One in eight US citizens lives in poverty.

[BaliBabyDoc]

1) Real income is down it's been going down at least since 2001.

2) The only reason TOTAL income was propped up (read: marginally kept pace with inflation) is that bean counters consider things like health benefits to be income. So despite the fact people paid MORE out-of-pocket and for premiums . . . in order to get LESS healthcare . . . Bushistas could claim most people were better off than before 2000.

3) It would be interesting to see what the true effect of immigration contributes. Technically, households led by undocumenteds shouldn't be included.

4) It would be interesting to see what effect the welfare reform law may contribute.

5) The expansion in public programs like Medicare primarily goes to industry . . . not to the people. Although many millions of older Americans may have been having some difficulty paying for meds, it was only a matter of time before almost every state would have instituted some kind of assistance program. In concert with some better than decent assistance programs from Big Pharma it would easily have matched the likey 'benefit' from the Drug Plan . . . at a much lower cost.

6) The expansion in Medicaid is a function of overall healthcare dysfunction and inflation. During the 90s many of the people that stopped getting insurance from companies went into Medicaid. But states have begun to tighten requirements for assistance. Even SCHIP-initiated programs are curtailing enrollment and benefits despite the fact that kids are very cheap.

7) From POW's link . . . it actually looks like poverty has been relatively flat since the early 70s. It certainly undulates but it's a very mild trend upwards at best through 96. I'm sure it probably actually went down until 2001.

There's very little doubt that Bush 01-08 will indeed be amongst the worst for the bottom 80% of Americans in modern history.

 

[imported_michaelpatrick33]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
And why the fvck should I care? This is America. The land of opportunity. People can get off their lazy asses, establish a work ethic, read a few books, and make their own success.

It's time for you apologizing Liberals, those responsible for the pussification of America, to stop treating the US Government as a crutch for the lazy. I mean, the fools in Orlando and Miami today closed the schools because of 20 MPH winds and rain. WTF! I really don't care if those spoiled-brat hellions called students have to whine and cry while walking to their sh!tty Government schools in rain, sleet, or snow. Their parents did it. Why can't they?

Also, the situation in NOLA is the perfect example of what happens when Big Government takes control, be it at the local, state, or federal level.

:laugh: Yeah, if we could just make blacks slaves again and all the Hispanics our gardeners we wouldn't have any problems right? We have been essentially racist denying minority equal rights for 3/4th's of our history and it hasn't been solved yet. I agree with Bill Cosby the African Americans must take responsibility for themselves but to ignore the latent racism and classism that is still occurring in the country is to keep your head in the sand. Your stereotyping is so outrageously stupid that it is staggering. Take some sociology courses and grow up.

The poor are lazy :roll: Yeah that's it. Unbelievable

 

[yllus]

Interestingly, historical evidence may be pointing at not throwing money at the problem as a real solution.

The General Welfare: Consequences and lessons of reform

As it was, the critics predicted that the reform would increase poverty. When he was in the Clinton administration, Primus commissioned an Urban Institute study that projected that the welfare-reform bill would push the families of 1 million children into poverty. For this reason, Ted Kennedy called the bill "legislative child abuse." Daniel Patrick Moynihan called reform "the most brutal act of social policy since Reconstruction" and predicted that there would be "a third of a million children in the streets."

Instead, poverty rates have fallen. The Census reports that the black child-poverty rate has dropped a third, from 43.8 percent in the mid '90s to 33.1 percent in 1999. That's the lowest rate in history. During the same period, the percentage of children of single mothers living in poverty has fallen from 44 to 35.7-also an all-time low. The Department of Agriculture reports that the number of children who are chronically hungry has dropped by nearly half.

The opponents of welfare reform said that no jobs would be available to people leaving the rolls. Most of them were said to be unemployable. But according to a recent paper by June O'Neill and Anne Hill for the Manhattan Institute, it is precisely the groups considered the least employable who are joining the work force at the fastest rate. Employment of never-married mothers is up 50 percent since 1992. For young single mothers (between the ages of 18 and 24), it's up 58 percent. For single mothers who are high-school dropouts, it's up 61 percent.

