There Are ZERO Children In Poverty

[initforme]

Because poverty is relative. In San Francisco a salary of $105,000 a year is poverty. Average rent is $3,300 a month Average Rental Price in San Francisco, CA & Market Trends | Zillow Rental Manager
Is this poor in Alabama or West Virginia?

Not sure. I wouldn't live in San Fran nor Alabama or WV. No way no how.

 

[RonnieOD]

I keep on hearing the left constantly saying that children are in poverty and we need to do this and that to lift them out of poverty. A bill is passing through Congress right now which the left claim will lift millions of children out of poverty.

BUT, the fact is, there are actually ZERO children in poverty. Let's define children as anyone younger than 18 and I challenge the left to show proof through financial records of children less than 18 that they are in poverty. Children under 18 have no financial records, nor do they have a financial net worth. In pretty much every single case there is, if they have any income from working jobs they also have zero debts, which gives them a positive net worth because children under 18 can't owe debts. So, assuming that most of these children don't work, they still have no debts and can't possibly be in poverty. They are children.

Now their parents, that's a different story. You can argue that we need to lift the deadbeat parents out of poverty, but children themselves cannot be in poverty. So, when the left claim that this and that will lift children out of poverty they are actually lying because it is lifting deadbeat parents out of poverty, not children.

I would say that a child that is not able to eat daily meals for adequate nutrition, or have a roof over his or her head is impoverished. So how many children meet the standard that I just gave, or why they are at that standard I cannot answer.

 

[Independentthinker]

I would say that a child that is not able to eat daily meals for adequate nutrition, or have a roof over his or her head is impoverished. So how many children meet the standard that I just gave, or why they are at that standard I cannot answer.

But we do not lift children out of poverty, we lift their deadbeat worthless parents out of poverty.

 

[Independentthinker]

Poverty is inevitable. It doesn’t matter how hard a person tries. The opportunity simply does not exist for ALL poor people to get a better job. Even if it did, who would be left behind to do all the service jobs vital to the economy?

I get that it makes you feel tough, manly and superior in comparison to just assume laziness is the sole reason for poverty, but reality is a lot more complicated.

It exists for most. They don't take the opportunity. I know because not only did I take my opportunity but for decades I have watched as many have not.

 

[candycorn]

Nobody dies of malnutrition in the greatest Country in the world unless they are insane and refuse to eat. Schools are well equipped to determine if a child is malnurshed but strangely enough most kids turn out to be clinically obese. In a rare case where a kid is malnurished, social services needs to investigate the parent or parents. There are many people, God bless' em, who think they are doing the right thing by contributing cans of stuff to food pantries which are allegedly intended to feed kids but the dirty little secret is that today's kids aren't going to open a can of lima beans when they can speed dial the pizza place on their cell phones. Glitzy commercials claim that "kids go to bed hungry" but it's a meaningless cliche designed to fund the organizations.

Your posts represents a comprehensive and complete mis-understanding of nutrition from an economic standpoint. Fatty foods are cheaper than lean foods. This is why there is an obesity problem; its cheaper to buy food that is not good for you than nutritious food.