3%

Must be that new liberal math, where 14.3% = 1 in 2....lol

 

[Wry Catcher]

...a record number of Americans — nearly 1 in 2 — have fallen into poverty or are scraping by on earnings that classify them as low income...

That's what Wry got from a Yahoo leftist. Here's what we get from USA QuickFacts from the US Census Bureau:

Persons below poverty level, 2009 14.3%

Must be that new liberal math, where 14.3% = 1 in 2....lol

Well, here's proof that not all right wingers are willfully ignorant. Some are too dumb to ever figure things out.

 

[Douger]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f8k0jJdqKP0&feature=related]History Channel - The Great Depression - YouTube[/ame]

 

[hortysir]

You keep shouting. It gets through, but it gets through slowly.

Thanks. It gets through to some; the willfully ignorant and callous conservatives don't give a shit nor care about other Americans (or other human beings, animals or the environment).

We've established and proved the number of people classified as below poverty level.

Can we have any stats on the number/percentage of Americans classified as low income?

 

[Lumpy 1]

In a word... Obamanomics...

 

[bripat9643]

No blame attached, no finger pointing and no need to play the partisan hack post.

Census shows 1 in 2 people are poor or low-income - Yahoo! Finance

Comment?

"low income" is defined as $44,000. That's pretty close to the median income in this country. In other words, they simply define "low income" as the half the country making less than the median income. The median income is the point where half of incomes are lower and half are higher.

So is it a surprise that "low income" people constitute half the wage earners in the country?

ROFL! According to the way they define the term, it would be impossible for less than 50% of wage earners to be "low income."

The fact that you posted this manure shows only that there is no natural limit to the gullibility of libtards.

 

[eots]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3hMws9AhtME]INFLATION: What is it REALLY? (Dollar Collapse) - YouTube[/ame]

 

[chanel]

We should just print more money and raise minimum wage to 100 dollars per hour. Or we could mail million dollar checks to all the poor people. How about a lobster in every pot and a unicorn in every garage? Problem solved in liberal la la land.