Poverty is Going Up?

[JS80]

Aside from the definition of poverty being bullshit, being poor in the US is a choice. I thought all you liberals were pro-choice?

 

[WhipperSnapper]

This shouldn't come as any surprise since old reports about the number of Americans on food stamps have been circulating for a long time.

It makes perfect sense that poverty in the U.S. would be increasing. Because we have merged our nation's economy and labor market with that of the billions of impoverished people in the third world (through foreign outsourcing, H-1B and L-1 visas, mass immigration), the American standard of living will average out with that of the third world and thus it must decrease.

I listened to a long talk radio show yesterday and part of the discussion involved whether or not Americans will get poorer. Some politicians and commentators are thinking that we may have to get poorer to compete with the rest of the world. Part of the solution might be to have Texas-style "job growth"--lots of low wage poverty jobs without benefits.

 

[Texashiker]

You're forgetting there is a very large portion of the population that simply doesn't want to work

When people were evacuating from hurricane katrina, I had the chance to work at a shelter in east Texas. We received somewhere around 300 - 400 people from new orleans.

After the people were in the shelter for about a week, the local unemployment office rented a greyhound sized bus, drove the bus to the shelter and offered to take people to the unemployment office so they could look for a job.

There were people at the shelter that REFUSED to get on the bus.

The officials running the shelter finally told the people that they had 2 options - leave the shelter or get on the bus and look for work.

There are people out there that want to work. If I lost my job today, tomorrow morning I would be looking for a job.

And then you have the people that refuse to work and will ride the system.

 

[her209]

Get another job? If you don't fill full time hours then you shouldn't qualify as in poverty and receive any of the handouts that go with it. And don't reply with there are no jobs. I work full time and could get a part time job at any fast food chain or retail store and these require no skills/education.

You don't think these people aren't working those types of jobs already? LOL

 

[Jimmah]

You're forgetting there is a very large portion of the population that simply doesn't want to work and sure doesn't want to work full time. 20 hours is fine to them because they get all their basics provided for them - food, clothing, shelter, cell phone, car/transportation, etc.

And then throw in 2 years of unemployment...why work? Work is for suckers.

This only encompasses a small part of people on the dole. While your assessment may be valid for some people, putting them all into one lazy group isn't fair nor is it productive spreading falsehoods and lies.

 

[spidey07]

This only encompasses a small part of people on the dole. While your assessment may be valid for some people, putting them all into one lazy group isn't fair nor is it productive spreading falsehoods and lies.

Bullshit. If they wanted to work a full time job they would. But then they'd lose a lot of their free shit. Why work? I'm describing the huge majority because there is little stopping the huge majority from going out and getting a full time job barring any physical ailments.

Democrats have effectively created this poverty trap to keep a large population on the handout to maintain a voter base of "where's my free shit democrats?"

 

[PrinceofWands]

Get another job? If you don't fill full time hours then you shouldn't qualify as in poverty and receive any of the handouts that go with it. And don't reply with there are no jobs. I work full time and could get a part time job at any fast food chain or retail store and these require no skills/education.

We're looking at 10% unemployment as it is (closer to 20% if you look at REAL unemployment rather than filings), and now you think people should be able to just snap their fingers and have 2 jobs? Mind if I borrow your magical job fairy wand?

 

[fskimospy]

This only encompasses a small part of people on the dole. While your assessment may be valid for some people, putting them all into one lazy group isn't fair nor is it productive spreading falsehoods and lies.

You'll learn pretty quickly to ignore spidey, the guy is nuts.

 

[Moonbeam]

Poverty is living with the condition of self hate and the statistics on it are nigh on universal.

 

[Ausm]

Aside from the definition of poverty being bullshit, being poor in the US is a choice. I thought all you liberals were pro-choice?

Like putting you on ignore :wub::wub:

+1

 

[Texashiker]

Aside from the definition of poverty being bullshit, being poor in the US is a choice. I thought all you liberals were pro-choice?

Being poor in the US is not always a choice, some people just do not know any better.

I know a family that has been on welfare and food stamps for close to 20 years. The kids were born on the system, fed by the system, and that is the only lifestyle they will probably ever know.

I do not believe that the majority of the people willing become poor. More likely its though poor choices, or just not knowing any better.

Lets take people that spend $100,000 on a master degree in some off the wall degree. Chances are they will never be able to pay their student loands off. They did not know any better.

 

[dmcowen674]

1 in 6 Americans are now in poverty

Clearly all Obama's fault

 

[JockoJohnson]

Saw three separate stories today about poverty rates going up according to the last census.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Poverty-rate-rises-as-incomes-cnnm-3626085049.html?x=0&.v=3

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-...ar-high-in-2010-as-household-income-fell.html

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/22-percent-american-children-lived-poverty-last-142535015.html

My question is, what defines poverty? Is it strictly an income test? Seems to me that we need to define what basic necessities are and then go from there. If you are able pay for:

1. Food/Water
2. Shelter
3. Clothing
4. Medicine

then its my opinion that you cannot be defined as being in poverty. I hear of too many instances where people are given government assistance due to being called "low income" or "poverty stricken" or "less fortunate" etc. and are rolling around in an Escalade with 22" chrome rims whilst talking on a $400 cell phone ($80/month plan), wearing $90 designer jeans (with underwear hanging out), on their way to their $200K house so that they can meet the Schwan's man for their evening meal in front of the 60" plasma TV with full HD and movie channels.

