1 out of every 7 Americans are poor!

[zzzz]

It is expected that when the figures are released in a few days that between 14.7 and 15% of Americans (1 out 7) were poor in 2009. Not record levels but the biggest one year increase since 1959 when they first started keeping track. More bad news for the Demos just before the election. If the news keeps getting worse the election of 2010 might end up being called a massacre instead of a landslide for the Republicans.

US poverty on track to post record gain in 2009 - Yahoo! News

 

[Tank]

All part of becoming a third world country, thanks libs.

 

[rightwinger]

I have a hard time with defining what makes someone poor. Poor Americans do not go hungry, have a roof over their head and access to education, rudimentary healthcare and a basic safety net.

I tend to see that the poverty line is arbitrarilly drawn and is not tied to standards of living

 

[Mad Scientist]

I have a hard time with defining what makes someone poor. Poor Americans do not go hungry, have a roof over their head and access to education, rudimentary healthcare and a basic safety net.

I tend to see that the poverty line is arbitrarilly drawn and is not tied to standards of living

America has some of the worlds richest "poor people".

 

[rightwinger]

I have a hard time with defining what makes someone poor. Poor Americans do not go hungry, have a roof over their head and access to education, rudimentary healthcare and a basic safety net.

I tend to see that the poverty line is arbitrarilly drawn and is not tied to standards of living

America has some of the worlds richest "poor people".

I don't envy our poor people but would like to see what living standards qualify as poor. I imagine it also depends on what part of the country you live in

 

[zzzz]

I have a hard time with defining what makes someone poor. Poor Americans do not go hungry, have a roof over their head and access to education, rudimentary healthcare and a basic safety net.

I tend to see that the poverty line is arbitrarilly drawn and is not tied to standards of living

America has some of the worlds richest "poor people".

I don't envy our poor people but would like to see what living standards qualify as poor. I imagine it also depends on what part of the country you live in

per the same article:

"In 2008, the poverty level stood at $22,025 for a family of four, based on an official government calculation that includes only cash income before tax deductions. It excludes capital gains or accumulated wealth. It does not factor in noncash government aid such as tax credits or food stamps, which have surged to record levels in recent years under the federal stimulus program. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_poverty_in_america"

 

[rightwinger]

America has some of the worlds richest "poor people".

I don't envy our poor people but would like to see what living standards qualify as poor. I imagine it also depends on what part of the country you live in

per the same article:

"In 2008, the poverty level stood at $22,025 for a family of four, based on an official government calculation that includes only cash income before tax deductions. It excludes capital gains or accumulated wealth. It does not factor in noncash government aid such as tax credits or food stamps, which have surged to record levels in recent years under the federal stimulus program. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_poverty_in_america"

$22,025 buys a different standard of living in different parts of the country. Ignoring accumulated wealth also doesn't make sense. If you inherit a $350,000 house but only report $22K in income...are you poor?

 

[PoliticalChic]

I have a hard time with defining what makes someone poor. Poor Americans do not go hungry, have a roof over their head and access to education, rudimentary healthcare and a basic safety net.

I tend to see that the poverty line is arbitrarilly drawn and is not tied to standards of living

America has some of the worlds richest "poor people".

I don't envy our poor people but would like to see what living standards qualify as poor. I imagine it also depends on what part of the country you live in

Excellent.

Further, it is the fluidity of our system that allows for the following:

More than three-quarters of those working Americans whose incomes were in the bottom 20 percent in 1975 were also in the top 40 percent of income earners at some point by 1991, says Sowell.
Source: Thomas Sowell, "How Media Misuse Income Data To Match Their Preconceptions," Investor's Business Daily, January 12, 2010.

For text:
How Media Misuse Income Data To Match Their Preconceptions - IBD - Investors.com

 

[PoliticalChic]

I have a hard time with defining what makes someone poor. Poor Americans do not go hungry, have a roof over their head and access to education, rudimentary healthcare and a basic safety net.

I tend to see that the poverty line is arbitrarilly drawn and is not tied to standards of living

America has some of the worlds richest "poor people".

