More Proof: The Left Has Been Hoodwinked

[Chris]

 

[occupied]

Just because our poor are not laying in the gutters starving to death does not mean they are not poor. Poverty in America means that it is highly unlikely your children will go to college no matter their grades. It means that a financial disaster such as sickness or job loss will mean you are thrown out of your house. It means that there is never a cent left over to save. It means your neighborhood is a crime riddled shit hole. It means your car is a 15 year old rust bucket and if it breaks down there is no money to fix it. Poverty means a lot of things that a VCR or cable TV does nothing to make up for. These people work harder than most at shit jobs that only desperate people would take. The welfare queen stereotype is not the norm, it is a single mom working herself into an early grave.

 

[Chris]

 

[Dragon]

All of these things you guys are saying about poverty in America are true, but miss the point. Getting into a dispute with PC over how badly off the poor in this country are is playing into her shell game.

The main problem with poverty in this country is that its ranks are growing while the ranks of the middle class are shrinking. Poor people are arguably materially better off today than they were in, say, the 1970s. But there are far more of them than there should be, because of the decline of the middle class.

That's what it's about. The OP is correct that you are being hoodwinked -- by the OP herself. Please don't fall for it.

 

[The T]

The Republican Blame the Poor campaign never ends.

Well, Chris....you've provided what our President calls a 'teachable moment.'


First, in case you missed this:
". ...doesn’t mean to criticize households with earnings of $22,314, the 2010 poverty level for a family of four, but finds that the nation believes too much is being spent on welfare."

Now, let's see the reality:

1. “Means-tested welfare spending or aid to the poor…(non-welfare programs provide benefits and services for the general population)…in 2008, total government spending on means-tested welfare or aid to the poor amounted to $714 billion. This high level of welfare spending was the result of steady permanent growth in welfare spending over several decades rather than a short-term response to temporary economic conditions…$522 billion (73 percent) was federal expenditures, and $192 billion (27 percent) was state government funds.”
Obama to Spend $10.3 Trillion on Welfare: Uncovering the Full Cost of Means-Tested Welfare or Aid to the Poor

a. By 2008, total welfare spending amounted to $16,800 per person in poverty, four times as much as the Census Bureau estimated was needed to eliminate all poverty in America- that would be $50,400 for a family of three!! Ibid.

b. Over the ten-year period from 2009 to 2018, federal and state welfare spending will total $10.3 trillion. Ibid.

c. This does not include ObamaCare.


2. And when reading the propaganda about poverty incomes, realize that they leave out the income transfers from various government programs: benefits are substantial and the recipients pay nothing. Those in the bottom 20% of income recipients receive over 70% of their income in such transfers. Now, why doesn’t the Old Left Media tell this?

a. In 2001 cash and in-kind transfers accounted for 77.8% of said recipients’ income. How fair is it for the Left to tell you that their income is actually 22.2% of what it actually is? Reynolds, “Income and Wealth,” p. 28

b. This tends to explain how Americans living below the poverty level spend $1.75 for every $1 of income. The Myth of Widespread American Poverty



3. So...to summarize the above, the $22,314, when combined with the means-tested in-kind and transfers from government ($67,200) means that our 'poor' family of four has an equivalent income of $89,514.

a. In 2006, the "real" (adjusted for inflation) median annual household income rose 1.3% to $50,233.00 according to the Census Bureau.
Household income in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



4. Still slobbering, Chris?
Or, waking up and realizing how you've been used?

Sadly some are so used to it they have come to enjoy it.

 

[PoliticalChic]

1. "As President Obama crafts a reelection income equality message aimed at punishing the rich and rewarding the poor, his own government finds that the 46 million living below the so-called “poverty line” live and spend pretty much like everyone else.

2. A collection of federal household consumption surveys collected by pollster Scott Rasmussen finds that 74 percent of the poor own a car or truck, 70 percent have a VCR, 64 percent have a DVD, 63 percent have cable or satellite, 53 percent have a video game system, 50 percent have a computer, 30 percent have two or more cars and 23 percent use TiVo.

3. “What the government defines as poverty is vastly different from what most Americans envision,” he writes in his newly released book, “The People’s Money.”