Perhaps the most surprising post-reform trend has been that the illegitimacy ratio has stopped rising. For 30 years, it had risen relentlessly. Every year, it ticked up another point. Now it appears to have stabilized, albeit at a high level (about one-third of babies are born to unmarried women).

What did President Clinton do? He signed The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, which stated that "recipients must work after two years on assistance, with few exceptions," included "a five-year time limit," and a performance bonus to states that moved welfare recipients into jobs in high numbers.

Side note: This also illustrates some of the brilliance of the Clinton Administration that the Democrat party since has seemed to completely forgotten - co-opt good Republican policies, and you suck voters away and onto your side.

 

[GTaudiophile]

Originally posted by: michaelpatrick33

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
And why the fvck should I care? This is America. The land of opportunity. People can get off their lazy asses, establish a work ethic, read a few books, and make their own success.

It's time for you apologizing Liberals, those responsible for the pussification of America, to stop treating the US Government as a crutch for the lazy. I mean, the fools in Orlando and Miami today closed the schools because of 20 MPH winds and rain. WTF! I really don't care if those spoiled-brat hellions called students have to whine and cry while walking to their sh!tty Government schools in rain, sleet, or snow. Their parents did it. Why can't they?

Also, the situation in NOLA is the perfect example of what happens when Big Government takes control, be it at the local, state, or federal level.

:laugh: Yeah, if we could just make blacks slaves again and all the Hispanics our gardeners we wouldn't have any problems right? We have been essentially racist denying minority equal rights for 3/4th's of our history and it hasn't been solved yet. I agree with Bill Cosby the African Americans must take responsibility for themselves but to ignore the latent racism and classism that is still occurring in the country is to keep your head in the sand. Your stereotyping is so outrageously stupid that it is staggering. Take some sociology courses and grow up.

The poor are lazy :roll: Yeah that's it. Unbelievable

Excuse me, but you're the one being racist, automatically associating the blacks and hispanics with "lazy" Americans. I never said such a thing! Here, south of Atlanta, I live near all sorts of minorities who live in multi-million-dollar homes and drive fancy cars, fancier than I could ever hope to afford. And the one thing I bet 90% of them have in common is a solid work ethic. Work ethic and determination are what save people from poverty, not your beloved government tit.

 

[xenolith]

Originally posted by: yllus
Interestingly, historical evidence may be pointing at not throwing money at the problem as a real solution.

QFT

Two undeniable truths about poverty;

1. TAKING PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY will pull you out of poverty! Your own decissions and actions determine your lot in life!!!

2. There will always, always, always be poor people in a free economy, always!

 

[Extelleron]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
And why the fvck should I care? This is America. The land of opportunity. People can get off their lazy asses, establish a work ethic, read a few books, and make their own success.

It's time for you apologizing Liberals, those responsible for the pussification of America, to stop treating the US Government as a crutch for the lazy. I mean, the fools in Orlando and Miami today closed the schools because of 20 MPH winds and rain. WTF! I really don't care if those spoiled-brat hellions called students have to whine and cry while walking to their sh!tty Government schools in rain, sleet, or snow. Their parents did it. Why can't they?

Also, the situation in NOLA is the perfect example of what happens when Big Government takes control, be it at the local, state, or federal level.

All I can say to you is : :disgust:

What does not sending students to school in bad weather conditions have to do with this? You can't expect to make people come to school in such conditions.

 

[WHAMPOM]

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
And the government should be responsible for pulling people out of poverty?

Of coiurse, the effect of natural disasters that destroy an economy would have no impact on the numbers.

From about 1959 to about 1973 the percentage living in poverty declined. Since about '73 it has generally risen (though there were reversals during the '80s and again in the late '90s).

Some simple graphs regarding poverty.


Exactly what series of natural disasters are you referring to that have affected us for roughly 33 years?

Twenty one years of Republican Presidents?

 

[WHAMPOM]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975

Trickle-down economics fails for a second time. When are these retards going to pull their heads out their collective asses?

And what solution do you propose as an alternative? Throwing money at the problem obviously isn't working either.

The poverty crisis starts at the local government level, not the federal level. Only local government officials have an understanding of the dynamics in their communities to truly enable change.

