Tuesday, September 20, 2011

Record poverty levels. . .

One of CitySquare's great board members sent me this summary of last Wednesday's report on the dramatic growth of poverty in the U.S. over the past year. 

Dramatic. 

Sobering. 

Sadly challenging. 

Difficult beyond words.


The Dallas Morning News has an article on the front page today:  Poverty in US Reaches Record. 

46.2 million now live at or below the official poverty line.

Poverty line for family of four is $22,314.00.

Texas poverty rate is up 9% to 18.4%. National average is 15.1%.

Breakdown is:

Blacks – 27.4%
Hispanic – 26.6%
Asian – 12.1%
White, non-hispanic – 9.9%

Since 2001 median household income has fallen 6.4% to $49,445 in 2010.

Concerning numbers indeed.

16 comments:

Anonymous said...

The poverty rate will get worse if this administration does not stop punishing the people who create jobs. For example, where is the justice in double taxation, a capital gains tax on top of federal tax? There is no truth whatsoever that Warren Buffett pays a lower tax in percentage than his secretary. Oh wait, he owes I billion in back taxes, so maybe so. Also, little Timmie, our Treasury secretary is a tax cheat. How can these people even show their faces?

Anonymous said...

Obama math:

Hey, Hubby, I'm going out to buy a whole new wardrobe because we are not buying a new car this year, never intended to buy one because this is not the year for a new car. Therefore, we saved $30,000 to spend in other ways.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous @7:56, some of us believe that God grants livelihoods and that, therefore, the rich do not "create jobs" but instead withhold livelihoods. What do you think of that?

Jeff W

Anonymous said...

Jeff W.

I haven't the slightest idea what you are talking about.

Anonymous said...

God is so weak that Donald Trump and Warren Buffet and, well, those Lexus drivers in West Plano can just withhold livelihoods from all the good people like us.

Anonymous said...

Who said this:

Four years ago, I stood before you and told you my story, of the brief union between a young man from Kenya and a young woman from Kansas who weren't well-off or well-known, but shared a belief that in America their son could achieve whatever he put his mind to.

It is that promise that's always set this country apart, that through hard work and sacrifice each of us can pursue our individual dreams, but still come together as one American family, to ensure that the next generation can pursue their dreams, as well. That's why I stand here tonight. Because for 232 years, at each moment when that promise was in jeopardy, ordinary men and women -- students and soldiers, farmers and teachers, nurses and janitors -- found the courage to keep it alive.

We meet at one of those defining moments, a moment when our nation is at war, our economy is in turmoil, and the American promise has been threatened once more.

Tonight, more Americans are out of work and more are working harder for less. More of you have lost your homes and even more are watching your home values plummet. More of you have cars you can't afford to drive, credit cards, bills you can't afford to pay, and tuition that's beyond your reach.

These challenges are not all of government's making. But the failure to respond is a direct result of a broken politics in Washington and the failed policies of George W. Bush.

Anonymous said...

Again, it amazes me how so many who comment here turn anything written into their own political rant. Seriously, at least just START with a comment about how sad it is that all those people are poor. There's no hint of compassion. You just sound heartless and soul-less, and not a bit like Jesus, who I take it from yesterday's comments some of you profess to follow.

Then again, maybe you actually don't care.

Anonymous said...

Anon. 7:07

This country is in BIG trouble. I do not want people to be poor, but whether you realize it or not it is politics that is making them that way. It's true there has always been poverty but not like this, except during the depression. In this case it is deliberate.

Anonymous said...

I'm amazed, too, that liberals keep pushing us toward the socialist model of Europe. While the Germans (who implemented austerity measures at the beginning of the recession and rebounded impressively) are now the only hope of the EU, the rest of Europe keeps whining and rioting. The Germans will put a stop to all this in just a few months, but it will be too late to save the EU experiment.

Here we are in the shadows of the most impressive economy (USA) in history driving ourselves toward the high tax, high unemployment, slow/no growth model that modern Europe is known for. The natural end of the Democrat Socialist model is collapse, now occurring.