4. ...details from two recent Department of Agriculture surveys: On an average day, just 1 percent of households have someone who is forced to miss a meal....96 percent of poor parents say their children were never hungry during the year because they couldn’t afford food.

5. “About 40 million Americans are officially defined as living below the poverty line. Yet most of those have adequate levels of food, shelter, clothing and medical care.

6. Sixty-three percent of American adults believe such a family is not living in poverty,” he writes. “Only 16 percent believe that a family is living in poverty if it has two color televisions, cable or satellite TV, a DVD player, and a VCR, but that’s what the average family living in poverty has as defined by the U.S. government,”...

7. ...doesn’t mean to criticize households with earnings of $22,314, the 2010 poverty level for a family of four, but finds that the nation believes too much is being spent on welfare.

8. ... 71 percent believe too many are receiving federal welfare benefits and would like to see official measures of poverty tightened...

9. The president, however, is going the other way and even reviving plans to help homeowners refinance their mortgages, an idea similar to a stimulus-era idea that in part led to the Tea Party movement.

10. ...the administration’s spending on means-tested programs like food stamps, public housing assistance, weatherization spending and others “is slated to continue growing dramatically even after the recession comes to an end.”
Feds:


Let the hand-wringing begin!

and it doesn't end there, according to the census ( 2009); 96% of the parents said their children were never hungry. Eighty-three percent of poor families reported having enough food to eat, and 82% of poor adults said they were never hungry at any time in 2009 due to a lack of food or money.

Warren Kozak: The Myth of the Starving Americans - WSJ.com



remembering too, that hunger is relative, it even goes further, consider; in Wisconsin over 370,000 children receive free lunches at school, however, less than 40k are condidered poverty line poor.......so who eats the other 300k some odd lunches?

Middle class kids, thats who. AND, when applying for federal aid for such prgms what number do you think they use? Ipso facto they provide free lunches to 370k, so thats what the ask for to be funded and, that too becomes a statistic added to the numbers justifying spending over 100 BILLION dollars on these prgms......


Oh and do you know that the lobby grp. for fast foods chains is trying to get congress to buy off on allowing them to accept EBT? We'l see were that goes.

As a group, America's poor are far from being chronically undernourished. The average consumption of protein, vitamins, and minerals is virtually the same for poor and middle-class children and, in most cases, is well above recommended norms. Poor children actually consume more meat than do higher-income children and have average protein intakes 100 percent above recommended levels. Most poor children today are, in fact, supernourished and grow up to be, on average, one inch taller and 10 pounds heavier than the GIs who stormed the beaches of Normandy in World War
How Poor Are America's Poor? Examining the "Plague" of Poverty in America

 

[PoliticalChic]

All of these things you guys are saying about poverty in America are true, but miss the point. Getting into a dispute with PC over how badly off the poor in this country are is playing into her shell game.

The main problem with poverty in this country is that its ranks are growing while the ranks of the middle class are shrinking. Poor people are arguably materially better off today than they were in, say, the 1970s. But there are far more of them than there should be, because of the decline of the middle class.

That's what it's about. The OP is correct that you are being hoodwinked -- by the OP herself. Please don't fall for it.

Wrong again, Lizzy


1. The statistical illusion known as ‘the vanishing middle class’ is produced by defining the middle class by some fixed interval of income.- say, between $35k and $50k- and then by counting the number of individuals are in that interval over the years.

The fallacy fails to note that the incomes of Americans have been rising over the years. So, as the statistical distribution of folks shifts to the right, the number of folks in the original income bracket, declines- contrary to the waves of journalistic and political rhetoric.

2. Over the decades, the percentage of American families with incomes over $75k has tripled. Alan Reynolds, “Income and Wealth,” p. 49.

3. "Median household net worth increased 17.7 percent between 2004 and 2007, but fell 3.2 percent from 2004 through last October, according to the Federal Reserve's Survey of Consumer Finances.” Average American Net Worth Drops 23% - CBS News

 

[PoliticalChic]

The super wealthy get the most welfare.

Trillions of dollars worth.

how?

this ought to be good.....

The Reagan Bush tax cuts for the rich. Reagan's own budget director, David Stockman, said that the Reagan tax cuts were a "Trojan Horse" to cut taxes for the wealthy.