I don't envy our poor people but would like to see what living standards qualify as poor. I imagine it also depends on what part of the country you live in

However, the standard of living for the poor has increased substantially:
Today, 43 percent of the poor own their own homes (80 percent have air conditioning and only 6 percent say they are overcrowded), approximately 75 percent own a car, 97 percent own a television, and nearly 80 percent have a VCR or DVD player.
This definition of poverty, as Samuelson notes, referencing the late Daniel Patrick Moynihan, is scaled up.
Robert J. Samuelson - Why Obama's poverty rate measure misleads


Forty-three percent of all poor households actually own their own homes; the average home owned by persons classified as poor by the Census Bureau is a three-bedroom house with one-and-a-half baths, a garage and a porch or patio.
Eighty percent of poor households have air conditioning; by contrast, in 1970, only 36 percent of the entire U.S. population enjoyed air conditioning.
Only 6 percent of poor households are overcrowded; two-thirds have more than two rooms per person.
The typical poor American has more living space than the average individual living in Paris, London, Vienna, Athens and other cities throughout Europe (these comparisons are to the average citizens in foreign countries, not to those classified as poor).
Also:
Nearly three-quarters of poor households own a car; 31 percent own two or more cars.
Ninety-seven percent of poor households have a color television; over half own two or more color televisions.
Seventy-eight percent have a VCR or DVD player; 62 percent have cable or satellite TV reception.
Eighty-nine percent own microwave ovens, more than half have a stereo, and a more than a third have an automatic dishwasher.
Material poverty can be measured relatively or absolutely. An absolute measure would consist of some minimum quantity of goods and services deemed adequate for a baseline level of survival. Achieving that level means that poverty has been eliminated. However, if poverty is defined as, say, the lowest one-fifth of the income distribution, it is impossible to eliminate poverty. Everyone's income could double, triple and quadruple, but there will always be the lowest one-fifth, explains Williams.
Source: Walter Williams, "Where Best To Be Poor," Jewish World Review, June 30, 2010.
For text:
Walter Williams

 

[Trajan]

I have a hard time with defining what makes someone poor. Poor Americans do not go hungry, have a roof over their head and access to education, rudimentary healthcare and a basic safety net.

I tend to see that the poverty line is arbitrarilly drawn and is not tied to standards of living

uhm, well said.....I recall correctly making the same point in that thread we had on the war on poverty vis a vis judging poverty pre- ww2, I didn't get much traction on that.

Anyway, I will be interested to see how this is spun by the MSM.

I clearly recall manic msm coverage of the poor and declining advance of folks out of and influx into poverty in the last admin.....

 

[Cecilie1200]

I have a hard time with defining what makes someone poor. Poor Americans do not go hungry, have a roof over their head and access to education, rudimentary healthcare and a basic safety net.

I tend to see that the poverty line is arbitrarilly drawn and is not tied to standards of living

America has some of the worlds richest "poor people".

Yes, and telling voters they aren't REALLY all that bad off is definitely going to help Democrats in the election.

 

[rightwinger]

America has some of the worlds richest "poor people".

I don't envy our poor people but would like to see what living standards qualify as poor. I imagine it also depends on what part of the country you live in

However, the standard of living for the poor has increased substantially:
Today, 43 percent of the poor own their own homes (80 percent have air conditioning and only 6 percent say they are overcrowded), approximately 75 percent own a car, 97 percent own a television, and nearly 80 percent have a VCR or DVD player.
This definition of poverty, as Samuelson notes, referencing the late Daniel Patrick Moynihan, is scaled up.
Robert J. Samuelson - Why Obama's poverty rate measure misleads


