When I was a kid in the early 80's we had one of these... and it was old when it was bought. Turntable, 8-track player... used to watch Saturday night wrestling as a family.
That was quality over quantity. :p
Posted on 01/02/2014 12:56:02 PM PST by bestintxas
For decades, the U.S. Census Bureau has reported that over 30 million Americans were living in “poverty,” but the bureau’s definition of poverty differs widely from that held by most Americans. In fact, other government surveys show that most of the persons whom the government defines as “in poverty” are not poor in any ordinary sense of the term. The overwhelming majority of the poor have air conditioning, cable TV, and a host of other modern amenities. They are well housed, have an adequate and reasonably steady supply of food, and have met their other basic needs, including medical care. Some poor Americans do experience significant hardships, including temporary food shortages or inadequate housing, but these individuals are a minority within the overall poverty population. Poverty remains an issue of serious social concern, but accurate information about that problem is essential in crafting wise public policy. Exaggeration and misinformation about poverty obscure the nature, extent, and causes of real material deprivation, thereby hampering the development of well-targeted, effective programs to reduce the problem.
Each year for the past two decades, the U.S. Census Bureau has reported that over 30 million Americans were living in “poverty.” In recent years, the Census has reported that one in seven Americans are poor. But what does it mean to be “poor” in America? How poor are America’s poor?
For most Americans, the word “poverty” suggests destitution: an inability to provide a family with nutritious food, clothing, and reasonable shelter. For example, the Poverty Pulse poll taken by the Catholic Campaign for Human Development asked the general public: “How would you describe being poor in the U.S.?” The overwhelming majority of responses focused on homelessness, hunger or not being able to eat properly, and not being able to meet basic needs.[1]
(Excerpt) Read more at heritage.org ...
I looked at the list and find I must have truly been a poor person when I grew up as about half things on list we did not have including air conditioning, microwave, dishwasher, multiple tvs, etc.
What I find missing on these sheets is a collection of vices like smoking, gambling and drinking that are undertaken that is not a "need" but a "want" that diverts additional money away from basic neccessities.
America sure seems to have a LOT of significantly overweight poor people who “go to bed hungry every night and don’t know where their next meal is coming from”.
Who knew air was so fattening....
Compare MRS WIGGS OF CABBAGE PATCH with the poor today.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0025523/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1
I still remember people who lived really poor. One woman invited her neighbors in to see her new wallpaper made of flattened cardboard boxes!
And a man who sided his tar paper shack with feed sacks dipped in concrete to keep the wind out and his family warm.
It is ironic that our War on Poverty and our War on Childhood Obesity is the same demographic…
Poor in America means that although they have more unnecessary creature comforts than the average middle class family, they are unable to afford them without using money extracted from the average middle class family
The woman in the article had missed her annual mammograms because she was uninsured. So her breast cancer was undetected for a long time and now it's critical.
The picture that came with the article told me all I needed to know .... and a fact that the article failed, as they always do, to address. This uninsured poor woman could somehow afford a smart phone (and the monthly service charges) and manicured fingernails (which must be maintained) but not an inexpensive routine procedure that takes about ten minutes a year.
I am below the poverty line. I am insured (through divorce agreements) until May. But it's catastrophic care and covers nothing until costs are in the thousands. Here in California a mammogram is $99, whether you are insured or not. And I own a flip phone, not a smart phone.
If I can afford a mammogram so can she. But she chose to spend it on phones and nails. Color me very unsympathetic.
I guess I am poor then. We dropped cable at the start of 2011 because we had to make cuts and that was the most unnecessary. We have a PS3 that we got as a gift, but only use it for Netflix and redbox movies. In that way, I’m not sure if it counts to say I have a gaming console since we just use it as a DVD player.
Also, we only have one TV. It’s a small 28” in our living room.
I have found that repeated bouts of forceful exhalation of air preceded by equal number of forceful inhalations tends to, over time, expel significant calories from within the human body.
The essence of liberalism is NOT having consequences for your choices. That’s why they can [should] have all those things and not have to sacrifice something else to get it.
I remember purchasing a 25" Sears console stereo TV back in the '80's. It was the biggest thing out there at the time - we thought we had really 'arrived', that's for sure...
When I was a kid in the early 80's we had one of these... and it was old when it was bought. Turntable, 8-track player... used to watch Saturday night wrestling as a family.
That was quality over quantity. :p
Poverty is living in a crime-infested neighborhood and blaming the police.
THIS ^
I drive past several rows of HUD on my way to work. Almost all of the apartments have DirecTV dishes; however, I’ve never seen a garden.
Like so many on FR, I guess I have even less than the poor have.
No one in my family has ever owned a smart phone. It’s not worth as much as they charge, at least not to me.
My family has only owned two TVs (one at a time) since I graduated college - one small set that I had to get rid of when they stopped broadcasting regular TV, and a new medium-sized HDTV with the cheap HD version of rabbit ears. I have never had cable/satellite. Best of all, we have kept the kids from developing enough of a TV addiction that ads would make them want the latest clutter.
- 65% of the poor have more than one TV.
- 63% of the poor have cable.
- 32% of the poor have more than two TVs.
No one in my family is overweight, and we throw away almost no food, nor do we eat out more than once a month (at least half of that at Chik-fil-A or Subway).
Other than growing children (who pass down their clothes to siblings), we wear the same clothes for several years in a row, often until they are no longer fit for a thrift store.
We have never owned a n electronic gaming system, whether Nintendo, Xbox, Wii, or whatever. My kids played with blocks, jump ropes, cards, balls, and other toys that used their imagination or physical activity.
- 29% of the poor have a video game system.
I am thankful that my family doesn’t have all the junk that the poor clutter their lives with. I would not be able to tolerate the poverty that a focus on collecting stuff creates.
Wow, I was just going to comment that every time I am in the worst parts of our city (economically) it is striking how many DirecTV or similar satellite dishes are all over the dwellings like barnacles.
Do these companies particularly prey on poor folks like rent-to-own operations? Is this service subsidized by the gubmint? I don’t even have cable, too expensive (and not interested). I think it’s unmistakable in these neighborhoods, I’m glad you noticed it too.
These services are not subsidized and they’ll shut you off if you don’t pay. That tells me that they have enough money and they don’t need mine.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.