The disease Obama carries is the same one Hillary Clinton carried when she attempted her version of universal healthcare, and the same as our Frog-in-Residence, John Kerry, carried as he heralded the glorious, sophisticated French society. Thankfully, Obama is incompetent. Otherwise, he would have succeeded. Hillary would have gotten the job done. The Great Orator continues to let his agenda slip in the most awkward of circumstances (crafty plumber).

Yes, I am amazed. We are the change we've been waiting for. Our continued slide into laziness, blame deflection, and growing entitlement mentality has made us into something quite different from the Americans who put up their farms and businesses to fund the Revolutionary War.

But don't worry libs, even the most conservative govt. can't find a way to deny your right to orgasm. You'll let us take the tax code away from you and we'll let you have your irresponsible fun.

Jeremy Gregg said...

Obama's Tax Hikes Expected To Have Little Impact On The Rich:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/20/obama-tax-rich_n_971658.html

"Historically, there's essentially no correlation" between tax rates for the rich and economic growth...To argue that taxing the wealthy will necessarily damage the economy is at best specious, at worst perverse."

Anonymous said...

Granted, we have high unemployment and low growth. But that cannot with be blamed on this one president any more than it can me blamed on the last one, or Congress alone(whether R or D), or on things that Washington does not control. The US economy is far too large and complex for such simplistic assessments (unless you just demand simplistic thinking).

High taxes on who? We have the lowest tax rates in 50 years.

Once again ... inane, reflexive ranting.

Anonymous said...

So neither the president nor the congress are responsible for the data on this graph?

Anonymous said...

So federal spending is increasing (with no one to blame) and now we're going to do this.

Anonymous said...

I don't mind an increase to about or slightly above the 30-year historic average, as long as we spread the burden fairly and level off the spending.

I've said this before, but Larry doesn't factor it into his approach - the correlation between unwed pregnancy and poverty is extremely high. If your born into a home with a mother and father, your chance of living in poverty is about 6%, with only a mother your chance of living in poverty is about 32%.

High govt. spending & high taxes remove captial from the market. Due to single parenthood and low education levels, a certain "floor" of poverty will always exist as these factors are immune from govt. taxing and spending. But taken together, those familites with both a mother and father with low education and lower incomes are susceptible to the lack of capital in the market as the economy contracts when inlfation exists, when taxes on employers increases and these employers reduce staffing levels and cut capital equipment orders, and when govt. decides how money will be spent (like it or not, govt. spending is targeted spending, not entrepreneurial in nature, and it is usually a narrow range of laborers who benefit, and only for a short time). This is why we calculate figures like the $250K/stimulus job produced.

It is insulting to find stimulus dollars going to industries that can not compete in the marketplace. Obama made claims that his first stimulus package represented "shovel-ready" projects. But instead they went to big labor and now here we are again chanting "pass this bill now" on the promise that work needs to be done now. (He was standing on a bridge in need of maintenance, supposedly, when he made the last spending speech.) So why didn't someone maintain the bridge with the first round of stimulus money?

Liberal policies are historically convoluted. It's almost as if someone is repeatedly lying to us and they next lie contradicts the one before it. The liar is then confused as to why we are not convinced of the certainty of the promised outcome.

Anonymous said...

Anon 12:07:

Thanks. We may not agree, but you calmly stated a reasonable position without resort to political sound bites or rant.

Chris, others: please take note - you really can express a position without Beck/Limbaugh quotes and name calling.

rcorum said...

Anon 12:07, I love the way you construct a thought. I think everyone who posts here could take a lesson from you. Your arguments are logical and I personally think they are difficult to answer. I also think you are spot on with your references to the correlation between unwed births with no father in the picture and poverty. This is a clear moral issue, but more than that it is an economic issue. Larry, I again have a problem with your heavy use of statistics, not because they are not helpful, but because they are so often misused and otherwise manipulated. You have heard people say that you can prove almost anything with the Bible. Well, I think the same thing can be said with the twisting of statistics. In this case I don't really challenge the validity of the numbers, but using them to to draw general conclusions is tricky. I would hope that we would all agree that there is a real problem with poverty in America, but the real question is how to address the problem.