Why do inner city neighborhoods continue to spiral into decay...children born out of wedlock, poor school systems, gang activity, drugs, substance abuse, poor adult role models, and a myriad of other dynamics all contribute...yet very few local leaders are willing or perhaps able to tackle these dynamics one by one...instead, the tendency is to blame the federal government, and poor money into programs that obviously are not working.

How do you end the spiral...is starts in the school systems and radiates out into the community...prevent kids from dropping out of school and ensuring that they have access to higher education is usually the first step.

I dunno. It seems that one in eight is a HUUUGGGEEEE amount of people living in poverty.

Yes, and it is unacceptable...unfortunately, both Democrats and Republicans use this fact as a political poker chip...I have yet to see either party truly take a leadership position in proposing a viable solution.

Education is the greatest deterrent to poverty.

 

[WHAMPOM]

Originally posted by: techs
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060829/ts_nm/life_usa_poverty_dc

U.S. data show one in eight Americans in poverty By Joanne Morrison

In the world's biggest economy one in eight Americans and almost one in four blacks lived in poverty last year, the U.S. Census Bureau said on Tuesday, releasing a figure virtually unchanged from 2004.

The survey also showed 15.9 percent of the population, or 46.6 million, had no health insurance, up from 15.6 percent in 2004 and the fifth increase in a row.

It was the first year since President George W. Bush took office in 2001 that the poverty rate did not increase. As in past years, the figures showed poverty especially concentrated among blacks and Hispanics.

In all, some 37 million Americans lived below the poverty line, defined as having an annual income below around $10,000 for an individual or $20,000 for a family of four.

The last decline in poverty was in 2000, the final year of Bill Clinton's presidency, when it fell to 11.3 percent.

"It shows that we are spending more money than ever on anti-poverty programs and we haven't done anything to reduce poverty," said Michael Tanner of CATO Institute, a free market think tank in Washington.

Around a quarter of blacks and 21.8 percent of Hispanics were living in poverty. Among whites, the rate edged down to 8.3 percent from 8.7 percent in 2004.

"Among African Americas the problem correlates primarily to the inner-city and single mothers," said Tanner, adding that blacks also suffer disproportionately from poor education and lower quality jobs.

Black median income, at $30,858, was only 61 percent of the median for whites.

Some 17.6 percent of children under 18 and one in five of those under 6 were in poverty, higher than for any other age group.

Real median household income rose by 1.1 percent between to $46,326 from $45,817 -- its first increase since 1999.

The figures contained wide regional variations, ranging from a median household income of $61,672 in New Jersey to $32,938 for Mississippi.

Major cities with the highest proportions of poor people included Cleveland with 32.4 percent and Detroit with 31.4 percent under the poverty line.



I dunno. It seems that one in eight is a HUUUGGGEEEE amount of people living in poverty.

Divide out the national dept and you have 999 out of a thousand living in poverty. Just a thought.

 

[johnnobts]

Education is the greatest deterrent to poverty.


_____________

And I would argue the greatest deterrent to education is growing up in a single-parent household. Consider: the drop-out rate among black students is 50 percent in America today! 50 percent! The percent of black children born out of wedlock is 70 percent. correlation? Methinks so. Please don't flame me as a racist for quoting stats. Not wanting to pick on the black community, but this is a matter that needs to be explored and dealt with. READ JUAN WILLIAMS' book, ENOUGH

can we blame bush for this? not really... increase in poverty is more a matter of failure in personal responsibility than the government's fault. You can have the best teachers in the public school system, but without a stable home environment a child is always going to be at a disadvantage when it comes to learning.

 

[Extelleron]

Originally posted by: johnnobts
Education is the greatest deterrent to poverty.


_____________

And I would argue the greatest deterrent to education is growing up in a single-parent household. Consider: the drop-out rate among black students is 50 percent in America today! 50 percent! The percent of black children born out of wedlock is 70 percent. correlation? Methinks so. Please don't flame me as a racist for quoting stats. Not wanting to pick on the black community, but this is a matter that needs to be explored and dealt with. READ JUAN WILLIAMS' book, ENOUGH

can we blame bush for this? not really... increase in poverty is more a matter of failure in personal responsibility than the government's fault. You can have the best teachers in the public school system, but without a stable home environment a child is always going to be at a disadvantage when it comes to learning.

