Us poverty rate up

AP ^ | August 30, 2005 | Jennifer Kerr

[Scarchin]

The nation's poverty rate rose to 12.7 percent of the population last year, the fourth consecutive annual increase, the Census Bureau said Tuesday.

The percentage of people without health insurance did not change.

Overall, there were 37 million people living in poverty, up 1.1 million people from 2003.

[Scarchin]

Okay - call me cold, but does anyone know the truth behind these numbers? Can you be living in "poverty" and own cell phones, cable TV, Xbox, cars etc? I'm always very suspicious of these reports.

[tfecw]

"Can you be living in "poverty" and own cell phones, cable TV, Xbox, cars etc? I'm always very suspicious of these reports."

That's why they are living in poverty.

[rhombus]

Can you be living in "poverty" and own cell phones, cable TV, Xbox, cars etc? I'm always very suspicious of these reports.

Well you might not be living in "poverty" but you sure can be living in public housing and own cell phones, cable TV, Xbox, cars etc

[Rodney King]

It's just based on income, I think. So if you made a million dollars for the last 10 years, and zero this year, you are in poverty.

It also doesn't count government transfer payments. Also, of course, everyone involved in selling drugs is "in poverty".

[Brilliant]

Two words: Illegal immigration.

[NRA1995]

So how are they defining "poverty?" That never seems to come to light.

[Eagle of Liberty]

You beat me to it. Deport the illegals and watch these numbers drop DRAMATICALLY.

[adorno]

Can you be living in "poverty" and own cell phones, cable TV, Xbox, cars etc? I'm always very suspicious of these reports.

Don't forget the food.

I wonder how many of the poor in this country are obese because of all the food the consume.

[getmeouttaPalmBeachCounty_FL]

Isn't that about the number of illegals whom we've not stopped from breaking and entering the US last year?

[Sprite518]

Bingo! You know the old cliche the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer. Yes technically that is correct because the poor continues to do things that make them poor, and the rich do things that make them rich.

Of course the class warfare warriors always try to say the rich are only rich because of luck, or their cheating the system in some way. It is never because the rich worked hard, and made good decisions.

We are the out come of decisions we have made in life, and continue to make. This is the hardest thing for someone to say. It is human nature to blame someone else. The hardest thing to do is to look in the mirror, and say I am the result of my decisions.

[Eagle of Liberty]

Rush mentioned yesterday that some RAT wanted to suggest that because the Federal Poverty Income is not based on Cost of Living expenses relative to where you live, the Poverty Income should be considered anything below $45,000.

Seems about right. </sarcasmoff>

[skeeter]

We were on the verge of winning the war on poverty, and the government had to do something & fast. So they began importing poverty from latin america.

The real irony is they sold it to us as a great thing for our economy.

[untenured]

The poverty level is calculated in a very simplistic way, and always has been since LBJ started it. Someone simply calculates the expenditure necessary to maintain basic nutrition levels on a national level, and the poverty line is the minimum level of income necessary to get that basic nutrition without crossing some percentage, which I don't know. Some more details are here. Interestingly, two big anti-poverty programs, food stamps and housing subsidies, are not counted as income.

It is true that the poverty line in the early part of this decade was higher than the average standard of living in 1955, and that the poor in the U.S. own cars and homes at a significantly higher rate than the poor in all rich countries and even the average population in some.

The Money Tree.

[Lowell]

BUSH'S FAULT!

[Bahbah]

Just pumping up the phony numbers in preparation for the mid-term elections. This is as valid as only being able to find homeless people when Republicans are in power. There is no reason for poverty to increase in this economy. It has gotten so bad that these things are cyclical and can easily be predicted, which Limbaugh does all the time.

[CROSSHIGHWAYMAN]

Two words: Illegal immigration.

Eliminate the past 10 years of rampant invasion from south of the border and the poverty rate would be half the current number.

I prefer to look at the "glass half full" numbers.

Home ownership at an all time high and wealth also at an all time high.

The income levels that define the so-called poverty rate in America would be affluent in the countries of origin.

[Scarchin]

Exactly! It's impossible to have a rational conversation with my libtard friends about this because just by questioning this I'm automatically an A-hole.

My simple point is that American "poverty" today would be considered extravagant luxury when compared to other countries or time periods.

Am I wrong?

[tomjohn77]

You know that that the median income in the US is $28000. With a household income of just around $100000 you will fit into the top bracket. Top 20%

[adorno]

...the Poverty Income should be considered anything below $45,000.

Wait a minute now!

Just a few years back, during the Clinton administration, weren't people considered rich if their income levels went above $30,000?. Noe they may be considered poor if their income levels are below $45,000?.

The difference may be due either to inflation, or a republican adminiistration in power. If and when the democrats take over, if they ever do, the rich level may be back to $40,000 and the poor level somewhere around $39,000.

[LexBaird]

The poverty rate is based on the bell curve of income, which, of course, means that you cannot eliminate poverty. Everyone below that magic floating dollar amount on the curve is in "poverty", even if the same income in Sweden would place them solidly in the middle class.

Why are so many children "in poverty"? Because young people have children while still low on that bell curve. Of course, as they mature and gain job skills, their income rises until their children strike out on their own - and become instant "poverty" stats.