They drive cars, but seldom new ones. They earn paychecks, but not big ones. Many own homes. Most pay taxes. Half are married, and nearly half live in the suburbs. None are poor, but many describe themselves as barely scraping by.
Down but not quite out, these Americans form a diverse group sometimes called “near poor” and sometimes simply overlooked ”” and a new count suggests they are far more numerous than previously understood.
When the Census Bureau this month released a new measure of poverty, meant to better count disposable income, it began altering the portrait of national need. Perhaps the most startling differences between the old measure and the new involves data the government has not yet published, showing 51 million people with incomes less than 50 percent above the poverty line. That number of Americans is 76 percent higher than the official account, published in September. All told, that places 100 million people ”” one in three Americans ”” either in poverty or in the fretful zone just above it.
During the past 50 years as the size of a comfortable and livable home increased from 1200-1500 square feet to 1800-3000 square feet; expensive vacations in Las Vegas or luxury cruises or trips to expensive amusement parks or expensive birthday party extravaganzas for youngsters and their tiny friends at fast food restaurants, etc. became the norm; teachers salaries, benefits and overtime perks in public schools grew year after year in actual value; when fewer people from the urban centers and suburbs saw any value in serving their country in the Armed Forces; as sex became a pleasurable social activity outside of marriage and child bearing and parenting became a terrible burden; when college students were provided education (?) in inane subjects and then found that employers didn’t value those educations; etc., I wondered when the bubble would burst.
We are a nation that has sold our productive capacity to ‘make things of value’,‘ things made by Americans in American manufacturing plants overseas; that has refused to do honest physical labor and instead expect illegal immigrants to do our physical labor with their hands; that now expects ‘something for nothing’ from the government without worrying about who actually pays for it; that instead of overcoming ethnic, racial and religious matters that occurred many several to many generations in the past (and some overseas in other countries) still wallow in self-imposed anger and misery and who somehow demand that these issues of the past be rectified, right now, today, and that somebody has to pay for what happened yesterday; that is some circles abandoning a sense of our uniqueness as a nation for the chimera of “world government†of laws made external to the Constitution of the United States somehow carrying more weight and being more binding on Americans within America; that recently has started demonizing persons who have seized the opportunities for success in America and who are now wealthy because of their enterprise and hard work as a selfish “one percent,“ etc.
So when I hear of the increasing number of “poor†in America, I wonder.
What is poor? People who are living far better than people who were comfortable and not poor fifty years ago but cannot support the material expectations of today’s life style?
Much of the inflation that has driven down the buying power of Americans today was caused by the almost insane desire of Americans for material things (things not necessary for a comfortable life but necessary for pleasure).
So,. The solution to being poor, as a nation, is to look within ourselves and to change our expectations and behavior in a responsible manner that will return our nation to financial stability and to reasonable (not exorbitant) lifestyle expectations.
Wow, a very impressive string of cliches.
In my comment #1. please correct
“We are a nation that has sold our productive capacity to ‘make things of value’,‘ things made by Americans in American manufacturing plants overseas;….”
to read
“We are a nation that has sold our productive capacity to ‘make things of value’ oversea (things made by Americans in American manufacturing plants);….”
AnglicanFirst, while I’m sure there are those who might be having a hard time affording a lifestyle they had become accustomed to, there are citizens who were never guilty of excessive consumerism, who had attained the lower middle class, perhaps own a small, modest home, and previously were able to afford their utilities, groceries, health care and make modest savings in the past, but no longer can. I know people like this, and have been witnessing the tragedies these people are suffering through, and not getting the help they need and deserve, even from their faith communities. There isn’t anyone paying attention to those people having to decide between paying their utility bills, and buying groceries.
It’s grotesque, that the poor and barely scraping by citizens in the US are being tarred with the same brush as those who gloated on about their disposable incomes for decades. It’s much the same kind of abuse that good, hardworking US citizens get heaped upon them, by those who seek to excuse the exploitation of our visa programs and illegal aliens, by claiming that US citizen workers are lazy and/or undeserving.
Lastly, it wasn’t “we” who sold our productive capacity overseas, but our politicians, and manufacturers. We weren’t asked, our jobs were taken from us, and we were left with nothing. It’s wrong to imply that the average US citizen holds any culpability to what’s happened to them, regarding this, we are the victims in all this.
[i]Lastly, it wasn’t “we†who sold our productive capacity overseas, but our politicians, and manufacturers[/i]
We didn’t sell our productive capacity overseas, we SENT it overseas. Minimum wage policies that impute value to labor far above the true value of the labor creates permanent unemployment here while sending a job overseas where the value is objectively quantified. High levels of corporate taxation to support a permanent welfare state here sends jobs overseas. Cost driving union contracts (steel, automotive) send jobs overseas to lower cost environments. Insane Governmental regulations which drive up manufacturing costs send jobs overseas. Insane energy policies send production overseas as well as our dollars to buy energy commodities we could produce here but refuse to. Insane regulations increase the cost of EVERYTHING we buy but provide no underlying value thus reducing our standard of living. The insane growth of the Federal Government swallows more of our economy while producing nothing of value, thus decreasing the level of real wealth in this nation.