Here are the numbers...

ReaganBushDebt.org

I watched Stockton on the Chris Hayes show last week, and he does say the kind of thing that the Left should report.

He also said that Reagan believed in treating cap gains as ordinary income....
There's some stuff for you guys to use there.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The Republican Blame the Poor campaign never ends.

It's right out of the Christian playbook.

 

[Trajan]

how?

this ought to be good.....

The Reagan Bush tax cuts for the rich. Reagan's own budget director, David Stockman, said that the Reagan tax cuts were a "Trojan Horse" to cut taxes for the wealthy.

Here are the numbers...

ReaganBushDebt.org

I watched Stockton on the Chris Hayes show last week, and he does say the kind of thing that the Left should report.

He also said that Reagan believed in treating cap gains as ordinary income....
There's some stuff for you guys to use there.

I always knew stockton was a bit batty but that cinches it

 

[PoliticalChic]

The class war is over. The rich won...

The problem with your precis is that there is no such thing as a perennial 'rich class' in the United States of America.

1. America continues to hold great prospects for those who wish to accumulate wealth in one generation. In fact, America has always been a land of opportunity for those who believe in the fluid nature of our nation's social system and economy.

More than one hundred years ago the same was true. In The American Economy, Stanley Lebergott reviews a study conducted in 1892 of the 4,047 American millionaires. He reports that 84 percent "were nouveau riche, having reached the top without the benefit of inherited wealth."

http://www.nytimes.com/books/first/s/stanley-millionaire.html

2. Even as mobility seems to have stagnated, the ranks of the elite are opening. Today, anyone may have a shot at becoming a United States Supreme Court justice or a C.E.O., and there are more and more self-made billionaires. Only 37 members of last year's Forbes 400, a list of the richest Americans, inherited their wealth, down from almost 200 in the mid-1980's. Shadowy Lines That Still Divide - New York Times


And, there is hope on the horizon for some of you guys:
3. The notion that the offspring of smart, successful people are also smart and successful is appealing, and there is a link between parent and child IQ scores. But most research finds IQ isn't a very big factor in predicting economic success.

Read more: As rich-poor gap widens in U.S., class mobility stalls


4. While it destroys any chance that you actually know anything, the following may make you happy: The wealthiest got hurt the most in the turndown.


WASHINGTON – A new report shows double-digit decreases in the number and wealth of the United States’ richest individuals last year.

The declines were the steepest since 1996, when the Merrill Lynch and Capgemini World Wealth Report was first published, leading some to ponder the ripple effects on the economy.

The 2008 declines in the population and wealth of U.S. High Net Worth Individuals – or those owning $1 million or more in financial assets minus the worth of primary residences – closely mimicked world-wide declines. In fact, the 2008 global HNWI population and wealth retreated below 2005 levels, undoing three years of consistent growth.
The U.S. population of HNWIs – the wealthiest Americans -- fell 18.5 percent to 2.5 million in 2008, while North American HNWI wealth (the report did not break out figures for U.S. HNWI wealth) dipped 22 percent to $9.1 trillion. Nevertheless, the U.S. continues to retain the largest number of HNWIs in the world – about 29 percent of the total HNWI population.
Perry also said that the recovery of the U.S. HNWI population and its wealth is expected to correspond with the gradual recovery of the stock market and broader economy starting next year.

“Though high net worth individuals add a lot of wealth to the economy, they still occupy a small slice of the pie,” Perry said. “Accordingly, they do not make or break the economy. When investments trend upward, theirs will too, and vice versa.”
Super rich faced steep declines in wealth last year

 

[Truthseeker420]

Good post. I think some on the left should be taken to countries like Africa so they can grasp the concept of what poor really means. Poor people in America have it ten times better than poor people from around the world. I have been to alot of other countries and have seen what poor is. When you can walk into a grocery store and see someone that in this country is labeled "Poor", and that person is buying t-bone steaks and shit, that is not poor.

So everything is okay as long as it's not as bad as Africa? That's the direction Republicans wanna take us?

 

[Trajan]

All of these things you guys are saying about poverty in America are true, but miss the point. Getting into a dispute with PC over how badly off the poor in this country are is playing into her shell game.

