The Community Organizer is systematically destroying America, it is true.
However, our definition of who is "poor" is quite different from the definition of "poor" in most of the world. In America, our "poor" usually have cell phones (with camera option), 2 TVs, a car, a refrigerator, plenty of food, a DVD player, and a computer.
I remember reading a blog, and these "poor" people kept blogging in and screaming at everyone else about how "poor" they were. Someone asked them why they had a computer? Did they have cable TV? Did they eat out a lot?
The answer was "yes" to all of those questions.
Try not to sneer to much at the poor.
/johnny
Where there is *real* poverty - people are skinny. Just sayin’...
hope & change baby!
how's that working out for ya?
Census is a count of the population...
How much money I make, determines how many representatives my state has?
If they don’t have to get their drinking water from the same mudhole that the livestock drinks from, they ain’t poor. Go to Africa and see what poor looks like.
Our ‘’poor’’ have a higher std of living then most Europeans. Take note note now that it is RATS/socialists/progressives/commies who keep saying we should be more like the Europeans.
Ray Stevens -- "Come to the USA"
The poor are getting poorer as jobs vanish oversea and illegal immigrants steal jobs, request medical benefits, apply for food stamps and makes things lots tougher for Americans.
Half the world’s population lives on less than $2/day.
If your income is more than that, you’re not poor.
From wikipedia.com
Concerns regarding accuracy
In recent years, there have been a number of concerns raised about the official U.S. poverty measure. In 1995, the National Research Council’s Committee on National Statistics convened a panel on measuring poverty. The findings of the panel were that “the official poverty measure in the United States is flawed and does not adequately inform policy-makers or the public about who is poor and who is not poor.”
The panel was chaired by Robert Michael, former Dean of the Harris School of the University of Chicago. According to Michael, the official U.S. poverty measure “has not kept pace with far-reaching changes in society and the economy.” The panel proposed a model based on disposable income:
According to the panel’s recommended measure, income would include, in addition to money received, the value of non-cash benefits such as food stamps, school lunches and public housing that can be used to satisfy basic needs. The new measure also would subtract from gross income certain expenses that cannot be used for these basic needs, such as income taxes, child-support payments, medical costs, health-insurance premiums and work-related expenses, including child care.[42]