America's poor

[h2co-pilot]

Rush got me all riled up this afternoon. He was referencing this paper; it is pretty enlightening:

August 27, 2007
How Poor Are America's Poor? Examining the "Plague" of Poverty in America
by Robert E. Rector


Poverty is an important and emotional issue. Last year, the Census Bureau released its annual report on poverty in the United States declaring that there were 37 million poor persons living in this country in 2005, roughly the same number as in the preceding years. According to the Census report, 12.6 percent of Americans were poor in 2005; this number has varied from 11.3 percent to 15.1 percent of the population over the past 20 years.

To understand poverty in America, it is important to look behind these numbers—to look at the actual living conditions of the individuals the government deems to be poor. For most Americans, the word "poverty" suggests destitution: an inability to provide a family with nutritious food, clothing, and reasonable shelter. But only a small number of the 37 million persons classified as "poor" by the Census Bureau fit that description. While real material hardship certainly does occur, it is limited in scope and severity. Most of America's "poor" live in material conditions that would be judged as comfortable or well-off just a few generations ago. Today, the expenditures per person of the lowest-income one-fifth (or quintile) of households equal those of the median American household in the early 1970s, after adjusting for inflation.


The following are facts about persons defined as "poor" by the Census Bureau, taken from various government reports:

• Forty-three percent of all poor households actu­ally own their own homes. The average home owned by persons classified as poor by the Census Bureau is a three-bedroom house with one-and-a-half baths, a garage, and a porch or patio.

• Eighty percent of poor households have air conditioning. By contrast, in 1970, only 36 percent of the entire U.S. population enjoyed air conditioning.

• Only 6 percent of poor households are over­crowded. More than two-thirds have more than two rooms per person.

• The average poor American has more living space than the average individual living in Paris, London, Vienna, Athens, and other cities throughout Europe. (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-seven percent of poor households have a color television; over half own two or more color televisions.

• Seventy-eight percent have a VCR or DVD player; 62 percent have cable or satellite TV reception.

• Eighty-nine percent own microwave ovens, more than half have a stereo, and more than a third have an automatic dishwasher.

As a group, America's poor are far from being chronically undernourished. The average consump­tion of protein, vitamins, and minerals is virtually the same for poor and middle-class children and, in most cases, is well above recommended norms. Poor children actually consume more meat than do higher-income children and have average protein intakes 100 percent above recommended levels. Most poor children today are, in fact, supernour­ished and grow up to be, on average, one inch taller and 10 pounds heavier than the GIs who stormed the beaches of Normandy in World War II.

In good economic times or bad, the typical poor family with children is supported by only 800 hours of work during a year: That amounts to 16 hours of work per week. If work in each family were raised to 2,000 hours per year—the equivalent of one adult working 40 hours per week throughout the year— nearly 75 percent of poor children would be lifted out of official poverty.

cont... http://www.heritage.org/Research/Welfare/bg2064.cfm
-------------------------------

It goes on and on. So could I .....

[H2wifey]

WOW, I never knew that.

[H2wifey]

Originally Posted by Steve - SanJose

Poor in the US often = fat.

[CO Hummer]

So what's new.

Americans are idiots. All of what is printed is true, yet nobody gives a crap. It's astounding.

[KenP]

Listening to that on the radio today really pissed me off.

Time to rejoin the Heritage Foundation.

[DRTYFN]

Originally Posted by h2co-pilot

...and a porch.....

And who might be sitting on those porches?

[h2co-pilot]

DOn't get me wrong, I think it is great that our "poor" live better than most in the world. I just don't like being told that it is worse than it really is by a certain party/parties/leaders.

[ChiHummer3]

Originally Posted by h2co-pilot

I just don't like being told that it is worse than it really is by a certain party/parties/leaders.

[Adam in CO]

Guess we are poor. Cool. Time to go get on welfare and food stamps.

