Michelle Obama serves soup at a homeless shelter several blocks from the white house
Homeless "poor" person records event on his $300.00 Blackberry. (with the $100.00/month plan)
Posted on 09/10/2009 8:26:33 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Today, the U.S. Census Bureau will release its annual poverty report. The report is expected to show an increase in poverty in 2008 due to the onset of the recession. It is no surprise that poverty goes up in a recession. What is surprising is that every year for nearly three decades, in good economic times and bad, Census has reported more than 30 million Americans living in poverty.
What does it mean to be “poor” in America? For the average reader, the word poverty implies significant physical hardship — for example, the lack of a warm, adequate home, nutritious food, or reasonable clothing for one’s children. By that measure, very few of the 30 million plus individuals defined as “living in poverty” by the government are actually poor. Real hardship does occur, but it is limited in scope and severity.
The average person identified as “poor” by the government has a living standard far higher than the public imagines. According to the government’s own surveys, the typical “poor” American has cable or satellite TV, two color TVs, and a DVD player or VCR. He has air conditioning, a car, a microwave, a refrigerator, a stove, and a clothes washer and dryer. He is able to obtain medical care when needed. His home is in good repair and is not overcrowded. By his own report, his family is not hungry, and he had sufficient funds in the past year to meet his family’s essential needs. While this individual’s life is not affluent, it is far from the images of dire poverty conveyed by liberal activists and politicians.
Various government reports contain the following facts about persons defined as “poor” by the Census Bureau:
Nearly 40 percent of all poor households actually own their own homes. On average, this is a three-bedroom house with one-and-a-half baths, a garage, and a porch or patio.
Eighty-four percent of poor households have air conditioning. By contrast, in 1970, only 36 percent of the entire U.S. population enjoyed air conditioning.
Nearly two-thirds of the poor have cable or satellite TV.
Only 6 percent of poor households are overcrowded; two-thirds have more than two rooms per person.
The typical poor American has as much or more living space than the average individual living in most European countries. (These comparisons are to the average citizens in foreign countries, not to those classified as poor.)
Nearly three-quarters of poor households own a car; 31 percent own two or more cars.
Ninety-eight percent of poor households have a color television; two-thirds own two or more color televisions.
Eighty-two percent own microwave ovens; 67 percent have a DVD player; 73 percent have a VCR; 47 percent have a computer.
The average intake of protein, vitamins, and minerals by poor children is indistinguishable from that of children in the upper middle class. Poor boys today at ages 18 and 19 are actually taller and heavier than middle-class boys of similar age were in the late 1950s. They are a full inch taller and ten pounds heavier than the GIs who stormed the beaches of Normandy during World War II.
Conventional accounts of poverty not only exaggerate hardship, they also underestimate government spending on the poor. In 2008, federal and state governments spent $714 billion (or 5 percent of the total economy) on means-tested welfare aid, providing cash, food, housing, medical care, and targeted social services to poor and low-income Americans. (This sum does not include Social Security or Medicare.) If converted into cash, this aid would be nearly four times the amount needed to eliminate poverty in the U.S. by raising the incomes of all poor households above the federal poverty levels.
How can the government spend so much and still have such high levels of apparent poverty? The answer is that, in measuring poverty and inequality, Census ignores almost the entire welfare state. Census deems a household poor if its income falls below federally specified levels. But in its regular measurements, Census counts only around 4 percent of total welfare spending as “income.” Because of this, government spending on the poor can expand almost infinitely without having any detectable impact on official poverty or inequality.
Also missing in most Washington discussions about the poor is an acknowledgement of the behavioral causes of official poverty. For example, families with children become poor primarily because of low levels of parental work and high levels of out-of-wedlock childbearing with accompanying single parenthood.
Even in the best economic times, the typical poor family with children has, on average, only 16 hours of work per week. Little work equals little income equals more poverty. Nearly two-thirds of poor children live in single-parent homes, a condition that has been promoted by the astonishing growth of out-of-wedlock childbearing in low-income communities. When the War on Poverty began, 7 percent of American children were born outside marriage; today the number is 39 percent.
President Obama is pursuing his agenda to “spread the wealth” through massive hikes in welfare spending financed by unprecedented increases in the federal debt. Before we further expand the welfare state and pile even greater indebtedness on our children, we need a more honest assessment of current anti-poverty spending and the actual living conditions of the “poor.”
— Robert Rector is a senior research fellow at the Heritage Foundation.
Some interesting stats from Rector at Heritage.
Additionally, America is the only country where the “poor” can be upwards of 100 pounds overweight and make twice weekly trips to the casino.
No money for such boring necessities as health insurance premiums, though.
Not a dime to be found...
poverty is being a democrat.
It is someone that believes that they can not take care of themselves, but must be supported by the state.
The “poor” in the US live like the middle class in Europe and Asia. They’d be upper middle class in S. America and Africa. They should get on their knees every day and thank God they were born poor in America.
A few years ago a buddy of mine had his daughter get married, and she married a guy from England.
The English family was quite wealthy and about 25 of the English families ( several hundred people) all flew over for the wedding and stayed several weeks.
Great people and we had a ball showing them around.
My buddy owns a small farm and works construction part time, hardly rich.
They were amazed that everyone here in the area drove tricked out 4x4 pick-up trucks and had an SUV or two.
They couldn't believe how big the houses and yards were, or how cheap things were in the stores.
They really freaked out ( not scared, just surprised ) when they found out it was OK to carry guns in your car, on your person, and every home was full of them.
Most of the Americans they met were middle class or to the low end of that, but all would have been very rich in England by their standard.
I love stories like yours!
This is what the entitlement mentality, that the left has promoted, is all about -
YOU pay for my necessities,
and then I can afford all the “stuff” I want.
Real poverty is a teenage girl prostituting herself to keep her family from starving. I’m not aware of any such in America.
This whole classification of “poor”
is just a cover for promoting covetousness
and empowering politicians to steal the property of others.
bookmark
They were also amazed that everyone could afford to go hunting here and how cheap that was. ( Licenses to shoot 5 deer are only $58 here ).
They said in England that hunting was only for the umber rich.
Unfortunately, many poor people will not be thankful. In their perception they have very little. They see others around them who have more. They don’t connect their place in life with their past decisions and their current level of effort.
Are there overweight people in this country? Of course there are.
However, they changed the way the BMI was calculated, moved the numbers around, and PRESTO!!, more fat people were created overnight!!
I always liked the story about the Russian family who made their first visit to the vastly underrated, magnificent triumph of American capitalism, that is the modern supermarket.
They were so stunned by the array of choices offered in such a clean, roomy, comfortable environment that they were literally speechless and immobile for several minutes.
Michelle Obama serves soup at a homeless shelter several blocks from the white house
Homeless "poor" person records event on his $300.00 Blackberry. (with the $100.00/month plan)
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.