Forty-three percent of all poor households actually own their own homes; the average home owned by persons classified as poor by the Census Bureau is a three-bedroom house with one-and-a-half baths, a garage and a porch or patio.
Eighty percent of poor households have air conditioning; by contrast, in 1970, only 36 percent of the entire U.S. population enjoyed air conditioning.
Only 6 percent of poor households are overcrowded; two-thirds have more than two rooms per person.
The typical poor American has more living space than the average individual living in Paris, London, Vienna, Athens and other cities throughout Europe (these comparisons are to the average citizens in foreign countries, not to those classified as poor).
Also:
Nearly three-quarters of poor households own a car; 31 percent own two or more cars.
Ninety-seven percent of poor households have a color television; over half own two or more color televisions.
Seventy-eight percent have a VCR or DVD player; 62 percent have cable or satellite TV reception.
Eighty-nine percent own microwave ovens, more than half have a stereo, and a more than a third have an automatic dishwasher.
Material poverty can be measured relatively or absolutely. An absolute measure would consist of some minimum quantity of goods and services deemed adequate for a baseline level of survival. Achieving that level means that poverty has been eliminated. However, if poverty is defined as, say, the lowest one-fifth of the income distribution, it is impossible to eliminate poverty. Everyone's income could double, triple and quadruple, but there will always be the lowest one-fifth, explains Williams.
Source: Walter Williams, "Where Best To Be Poor," Jewish World Review, June 30, 2010.
For text:
Walter Williams

Good points. But alot can still be attributed to progress, An air conditioner or color TV does not consume as much of your income that it would in 1970. A cell phone (car phone) used to be something only the wealthy could afford...now, every kid has one.

From my perspective, what has changed is access to upward mobility. In 1970 you could afford to send your children to college without going into serious debt. You could get a decent job and afford to buy a car or an entry level home shortly after you graduated.

College graduates today move back with their parents because they carry so much debt. It is much more difficult to rise to a higher standard of living today than in the 70s

 

[boedicca]

America has some of the worlds richest "poor people".

I don't envy our poor people but would like to see what living standards qualify as poor. I imagine it also depends on what part of the country you live in

However, the standard of living for the poor has increased substantially:
Today, 43 percent of the poor own their own homes (80 percent have air conditioning and only 6 percent say they are overcrowded), approximately 75 percent own a car, 97 percent own a television, and nearly 80 percent have a VCR or DVD player.
This definition of poverty, as Samuelson notes, referencing the late Daniel Patrick Moynihan, is scaled up.
Robert J. Samuelson - Why Obama's poverty rate measure misleads


Forty-three percent of all poor households actually own their own homes; the average home owned by persons classified as poor by the Census Bureau is a three-bedroom house with one-and-a-half baths, a garage and a porch or patio.
Eighty percent of poor households have air conditioning; by contrast, in 1970, only 36 percent of the entire U.S. population enjoyed air conditioning.
Only 6 percent of poor households are overcrowded; two-thirds have more than two rooms per person.
The typical poor American has more living space than the average individual living in Paris, London, Vienna, Athens and other cities throughout Europe (these comparisons are to the average citizens in foreign countries, not to those classified as poor).
Also:
Nearly three-quarters of poor households own a car; 31 percent own two or more cars.
Ninety-seven percent of poor households have a color television; over half own two or more color televisions.
Seventy-eight percent have a VCR or DVD player; 62 percent have cable or satellite TV reception.
Eighty-nine percent own microwave ovens, more than half have a stereo, and a more than a third have an automatic dishwasher.
Material poverty can be measured relatively or absolutely. An absolute measure would consist of some minimum quantity of goods and services deemed adequate for a baseline level of survival. Achieving that level means that poverty has been eliminated. However, if poverty is defined as, say, the lowest one-fifth of the income distribution, it is impossible to eliminate poverty. Everyone's income could double, triple and quadruple, but there will always be the lowest one-fifth, explains Williams.
Source: Walter Williams, "Where Best To Be Poor," Jewish World Review, June 30, 2010.
For text:
Walter Williams

Looks like we should declare Victory in the War on Poverty.

 

[rightwinger]

I have a hard time with defining what makes someone poor. Poor Americans do not go hungry, have a roof over their head and access to education, rudimentary healthcare and a basic safety net.

I tend to see that the poverty line is arbitrarilly drawn and is not tied to standards of living

uhm, well said.....I recall correctly making the same point in that thread we had on the war on poverty vis a vis judging poverty pre- ww2, I didn't get much traction on that.

Anyway, I will be interested to see how this is spun by the MSM.

I clearly recall manic msm coverage of the poor and declining advance of folks out of and influx into poverty in the last admin.....

I remember the news shows on the war on poverty in the early 60s. People literally lacked shoes. People lived in homes (shacks) without electricity, plumbing or running water.