I am sorry but these poverty stories are sad, yes, but they make me think we need to redefine poverty. If you are able to provide for the four basic needs I stated, you are not in poverty. If you are in need of assistance because you can't, we give you only enough to make sure you can provide what is in the list, nothing more. If you can afford of any of the extravagant things I mentioned, you are off assistance immediately. Is this asking too much?

So according to the first article, democrats gained an additional 2.6 million voters or potential voters on top of the already 43.6 million guaranteed voters

Just more bad news for the GOP.

 

[piasabird]

Usually the US Census determines what they consider the be the income below which would be considered poverty. However, economic conditions and cost of living vary from place to place. Similarly some locations have higher gas tax than others, which is cause by runaway taxation. Overtaxation can cause poverty also. Just go buy gas in Chicago and then go buy some in tennessee or some other nearby states.

The government is often not the solution, but is the enemy of mankind and poverty.

 

[piasabird]

During a recession, poverty rises. This is not rocket science!

 

[spidey07]

During a recession, poverty rises. This is not rocket science!

But, but, the recession ended two years ago when Obama took over!

This is all part of Obama's plan. To put as many people as possible on the government handout to force it's eventual collapse. Cloward-piven at work. There's a reason he's called the food stamp president.

 

[her209]

Usually the US Census determines what they consider the be the income below which would be considered poverty. However, economic conditions and cost of living vary from place to place. Similarly some locations have higher gas tax than others, which is cause by runaway taxation. Overtaxation can cause poverty also. Just go buy gas in Chicago and then go buy some in tennessee or some other nearby states.

The government is often not the solution, but is the enemy of mankind and poverty.

WAIT! So you're saying taxation based on consumption will lead to poverty...

 

[ayabe]

A family of 4 making ~22K a year or less is living in poverty, I believe that is very close to the official definition.

To me that goes way beyond poverty and is firmly in the "poor as fuck" demo.

When I was single and had 2 roommates and still working my college job I pulled in about that much, I wasn't rich by any means. Trying to raise a family on that wage is a joke.

Just because people have indoor plumbing and electricity doesn't mean they aren't poor.

 

[spidey07]

A family of 4 making ~22K a year or less is living in poverty, I believe that is very close to the official definition.

To me that goes way beyond poverty and is firmly in the "poor as fuck" demo.

When I was single and had 2 roommates and still working my college job I pulled in about that much, I wasn't rich by any means. Trying to raise a family on that wage is a joke.

Just because people have indoor plumbing and electricity doesn't mean they aren't poor.

Was all of your food, shelter, transportation, cell phone, heat/power, cable paid for by the state/fed?

 

[KlokWyze]

Bullshit. If they wanted to work a full time job they would. But then they'd lose a lot of their free shit. Why work? I'm describing the huge majority because there is little stopping the huge majority from going out and getting a full time job barring any physical ailments.

I have to agree to a degree. Why would someone work a part time job making the same amount of money they would be collecting for doing nothing? This doesn't represent the "majority" though, maybe 50/50, but not most.

 

[Macamus Prime]

$25 to $30K a year should buy you:
- $500 a month health insurance
- take care of $1,000 rent
- $9,000 in taxes
- food for,...

Wait, I am already over $25K?

HA! YOU ARE LIVING BEYOND YUR MEANS!!! LOL!!! HAHA-HHA!! LERN TA LIVE IN YUR MEANS!!! LOLOLOL!!! LOZER!! You are SUCKS a LOSER!!!!!!shift+1!!!!!

 

[crownjules]

Democrats have effectively created this poverty trap to keep a large population on the handout to maintain a voter base of "where's my free shit democrats?"

The Republicans are not saints in this regard either. Who do you think benefits the most when the poor are given handouts to go out and buy HDTVs, cars, and all the other consumer items that are hawked on us? Both parties have a vested interest in keeping the status quo and it's for very different reasons.

The poor live better off than they've earned. The rich get richer. And the middle class gets fucked by both ends.

 

[xBiffx]

$25 to $30K a year should buy you:
- $500 a month health insurance
- take care of $1,000 rent
- $9,000 in taxes
- food for,...

Wait, I am already over $25K?

HA! YOU ARE LIVING BEYOND YUR MEANS!!! LOL!!! HAHA-HHA!! LERN TA LIVE IN YUR MEANS!!! LOLOLOL!!! LOZER!! You are SUCKS a LOSER!!!!!!shift+1!!!!!

$9000 in taxes...LOL. Only if this were true.

 

[Texashiker]

1 in 6 Americans are now in poverty

Clearly all Obama's fault

I blame every president from Nixon to obama.

Nixon visited china and opened the gates to cheap chinese imports. From there, things progressed all the way to free trade and most favored trade nation status for china.

I also blame the senate for approving the free trade treaties. Without the senates approval, the president is powerless to make treaties.

http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/briefing/Treaties.htm

The Constitution gives the Senate the power to approve, by a two-thirds vote, treaties made by the executive branch.

 

[xBiffx]

The Republicans are not saints in this regard either. Who do you think benefits the most when the poor are given handouts to go out and buy HDTVs, cars, and all the other consumer items that are hawked on us? Both parties have a vested interest in keeping the status quo and it's for very different reasons.

The poor live better off than they've earned. The rich get richer. And the middle class gets fucked by both ends.

Last time I checked, GE was pretty liberal. Of course, that's just one example. Republicans support ideas that help people support themselves not ideas that help the government support them in exchange for votes. You know that whole personal responsibility nonsense.