Posted on 04/08/2014 7:11:28 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
A major concern of progressives is their supposed interest in the fate of the poor. They purport to be the champions of the poor. But the truth is that they need the poor more than the poor need them, in a symbiotic relationship. As much as 75% of the money allocated to the poor is consumed by the vast bureaucracies that administer this aid.
[SNIP]
What is poverty? The late political scientist Edward Banfield provided four degrees of poverty: destitution, which is lack of income sufficient to assure physical survival and to prevent suffering from hunger, exposure, or remediable or preventable illness; want, which is lack of enough income to support essential welfare; hardship, which is lack of enough to prevent acute persistent discomfort or inconvenience. To this he added a fourth: relative deprivation which is a lack of enough income, status, or whatever else may be valued to prevent one from feeling poor in comparison to others. This last category is elastic enough to include millionaires who covet the possessions and power of billionaires. One important category of poverty Banfield does not mention is psychological or spiritual poverty. This is the most significant form of poverty in an affluent society when physical needs are easily met.
Where do America's "poor" stand in this scale of poverty? In a nation of over 300 million people there are undoubtedly cases of destitution, want and hardship. However, these cases appear to be the exception. As former Secretary of Agriculture Dan Glickman stated, "More people die in the United States of too much food than of too little." According to William Bennett, "Poor people in America have a higher standard of living than middle-class Americans of previous generations."
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Thanks, you just bumped me up to upper middle class.
(/libthink /sarc)
As Thomas Sowell points out, there is no shame in having a bottom quintile, if - as is the case in America - being in the bottom quintile is strongly negatively correlated with age. You could have a society in which everyone at any given age made the same amount of money - but in which everyone gets an equal raise annually. In such a society everyone would have identical prospects when born - but there could be more or less radical difference between the lowest-quintile youngsters and the highest-paid seniors.
You took me WAAAAY too seriously.
I was pointing out the intellectual vapidity of the left’s “caring about the pooowuh”.
Some 87% of the world’s population lives below the US “poverty line”.
Half the world’s population lives on less than $2/day.
If you’re doing better than 9 out of 10 people on the planet, or even just half, you’re not poor.
Author makes good categories. “Destitution” and “want” are poor; “hardship” and “relative deprivation” are not.
Haiti has poverty, as there is nowhere near enough natural resources to support the population, and moving elsewhere is nigh unto impossible for most. Here, the problem isn’t resources, it’s the will to survive.
Thank You. I lived in southern CA until I was eleven. I used to complain to my dad that I was “tired of being poor” since I didn’t have all the stuff other kids had.
One weekend he put us all in the car and drove us to Tijuana. I never complained again.
Statiscally of course. Every family in the US could earn $100K a year and there would still be a bottom quintile.
Shabazz Napier is the name if the person I was trying to think of. Something wrong there. Maybe he just mismanages his money. But his parents could send a care package or a little cash. Worse comes to worse, there are food banks, free meals at churches, etc.
During the school year, Mr. Napier has an all-you-can-eat meal plan at his college, as reported by his college.
Of course, the cafeteria is only open 12 hours per day, so maybe he just gets a little peckish in the very early morning hours before breakfast.
sitetest
the media (they are not main stream just well established in NYC’s media hub) is pushing these stories.
Today and yesterday NPR had nothing but glowing praise anecdote stories about the incredible wonderfulness of obamacare. 100% pure boldfaced lies in the face of reality but that did not matter.
(BTW time for NPR’s tax exempt status to end)
Thanks. I was hoping that a thread would be devoted to school athlete unionization issue and Mr. Napier’s problems, but evidently not
These days any time I see a push for unionization of ANYTHING, I assume its because the unions are losing so much influence, they’re trying to grab it where they can.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.