Poverty in United States, the faces behind the numbers

[Castout]

Thought this is something that's concerning and worth reading.

http://news.yahoo.com/behind-poverty...151738270.html

[Skybird]

It is not just politcal ideology and ideal realities read from papers. There is always faces behind the numbers. I especially am worried about the growing number of "faces" who get hit by cirumstances beyond their control or influence, the victims that are not responsible for fate bringing them down.

Last week it was reported that by official government statistics now every sixth American lives below the so-called poverty-treshold. The number of people living on the streets and having no place to house in, is growing.

It is not much better in parts of Europe, and most obviously in Greece. Here, it is every third citizen now living below that poverty-line. I also hear in a political debate yesterday that Greece' two biggest money-making companies are a bottle-filling company, and a lottery company. Go figure what this means for Greece's chances to ever get back on it's feet. The lack of "economic value added " (="Wertschöpfung der Wirtschaft") is a problem so big that it will cripple any chances for Greece to pay back its debts and get out out of the deep black hole they are in.

Not only in Italy, Spain, Portugal also, but also in parts and metropoles of for example France and Germany, the number of the disowned who have lost everything, is growing rapidly. Most of these before were members of the social middle-class with modest or good material living conditions. Until they lost everything to the banks' products, or lost their jobs - and the spiralling down began.

It can hit almost everybody these days. And we seem to have run out of "safe" havens.

[Castout]

I'm sorry to hear that Europe is in no better situation.

I thought Obama's 500 billion job creation stimulus was a bad idea in times of US mounting debt crisis but it might not be bad at all.

After all what we can do as human is to try and try and try.

[Castout]

Originally Posted by Skybird

It can hit almost everybody these days. And we seem to have run out of "safe" havens.

On the lighter side. . . .
I heard there's a cocaine plantation in Mexico that needed investors. Good return rate and fast too
All they need is couple grand and a family hostage.

[Betonov]

Originally Posted by Castout

On the lighter side. . . .
I heard there's a cocaine plantation in Mexico that needed investors. Good return rate and fast too
All they need is couple grand and a family hostage.

Nah, false reports to raise demand. The influx of cheap chineese fertilizer lowered the quality of the harvest. Better to invest in Slovenian marihuana fields for 2012. Eco and bio.

[Armistead]

It will get worse. Sadly we live in a nation where those that have don't care about those that don't.

The other issue is poor planning, people just don't prepare for hard times. Many live in middle class, have cable, cell phones, eat out, spend spend spend, but don't save a dime. We're a nation or culture that promotes spending, not planning. I think we should add a class to high school that teaches finance at a usable level.

What's really sad is those that face disease and disability that have no cures, most end up in utter poverty alone.

[Ducimus]

Edit:

[nikimcbee]

The other issue is poor planning, people just don't prepare for hard times. Many live in middle class, have cable, cell phones, eat out, spend spend spend, but don't save a dime. We're a nation or culture that promotes spending, not planning. I think we should add a class to high school that teaches finance at a usable level.

This. We're a culture that lives beyond our means. If you want real poverty, go to Africa.

[Ducimus]

[MothBalls]

Originally Posted by Skybird

I especially am worried about the growing number of "faces" who get hit by cirumstances beyond their control or influence, the victims that are not responsible for fate bringing them down.

How do you separate those that are truly innocent from those who created their own mess? One of my neighbors is having a tough time after getting "laid off" (is what he told everyone) and can't find another job. Come to find out, he got fired for smoking pot while driving a company vehicle, and that's probably why he can't get hired anywhere else.

Because he has a family to feed, he'll draw thousands of dollars in public assistance, get free medical care and become a burden to society. Is it fair for taxpayers to support this idiot because he created his own situation?

Originally Posted by Armistead

The other issue is poor planning, people just don't prepare for hard times. Many live in middle class, have cable, cell phones, eat out, spend spend spend, but don't save a dime. We're a nation or culture that promotes spending, not planning.

This. So true, seen it so many times. When I worked in corporate America the parking lot looked like a luxury car dealer, with Lexus, Mercedes, Porsche, etc...... then at the end of the row, my 10 year old pickup truck. Those people are hurting now, some have asked me for help, I don't have any sympathy for them. They lived beyond their means and learned a lesson too late.

What bothers me is the children of these people have to suffer because their parents ego and poor planning. Not only should they have classes to teach children about how to plan ahead, they should teach the parents as well.

Maybe we need a parenting license in America. If you're going to have kids, you have to pass some simple tests and do some homework. Like how to manage finances and teach little Johnny to stand on his own two feet, and not spend more than you make until you go broke.

Then they blame it all on the politicians. If we spent as much effort on fixing problems rather than placing blame for them, we might get somewhere.

Originally Posted by nikimcbee

This. We're a culture that lives beyond our means. If you want real poverty, go to Africa.

I wonder about that. When determining the "poverty level" in countries, what exactly is poverty? In some countries the poverty level could be considered middle class by other countries. Just having a roof over your head and food on the table is a dream for many in the third world, taken for granted in other parts of the world.

[AVGWarhawk]

I agree with you points mothball. There are many who bucked or worked the system for years. It has caught up to them. However, there are those that did get nailed to the wall. I would say as a guess there are far fewer of these folks than those who worked the system for years.

[AVGWarhawk]

I wonder about that. When determining the "poverty level" in countries, what exactly is poverty? In some countries the poverty level could be considered middle class by other countries. Just having a roof over your head and food on the table is a dream for many in the third world, taken for granted in other parts of the world.

Based on the cost of living in a particular area.

[flatsixes]

Admittedly, I haven't read the entire document as of yet, but the I find the chart on page 4 (Figure 14) of the Census Bureau report on poverty very interesting. It seems that the percentage of the U.S. population in poverty has not varied all that greatly since the early 1960's. LBJ's War on Poverty clearly knocked the number down very early on, but I do not see any evidence (at least from this graph) that the myriad of subsequent anti-poverty programs made much of a dent in baseline poverty. Why?

Also, skip to page 18 and you find this shocker:

Work Experience

Among all workers aged 16 and older,
neither the poverty rate (7.0 percent)
nor the number in poverty (10.7 million)
in 2010 were statistically different from 2009.

People aged 16 years and older who
worked some or all of 2010 had a
lower poverty rate than those who
did not work at any time***8212;7.0 percent
compared to 23.9 percent (Table 4). In
2010, the poverty rate among fulltime,
year-round workers (2.6 percent)
was lower than the rate for those who
worked less than full time, year round
(15.0 percent).

Among those who did not work at
least 1 week last year, the poverty rate
and the number in poverty increased
to 23.9 percent and 20.7 million in
2010 from 22.7 percent and 18.9 million in 2009 (Table 4).
Those who did not work in 2010 represented 66.0
percent of people aged 16 and older in
poverty, compared with 36.2 percent
of all people aged 16 and older.

Unemployment breeds poverty. Got it. But the difference between those who worked at least some of the time and those who did not work at all is staggering. The "working poor" seems to be, in actuality, a very small class indeed. Which is a good thing. But there's a core of poverty here that looks like a floor, and whatever it is we've been doing hasn't been effective.