Last month a story by the Associated Press told the nation
that nearly half of the country is living in poverty, or on the edge of it: “Squeezed
by rising living costs, a record number of Americans — nearly 1 in 2 — have
fallen into poverty or are scraping by on earnings that classify them as low
income.”
Can’t you just hear the astonishment expressed over this
horrible development? “Things are so bad in America that nearly half of us are poor
or almost poor.”
Poverty: the word conjures up images of people living on the
streets or under bridges, with ragged clothes, begging for food. Or a family of
ten crowded into a 3-room apartment or a dilapidated trailer. That is the
picture of poverty. But for the vast majority of those that are the subject of
the AP story, conditions are much, much better than that. Nevertheless, some
folks accept this awful scenario without question, because it fits into their view
of America as a deeply flawed country that ignores the needy and must be
fundamentally transformed.
True, the protracted and anemic Obama recovery has had
terrible effects, as anti-business policies create uncertainty about the future,
which keeps people unemployed, causes some businesses to impose cut backs while
others are forced to shut down completely. However, even in the throes of the ghastly
Obama economy, half of us are not in or near poverty. At least not true
poverty.
In order to get close to the shocking 50 percent threshold,
the AP had to double-down on the poverty levels by adding in those earning up
to twice the poverty level, then describe these people as “scraping by” as low
income earners. There are 49.1 million people whose earnings level classifies them
as in poverty. That’s a lot of people, but it is a long way from 50 percent, only
about a third of that number.
To truly shock people, a 16 percent poverty rate just won’t
do; the number must be much higher. So, by adding in the 97.3 million
classified as “low income,” which is the group at 100 to 199 percent of the
poverty level, that adds another 31 percent to the total, and gets pretty close
to one out of two Americans.
The purpose here is not to diminish the dire existence of
truly poor Americans, but to bring honesty into the discussion.
I have written before about how “normal” the lives of many
of those in the “poor” half of the population are, using government data that show
that the typical poor household has a car, air conditioning, cable or satellite
TV service, not one but two color TVs, a VCR and a DVD player, and kitchens
equipped with a refrigerator, a range and a microwave. Half of them have a home computer and a third
have a widescreen TV, and one in four has a digital recorder.
It is a positive aspect of the capitalist system that the
price of products becomes more affordable over time, enabling more and more of
us to acquire things we want. However, it is a truism that truly poor people cannot
afford to purchase such unnecessary items at any price.
The anti-capitalism folks on the Left want you to believe
that despite having these modern conveniences, poor families still are deprived
of basic needs, like food and housing. If this is true, doesn’t that beg the
question of why these families spend scarce dollars on non-necessities instead
of on food and better housing?
But, as the Heritage Foundation explains, the truth is that half
of the people addressed in the AP story live in single-family homes and 40
percent live in apartments. Their residences are not overcrowded and for the most
part are in good repair. “Poor Americans, on average, live in larger houses or
apartments than does the average, non-poor individual living in Sweden, France,
Germany or the United Kingdom,” Heritage’s Robert Rector and Rachel Sheffield
wrote in September.
But what about the children, the one in four who go to bed
hungry every night? Well, as it turns out, that, too, is untrue. Heritage
reports from Department of Agriculture data that “96 percent of poor parents
stated that their children were never hungry at any time during 2009, despite
the severity of the recession.”
It is nothing short of despicable, and maybe it ought to be
illegal, to attempt to convince the American people that half of us are in
poverty or in dire financial circumstances when that is provably untrue. We can
only guess at the motivation of the Associated Press in perpetrating this
fraudulent picture of life in the United States. Playing such games –
exaggerating the conditions and the numbers of poor – benefits some, but it
does not benefit the poor.
It’s an attempt to soften us up and make us more willing to support
starting new government programs or expand existing programs to help the poor,
and it shifts the focus away from other serious cultural problems, like the
collapse of marriage and the family, and the erosion of the work ethic.
Click here to Comment
6 comments:
Hello! Just want to say thank you for this interesting article! =) Peace, Joy.
We are all becoming too soft!
Amen, Steve. Amen.
Although our unemployment rate is high and many are underemployed, compared to other countries (who must be laughing their butts off at that definition of poor)we are still a rich nation. That can change and will if the Obama era is not brought to a screeching halt in November.
You said a mouthful there, Betty Jo.
Now, if we can just keep the Republicans from destroying each other ...
I'd love to see a Smokey shot "annual budget" for a family of four making $25k a year, before taxes, as this places them above the poverty line...
I'd be curious as to how Smokey would live like this... rent, food and utilities alone quickly dwindle the budget... but I'm sure they are just lazy and looking for a lifelong handout...
Post a Comment