You don't see that level of poverty anymore.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

It is expected that when the figures are released in a few days that between 14.7 and 15% of Americans (1 out 7) were poor in 2009. Not record levels but the biggest one year increase since 1959 when they first started keeping track. More bad news for the Demos just before the election. If the news keeps getting worse the election of 2010 might end up being called a massacre instead of a landslide for the Republicans.

US poverty on track to post record gain in 2009 - Yahoo! News

Unless you're homeless, nobody in the U.S. is poor. I suggest you travel out of the U.S. once in your life if you want to see what it means to be poor.

 

[shintao]

All part of becoming a third world country, thanks libs.

You sure is welcome. Did you get your street vendor license yet??

 

[PoliticalChic]

I don't envy our poor people but would like to see what living standards qualify as poor. I imagine it also depends on what part of the country you live in

However, the standard of living for the poor has increased substantially:
Today, 43 percent of the poor own their own homes (80 percent have air conditioning and only 6 percent say they are overcrowded), approximately 75 percent own a car, 97 percent own a television, and nearly 80 percent have a VCR or DVD player.
This definition of poverty, as Samuelson notes, referencing the late Daniel Patrick Moynihan, is scaled up.
Robert J. Samuelson - Why Obama's poverty rate measure misleads


Forty-three percent of all poor households actually own their own homes; the average home owned by persons classified as poor by the Census Bureau is a three-bedroom house with one-and-a-half baths, a garage and a porch or patio.
Eighty percent of poor households have air conditioning; by contrast, in 1970, only 36 percent of the entire U.S. population enjoyed air conditioning.
Only 6 percent of poor households are overcrowded; two-thirds have more than two rooms per person.
The typical poor American has more living space than the average individual living in Paris, London, Vienna, Athens and other cities throughout Europe (these comparisons are to the average citizens in foreign countries, not to those classified as poor).
Also:
Nearly three-quarters of poor households own a car; 31 percent own two or more cars.
Ninety-seven percent of poor households have a color television; over half own two or more color televisions.
Seventy-eight percent have a VCR or DVD player; 62 percent have cable or satellite TV reception.
Eighty-nine percent own microwave ovens, more than half have a stereo, and a more than a third have an automatic dishwasher.
Material poverty can be measured relatively or absolutely. An absolute measure would consist of some minimum quantity of goods and services deemed adequate for a baseline level of survival. Achieving that level means that poverty has been eliminated. However, if poverty is defined as, say, the lowest one-fifth of the income distribution, it is impossible to eliminate poverty. Everyone's income could double, triple and quadruple, but there will always be the lowest one-fifth, explains Williams.
Source: Walter Williams, "Where Best To Be Poor," Jewish World Review, June 30, 2010.
For text:
Walter Williams

Good points. But alot can still be attributed to progress, An air conditioner or color TV does not consume as much of your income that it would in 1970. A cell phone (car phone) used to be something only the wealthy could afford...now, every kid has one.

From my perspective, what has changed is access to upward mobility. In 1970 you could afford to send your children to college without going into serious debt. You could get a decent job and afford to buy a car or an entry level home shortly after you graduated.

College graduates today move back with their parents because they carry so much debt. It is much more difficult to rise to a higher standard of living today than in the 70s

There is no disputing the debt carried by new grads, but I would argue that the upward mobility is still evident, and related more to the American hallmark: opportunity.

1." I lived for about a decade, on and off, in France and later moved to the United States. Nobody in their right mind would give up the manifold sensual, aesthetic and gastronomic pleasures offered by French savoir-vivre for the unrelenting battlefield of American ambition were it not for one thing: possibility.
You know possibility when you breathe it. For an immigrant, it lies in the ease of American identity and the boundlessness of American horizons after the narrower confines of European nationhood and the stifling attentions of the European nanny state, which has often made it more attractive not to work than to work. High French unemployment was never much of a mystery."
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/04/opinion/04iht-edcohen.2.20587034.html

