[QQQQQ]

The above is very important, to put into context the census data, which the Dems will be using against President Bush, that the ranks of poor rose 4% to 35.9 million in 2003. We had a recession, what is actually amazing, is that there only was a 4% increase in the "poor'.

And note above what the "poor" have. I think the definition of "poor" needs to be changed.

Here is the Reuters article:

Poverty rises in United States

I didn't want to put that in the headline, since it will be on the front pages of every news paper.

We need to put it in perspective and provide the context, which the Heritage Foundation has done.

The link to the Heritage Foundation article takes you to the Executive Summary of the report. But there is a link to the entire report, which has a lot of good graphics, which I would recommend reviewing.

The link to the full report is:

Understanding Poverty in America. Full Article

[Always Right]

By Democrat standards, you are poor if you have a household income of less than $60,000, and mega wealthy if you have a household income of more than $80,000. Hope that helps.

[QQQQQ]

Sure enough: Kerry turns new Census data against Bush

ANOKA, Minn. - John Kerry wasted no time turning new Census data against President Bush.

The Census Bureau said today that the number of Americans living in poverty rose by more than a million people last year. And the number of people without health insurance jumped by nearly a million and a half.

Kerry told an audience at Anoka Technical College that the figures are "fact, not political diatribe." And he says his policies would be better.

[wbill]

Bush's fault. Women, children, minorities hardest hit.

[DB]

The "poverty standard" is only based on "income" and not actual assets. Really stupid. But hey, that's the government for you.

[elbucko]

During the depression, Will Rogers oft quoted that: "Americans were the first people ever to go to the poorhouse in an automobile". It would seem that the poor, as well as owning an automobile, now also own their own "poorhouse".

America; What a country!

[elbucko]

*** The typical poor American has more living space than the average individual living in Paris, London,....

This, I know from personal experience, is a fact.

[Libertarianize the GOP]

If poverty is based on annual income. A multimillionaire farmer who has a bad crop and doesn't show a profit would be considered poor for that year. Sell enough assets that lost value to offset your income you to can be poor for a year. Use depreciation allowances to offset income and the same thing occurs. Using income as the determining factor can allow an individual to move from the bottom quintile to the top quintile with relative ease.

[familyofman]

"...put into context the census data, which the Dems will be using against President Bush, that the ranks of poor rose 4% to 35.9 million in 2003. We had a recession,..."

There was no recession during any part of 2003, the recession took place back a couple of years ago. In fact the economy was growing quite fast in 2003.

[Mr.Atos]

For further consideration...

1. Do the Census numbers, with regard to income, adjust the figures differently with regard to mortgage deductions on an IRS tax return? If so, wouldn't the fact that home ownership increased significantly in the last 4 years, technically adjust some of the population's income levels into the red? As far as I know, rent is not factored out of income as an adjusted expense.

2. Would the increased shift in the job market to entrepreneurship account for some of the reduction in the Health Care coverage numbers?

3. A baby boom has been underway for the last 3 years. This changes many factors in the demographic. Tax relief, home ownership, and improved economic conditions have encouraged us to consider shifting our lifestyles toward a single-income household. Many of our friends have already made a similar change.

Food for thought.

[YOUGOTIT]

Having lived in Europe (Belgium, Netherlands, Italy) for over 11 years and, after leaving going back for vacation every year or so for some time, I find the poverty question in these United States to be overplayed. Plus the left-wingers are always throwing Europe up in our face for its great living. Below is a short study done by a Swedish Think Tank.

First in a study done by a Swedish think tank (Timbro): The following was found:
If Europe was part of the United States only Luxembourg could rival the best states in the US. The rest of Europe would rank below the U.S. average.
Poverty in the U.S; 25% of the population (1999) were considered to be in the low-income area (annual income of less that $25,000). In Europe between 35% and 50% of the population would be considered low income. The disparity between the poverty level in the U.S. and Europe would be even greater.
Productivity; Because of the interference of government in private enterprise, the productivity in Europe is such that 10% to 16% of the population is unemployed because no new jobs have been created in years.

Health care; WHO (World Health Organization): European Health Care Fails Elderly. Providing care for people with terminal illnesses regardless of age or income has become "a neglected topic in most countries," said Dr. Agis Tsouros of the WHO's Copenhagen-based Europe office.

Taxes; In Europe tax revenues are 40% to 50% of GDP (Study by Timbro); in the U.S. it is less that 30%. The high tax rates are driving Europeans to nongovernmental authorized work or businesses that do not pay taxes.

Living Space: In the U.S. poor Americans live in an average of 1,200 Sq feet of space. In Europe the average for all households (Timbro Study) is 1,000 sq feet. In the U.S. a large number of “poor” people own their own homes (45.9%).

The Timbro study concludes; ”Most Americans have a standard of living which a majority of Europeans will never come anywhere near.”

Enough said.