And we have voted for and supported all of that as a nation: and as one radical preacher has intoned “America’s chickens are coming home to roost”
I love Anglican First’s casual dismissal of the data. Perhaps he might share what his particular delights are? What size is his house? Has he ever taken a vacation in expensive hotels?
BTW, my family and I live in a 1200 sq ft house. We have never had a vacation in any place but the houses of family members. We go to a fast food restaurant once in a while (less than thrice a month) – ah, but why burden Anglican First with facts? I should mention that I have very few friends and acquaintances that live as his stereotypes do – the ones that do have lots more income than I. But again, why burden someone with facts when he knows with absolute certitude that the poor have only themselves to blame.
I also want to congratulate the Deacon for his ability to blame all our economic woes on minimum wage workers who drove jobs overseas where Corporate America could make profits off slave labor; unions, insane governments and energy policies (hmm, how insane is it that that Corporate America manipulates fuel prices every holiday or every time an emir has a gas attack); and finally insane regulations that try to mitigate the effect of Corporate America on our environment and people’s lives (you might want to read today’s NYT’s article on the effects of “fracking” on towns in SW PA). Thanks for the blinding clarity you bring to the discussion.
My wife and I both served in the Air Force; she for four years, and me for 15 1/2 years, when I was retired for service-connected disability. She retired from Farmers Insurance Group, and I am on permanent VA 100% disability. We both receive Social Security and use the VA Healthcare System when we need it. In 2003, we bought a new 1,660 sq ft home in Lops Banos, and we manage to do pretty well, considering the economy. There are times when we have to “tighten the belt a bit,” but all in all, we manage to keep our heads above water. When we go on vacation, we stay away from expensive amusement parks and we go to the beach or the mountains……which aren’t far away. We also take advantage of group rates whenever we can; no need for expensive cruises, etc.
It seems to me that there is some truth to both sides of the above discussion. I grew up in the 1950s and 60s in a household with very few of the amenities of today’s housing and not nearly as much space as people expect today. Eating out at fast food outlets, or anywhere, was perhaps once or twice a year, not perhaps three times a month. My clothes were homemade. I suspect many of today’s “near poor” are not quite that close to the edge. Nor do we have in the US anything like the abject poverty on display in South Asia, Africa, and the slums of Brazil.
On the other hand, there certainly are people struggling. With high unemployment, extended unemployment for many, and with basics like grocery costs on the rise, the outlook is rough for lots of people. So while people are not “poor” as previous generations or other continents see “poor,” many people here do see their own standard of living declining and are gloomy about their prospects.
[i] I should mention that I have very few friends and acquaintances that live as his stereotypes do [/i]
Okay, AF wasn’t talking about you Dan, dissapointed?
[i]I also want to congratulate the Deacon for his ability to blame all our economic woes on minimum wage workers who drove jobs overseas [/i]
I’ll ignore the hyperbole there; but readily available data, coupled with a little logic demonstrates that a Government imposed minimum wage disadvantages people with minimum work skills, ie their skills and abilities are not worth the rate of pay forced on an employer, so the employer does not employ those people, denying them gainful employement and forcing them into Government run welfare dependency (Uncle Sam’s Plantation). The employer compensates by using either automation to replace the workers or overseas sourcing of goods and services where the value of the labor input is related to the skill level required.
Big Government affinity for the Plantation is flawed in that not everyone can live on the plantation, and moreover, not everyone wants to.
Yes Katherine, a lot of people are struggling for sure. Some are struggling just as you noted; costs of living going up but income stagnant or reduced through rampant unemployment or underemployment.
Others are struggling because they took on too much debt (housing, credit card, education) and now do not have the means to service the debt and maintain an expected level of living.
If we keeping digging into the hole we have already dug ourselves into, we will reach Greece.
#3 Mari, I absolutely agree with you. Those of us who lived within our means, played by the rules, and were responsible were hit just as hard, sometimes harder. So, the naysayers who say that if you’re not doing well and you don’t have a lot of savings/investments, it’s your own fault are living in some sort of bubble or the state of denial. Even a small mortgage becomes difficult to pay if you’ve lost your job or can’t work.
Not all regulations are insane – though some certainly are. Restricting lead, asbestos, and many other hazardous substances in manufacturing processes and products when it might be easier and cheaper to use them is a regulation that is very helpful. So are safety regulations in factories and products. “Caveat emptor” has its place, but many products are to complex to “caveat” well. And unions, while greedy and self-centered, do some protection against the greed of large corporations. (My brother works in the auto industry – he says it is hard to tell who is more greedy and short-sided, management or labor.)
We need industries that make things right here, even so. They need to be regulated. China does not regulate nearly as much, and that gives them something of a competitive advantage – but at a high social and environmental cost. So that is a factor, but it cannot be the only factor.