The main problem with poverty in this country is that its ranks are growing while the ranks of the middle class are shrinking. Poor people are arguably materially better off today than they were in, say, the 1970s. But there are far more of them than there should be, because of the decline of the middle class.

That's what it's about. The OP is correct that you are being hoodwinked -- by the OP herself. Please don't fall for it.

badly off the poor in this country

lets play the old lefty trick, hey its all relative aint it?

badly off? food aside, becasue there is no 'starvation' going on, adding up the appurtenances alone ( that THEY use THEIR money in hand to buy) that the 'poor' have or access to, makes them middle class in 60% of the rest of the world but hey, we need to give more...the problem is it will never ever ever ever ever ever be enough. Unless they get a deck chair on the cruise ship of life, and even that won't be enough either, there will always be another bitch the left surfaces, like they don't have a first class cabin....its all they have. Pathological ingrates.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Good post. I think some on the left should be taken to countries like Africa so they can grasp the concept of what poor really means. Poor people in America have it ten times better than poor people from around the world. I have been to alot of other countries and have seen what poor is. When you can walk into a grocery store and see someone that in this country is labeled "Poor", and that person is buying t-bone steaks and shit, that is not poor.

So everything is okay as long as it's not as bad as Africa? That's the direction Republicans wanna take us?

Yeah I knew it was a matter of time before someone dusted off that old chestnut. Americans arent poor because other people in other countries are poorer is one I hope the GOP runs with. \

 

[PoliticalChic]

Good post. I think some on the left should be taken to countries like Africa so they can grasp the concept of what poor really means. Poor people in America have it ten times better than poor people from around the world. I have been to alot of other countries and have seen what poor is. When you can walk into a grocery store and see someone that in this country is labeled "Poor", and that person is buying t-bone steaks and shit, that is not poor.

So everything is okay as long as it's not as bad as Africa? That's the direction Republicans wanna take us?

Yeah I knew it was a matter of time before someone dusted off that old chestnut. Americans arent poor because other people in other countries are poorer is one I hope the GOP runs with. \

Except that that isn't the argument at all.
I understand how your straw argument would make you feel better about yourself, that you hadn't been used by the Leftist media-masters....but you have been....big time.


Assume arguendo that post #20 is true...and it is sourced....then the 'poor' about whom you are so concerned....are able to live in the United States on the equivalent of almost $90,000!

Again, from that post: "So...to summarize the above, the $22,314, when combined with the means-tested in-kind and transfers from government ($67,200) means that our 'poor' family of four has an equivalent income of $89,514."

Realize that that is almost twice what the average working family that pays the taxes that make that $90k possible is making???

Feel like a real jerk now, don't you?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Good post. I think some on the left should be taken to countries like Africa so they can grasp the concept of what poor really means. Poor people in America have it ten times better than poor people from around the world. I have been to alot of other countries and have seen what poor is. When you can walk into a grocery store and see someone that in this country is labeled "Poor", and that person is buying t-bone steaks and shit, that is not poor.

So everything is okay as long as it's not as bad as Africa? That's the direction Republicans wanna take us?

Post #35 is for you, too.

PSYCHE!!!!!!

 

[Seawytch]

Wow...now the right wingers think our poor aren't poor enough. They really do want to be first in the race to the bottom...

 

[PoliticalChic]

Wow...now the right wingers think our poor aren't poor enough. They really do want to be first in the race to the bottom...

Post #35 is for you, too.

PSYCHE!!!!!!

 

[Lovebears65]

Lets see the poor gets section 8 so they dont pay much to live, The poor gets food stamps so they dont have to pay to eat, the poor gets medicaid so they dont have to pay for insurance, the poor gets grants for education so they dont have to pay for that. The poor gets free money with welfare. Why would anyone want to get off of welfare when everything is handed to them for free. Well the rest of us is paying for that..

 

[Seawytch]

Wow...now the right wingers think our poor aren't poor enough. They really do want to be first in the race to the bottom...

Post #35 is for you, too.

PSYCHE!!!!!!

All post 35 says is that America's poor aren't poor enough for the RWers. Big surprise there...