[h2co-pilot]

Well, first you'll have to get divorced since marriage is not favored in the welfare system and then you'll have to cut your hours and ambition to work. Also it would certainly help if you pushed out more kids once you get started.

[GLBLWARMR]

I do have a heart but I quite caring about the nations poor when I heard about a woman in Mass. that was collecting approximately 1 million dollars legally a year in welfare for her and her 14 kids she was raising. There are a few poor that I feel sorry for but for the most part the country provides enough support and services for them that they make more than I do in a year and I spend times in war zones. Oh well what can I say???

[DennisAJC]

Poor little fatties.

I guess lazy took on a new meaning.

[Agriv8r]

Originally Posted by DennisAJC

Poor little fatties.

I guess lazy took on a new meaning.

there is probably an article that would compare the lazy now, to the lazy of the seventies and even the lazy of the european countries....i wonder if the lazy americans are really lazy or if it is just some political lip service....

[BKLYNH2]

I would have to say that the statistic about AC is a bit eroneous. Home air conditioning as we know it was relatively new in the 60's and very expensive. It was not until the 70's that AC in the residential market really took off. It's like comparing how many people owned a 50" plasma the first year they were available and how many have them now.

[h2co-pilot]

Originally Posted by BKLYNH2

I would have to say that the statistic about AC is a bit eroneous. Home air conditioning as we know it was relatively new in the 60's and very expensive. It was not until the 70's that AC in the residential market really took off. It's like comparing how many people owned a 50" plasma the first year they were available and how many have them now.

I put that in red just because it was a weird fact. However, I wonder what the statistics are presently, world wide.

A/C is nice and in some areas vital, speaking of which- I bet the percentage is still low country wide. But it is a luxury, sometimes vital but a luxury. Someone in a povertous state should be considering the sacrifice.

The cable/satellite reception and cell phones slay me.

Poverty should be associated with bare need- food, shelter and water; along with providing education/trade cultivation.

[BKLYNH2]

Yeah, I could really get going on this one too. Unfortunately most govt. studies are so antiquated that they present very little useful information. I'd like to know what actually is the criteria for poor since the technical poor seem to be doing alright. In reality it is a very complex thing to understand, as standards of living have to be established geographicly not nationwide. I live in a 1000sf apt. which is obviously a lot smaller than the average home size, yet there are places I could live where the value of the apt. would provide me the largest mansion on the block. That being the case how is it that standards of living are based on national average income?

[h2co-pilot]

Originally Posted by BKLYNH2

Yeah, I could really get going on this one too. Unfortunately most govt. studies are so antiquated that they present very little useful information. I'd like to know what actually is the criteria for poor since the technical poor seem to be doing alright. In reality it is a very complex thing to understand, as standards of living have to be established geographicly not nationwide. I live in a 1000sf apt. which is obviously a lot smaller than the average home size, yet there are places I could live where the value of the apt. would provide me the largest mansion on the block. That being the case how is it that standards of living are based on national average income?

Good point.

There needs to be a better evaluation system.

For example, some people paid way too much for their iphone in the beginning, now people are getting it for sooooo much cheaper :

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,295917,00.html

[BKLYNH2]

Originally Posted by h2co-pilot

Good point.

There needs to be a better evaluation system.

For example, some people paid way too much for their iphone in the beginning, now people are getting it for sooooo much cheaper :

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,295917,00.html

HARDEE HAR HAR HAR! I have been enjoying my phone for a few months now that's worth something, no?
By the way I found a phone for you, too.

[DRTYFN]

Originally Posted by BKLYNH2

HARDEE HAR HAR HAR! I have been enjoying my phone for a few months now that's worth something, no?
By the way I found a phone for you, too.

Here's a GPS unit for you.

[BKLYNH2]

Originally Posted by DRTYFN

Here's a GPS unit for you.

I could see how someone with their head up their a$$ would find that useful, but please wash it off before you offer it to someone else.

I know ur h8n cawz u is jealous!