2. - Income mobility. In the U.S., people who had low incomes in 1983 didn't necessarily have incomes as low a decade later. People in this country have long moved up over time, and this income mobility continues to be true. While some people do remain in the lowest income group, they are the exception.
One way to quantify income mobility is to examine how many people remain in the same tax bracket over time. We compared the returns of tax filers in the lowest tax rate bracket (zero) in 1987 with their returns in 1996. Only one third of the tax filers were still in the zero tax bracket, but 25% were now in the 10% bracket, 32% had moved up to the 15% bracket and 9% were in the 25%, 28%, 33% or 35% brackets. And that was following them for a decade, not a generation.
http://online.wsj.com/public/article_print/SB122143692536934297.html

3. "In the Millionaire Next Door," Stanley and Danko tell us that "most of America's millionaires are first-generation rich." They earned their money themselves. Not through inheritances or dad's teachings. "Most people who become millionaires have confidence in their own abilities. They do not spend time worrying about whether or not their parents were wealthy."
Secrets of becoming a millionaire [Archive] - NFL Football Picks | College Football Picks

" 80% of U. S. millionaires are first generation affluent. Contrary to popular belief, most people are not born into wealth. They earn their money the old fashioned way, they work for it."

Making money: The path to becoming a millionaire - by Terry Marsh - Helium

"The vast majority of today's millionaires did not inherit their money -- they're self-made."
Richistan


According to a study by Prince & Associates, less than 10% of today’s multi-millionaires cited “inheritance” as their source of wealth.
The Decline of Inherited Money - The Wealth Report - WSJ

Most of America's millionaires are first-generation rich. How is it possible for people from modest backgrounds to become millionaires in one generation? Why is it that so many people with similar socioeconomic backgrounds never accumulate even modest amounts of wealth?
washingtonpost.com: The Millionaire Next Door


One should look at the relationship between debt and the end of the work ethic in America...

 

[rightwinger]

Most of America's millionaires are first-generation rich. How is it possible for people from modest backgrounds to become millionaires in one generation?

Being a millionaire is not that big a deal anymore. Anyone who buys a home, invests in a retirement account and avoids unnecessary debt can become a millionaire in their lifetime

 

[Old Rocks]

Not a millionaire, but I have done reasonably well.

I would like to point some differances in 'possibilities', then and now, from when I was a child in the late '40's and 50's.

The first full year I worked after graduating from high school, and a stint in the Air Force, I made $6500. An entry level job, and much overtime. My parents bought a large old house for $6500 that same year. There is no way a person could equal the cost of a small house, let alone a large one in reasonable condition, on today's entry level job, no matter how much overtime they worked. Cars, even small ones, cost much more compared to bottom end jobs today, also. Formal education, at least in community and state colleges is also more expensive today.

However, access to education material, via the net, is many times as great today, orders of magnitudes greater. No matter what your interest, you can find enormous amounts of information concerning it for very little cost. Electronic entertainment, to a degree unimaginable when I was a child, is within the price range of almost everybody. Same for things that were once the privilege of the well to do. Things like cameras the take fine pictures. And cost very little to operate and no film or developing costs. The ability to actually own the products of the silver screen at very little cost is also something that was not available in my childhood.

Today, a young person that has a very good understanding and ability to use todays technology can become well off in a short time. Much quicker than more than half a century ago.

Things are simply differant today than they were half a century ago. A differant world with differant challenges and oppertunities. The 'possibilities' are still there, but they are differant from my childhood.

Being poor today mean less than adaquete access to health care, rather than virtually no access as it meant when I was young. Today, being poor means having less, not having almost nothing at all.

 

[Bill O'Olberman]

From my perspective, what has changed is access to upward mobility. In 1970 you could afford to send your children to college without going into serious debt. You could get a decent job and afford to buy a car or an entry level home shortly after you graduated.

College graduates today move back with their parents because they carry so much debt. It is much more difficult to rise to a higher standard of living today than in the 70s

Well in my opinion the main cause of this is the relative scarce number of jobs to the relative plentiful number of people searching for a job. For every job opening a recent grad applies for he/she is competing with people who have established careers in that given field or industry. And the people with established careers are accepting less money just so they can have a job. Five, four, even three years ago it was very different. Also, at 23 Ive moved back in with my parents for a little while. Something I am not very proud of but it will allow me to pay off all my student loans by next summer (about 8 years in advance).