If education is needed, then Colleges must not be allowed to charge 20-30k a year for a college education- how many people REALLY can afford it, unless their parents are rich and paying for it, OR they're getting a good scholarship? Even so, room and board, books, etc.......... not everyone can afford it and to get a good job today you need a college education.

The government must intervene and force colleges to lower their prices tremendously- then they'll think twice about the huge pools and hot tubs, the gyms, all the sometimes useless research Professors do, etc....... and actually worry about educating the students.

 

[bobdelt]

Originally posted by: Pens1566
Not necessarily, but on the other hand its policies shouldn't be putting more people below the poverty line either.

But the amount of people below the poverty line hasnt dramatically increased the past 6 years, in fact, its decreased! omg!

 

[yllus]

Originally posted by: Extelleron
If education is needed, then Colleges must not be allowed to charge 20-30k a year for a college education- how many people REALLY can afford it, unless their parents are rich and paying for it, OR they're getting a good scholarship? Even so, room and board, books, etc.......... not everyone can afford it and to get a good job today you need a college education.

The government must intervene and force colleges to lower their prices tremendously- then they'll think twice about the huge pools and hot tubs, the gyms, all the sometimes useless research Professors do, etc....... and actually worry about educating the students.

Who decides what is "useless research" and what is useful?

Huge pools, hot tubs (can't say I've seen that at my university), gyms... Yeah, giving students the ability to exercise and engage in sports is totally the wrong way to go.

 

[Extelleron]

Originally posted by: yllus

Originally posted by: Extelleron
If education is needed, then Colleges must not be allowed to charge 20-30k a year for a college education- how many people REALLY can afford it, unless their parents are rich and paying for it, OR they're getting a good scholarship? Even so, room and board, books, etc.......... not everyone can afford it and to get a good job today you need a college education.

The government must intervene and force colleges to lower their prices tremendously- then they'll think twice about the huge pools and hot tubs, the gyms, all the sometimes useless research Professors do, etc....... and actually worry about educating the students.

Who decides what is "useless research" and what is useful?

Huge pools, hot tubs (can't say I've seen that at my university), gyms... Yeah, giving students the ability to exercise and engage in sports is totally the wrong way to go.

Some research done by professors is useless and important, but more should be done to ensure that that which is useless is phased out.

And the point is when people can't afford college already, the last thing they need is the price to be raised MORE for non-essentials such as pools, etc.......overall, college costs too much for what it's worth and is one of the financial areas that needs to be government controlled- the price of college is rising more than any other product on the market, and for something as essential as college EVERYONE should be able to go, not just a portion of the population.

 

[yllus]

Originally posted by: Extelleron

Originally posted by: yllus

Originally posted by: Extelleron
If education is needed, then Colleges must not be allowed to charge 20-30k a year for a college education- how many people REALLY can afford it, unless their parents are rich and paying for it, OR they're getting a good scholarship? Even so, room and board, books, etc.......... not everyone can afford it and to get a good job today you need a college education.

The government must intervene and force colleges to lower their prices tremendously- then they'll think twice about the huge pools and hot tubs, the gyms, all the sometimes useless research Professors do, etc....... and actually worry about educating the students.

Who decides what is "useless research" and what is useful?

Huge pools, hot tubs (can't say I've seen that at my university), gyms... Yeah, giving students the ability to exercise and engage in sports is totally the wrong way to go.

Some research done by professors is useless and important, but more should be done to ensure that that which is useless is phased out.

And the point is when people can't afford college already, the last thing they need is the price to be raised MORE for non-essentials such as pools, etc.......overall, college costs too much for what it's worth and is one of the financial areas that needs to be government controlled- the price of college is rising more than any other product on the market, and for something as essential as college EVERYONE should be able to go, not just a portion of the population.

Clearly someone views it as useful if the research receives funding.

I'd consider athletics facilities essential to college. There may be a need for some moderation of college tuitions, but it's rather clear that college isn't for everyone - so there's nothing wrong with only a portion being able to attend. In fact, dropping the tuition too much is likely to devalue college as a whole.