Poverty Rate In U.S. Saw Record Increase In 2009: 1 In 7 Americans Are Poor

[Techn0Girl]

Source: The Huffington Post

WASHINGTON — The number of people in the U.S. who are in poverty is on track for a record increase on President Barack Obama's watch, with the ranks of working-age poor approaching 1960s levels that led to the national war on poverty.

Census figures for 2009 – the recession-ravaged first year of the Democrat's presidency – are to be released in the coming week, and demographers expect grim findings.

It's unfortunate timing for Obama and his party just seven weeks before important elections when control of Congress is at stake. The anticipated poverty rate increase – from 13.2 percent to about 15 percent – would be another blow to Democrats struggling to persuade voters to keep them in power.

...

Among the 18-64 working-age population, the demographers expect a rise beyond 12.4 percent, up from 11.7 percent. That would make it the highest since at least 1965, when another Democratic president, Lyndon B. Johnson, launched the war on poverty that expanded the federal government's role in social welfare programs from education to health care.

Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/09/11/poverty-rate-in-us-saw-re_n_713387.html

---

My comments:

From http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/14/bank-of-america-ceo-moyni_n_423121.html

"Bank of America CEO Brian Moynihan told Karl that he saw "no disconnect" between lavish bonuses for executives at bailed out banks during a very tough economic climate for the average American."

From http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/02/05/goldman-sachs-bonuses-ceo_n_451961.html

"Goldman Sachs Group Inc. CEO Lloyd Blankfein is getting a $9 million stock bonus for 2009, a modest payday by Wall Street standards that appears aimed at quelling criticism of the bank's compensation practices."

From http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/02/10/obama-says-he-doesnt-begrudge-bank-executives-their-bonuses/

"Mr. Obama, responding to a question, termed the $17 million bonus awarded Jamie Dimon, the chief executive of JP Morgan Chase, or the $9 million that went to Lloyd Blankfein, the Goldman Sachs chief executive, as “extraordinary,” but compared the amounts to what some athletes make. He said, “there are some baseball players who are making more than that and don’t get to the World Series either, so I’m shocked by that as well.” "

[dkf]

1. Poverty thresholds

http://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty/10poverty.shtml

The 2010 Poverty Guidelines for the
48 Contiguous States and the District of Columbia
Persons in family Poverty guideline
1 $10,830
2 14,570
3 18,310
4 22,050
5 25,790
6 29,530
7 33,270
8 37,010
For families with more than 8 persons, add $3,740 for each additional person.

[Cal Carpenter]

12. This is very important information

These levels are ridiculously low for most parts of the country. You could make twice that for a family of 4 and not be able to afford your basic bills (housing, health care, day care, utilities, etc).

As far as people's day-to-day reality, the poverty rate is much higher than even the numbers in the OP suggest.

Coupled with the fact that there are people out there making millions a year, it is unconscionable.

[bobbolink]

14. You're very right.. the formula is very outdated, and badly needs to be refigured.

It contributes to homelessness, because it doesen't take into account the horrendously rising costs of housing.

But, its not an issue that "progressives" are willing to take up.

[defendandprotect]

17. Stuff everyone should know . . . bad enough -- but, then, even worse .. . GOP screwed with

all economic statistics -- and the info even Obama is getting should be challenged --

they have to remake these statistical tables!

[OhioChick]

13. Pathetic guidelines that are very telling. n/t

[Techn0Girl]

18. So true - Here's another important economic statistic that's been "juiced".....

The unemployment stats aren't what you think they are.
You THINK that unemployment nationwide is around 9.5%, right?
Wrong.

Go google "unemployment U6" then Google "Unemployment U3"

The U3 stats are what the government releases to the newspapers and that the NewsCorps dutifully report.

The official Govt U6 stats though tell the real story.
Don;t want to spoil your surprise so go Google it :)

[OhioChick]

19. Oh....I know the unemployment rate is FAR higher than 9.5...

I'm familiar with U3 and U6.

For those that don't understand:

Understanding Unemployment Data

There are six levels of data in the collection of unemployment and they are U1-U6. The release that we see every month for the previous month, which typically will include a revision of the last release, is the U3 number. However, if you want to understand what is really going on in our labor markets you must understand the definition of the U1-U6 data.

U1= The percentage of the labor force that is unemployed 15 weeks or longer

U2= The percentage of the labor force for the previous month who lost their jobs or have completed temporary work such as the Consensus employees that are hired this year to take the consensus, they are not permanent employees and when they fall off the payroll they will show up in U2. You can consider U2 as “Those who lost their jobs” whether fired, laid off, or completed temporary work.

U3= This is the official released data which the news focuses on and retail investors as many are unaware that there are additional levels and measures of unemployment. U3 is the percentage of the Civilian labor force that is unemployed AND actively seeking work.

U4=Is the same as U3 but adds what are termed as “Discouraged Workers”. Typically this addition of “Discouraged Workers” is an almost insignificant addition to the U# rate, typically accounting for a few tenths of a percentage point.

U5= Is the U4 rate (discouraged workers) and adds to the tally what is termed as “Marginally Attached Workers” or those that would like to work, but have given up seeking employment for a number of different reasons. Discouraged workers include those that believe the search for work is futile are considered “discouraged workers”, those that have rea sons -any reason beyond that, are put into the broader classification of “marginally attached”.

U6=Adds “part time workers” -an hour a week will do it, but those that wish to be gainfully, full-time employees. Typically this will add about 2-3% points to the U3 number but as we have seen recently with U3 at 9.7 and U6 at 16.8, the difference is quite dramatic.

http://www.trade-guild.net/2010/03/understanding-unemployment-data.html

[Techn0Girl]

20. Fantastic link! I'm bookmarking that - thank you :)

[Stand and Fight]

24. Link...

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t12.htm

[Skittles]

2. nice dig at Obama in that first line

whatever he has done OBAMA DID NOT CAUSE THIS RECESSION

[No Elephants]

4. True, but Bush was very cagey in saying he would not release the remaining TARP unless Obama asked

him to and Obama was responsible for the stimulus. We can argue that he had no choice about either, but were both done as wisely and effectively as they may have been? All that is linked in the public mind under "bad economy." Besides, at this level, we are way over the head of low info voters.

And, only this morning, I heard someone (Republican, I assume) on Chris Matthews refer to Obama's TARP and Obama's stimulus and cite Geithner's role in the underlying problem.

[JCMach1]

3. Do we need further proof Bush flushed the country down the toilet?

[Techn0Girl]

15. Bush may have flushed the handle....

But Obama is working the plunger now like mad.

Wake up. If Obama doesn't pull an FDR real soon - and I mean like in the next 6-12 months, you are going to be telling your grand kids about the Second Great Depression and how your family lived in a tent and stood in soup lines.

We are all on the precipice right niw and so far the only real helping hand Obama has given has been to the banksters.

[OhioChick]

22. Absolutely right and well-stated n/t

[Stuart G]

5. What can be said about this?? It is very very sad..

Bush and his crowd don't give a damn, didn't give a damn and will never give a damn..........

[Techn0Girl]

21. Bush was 2 years ago... he screwed us over no doubt.... but what has the current Admin done ?

Aside from taking in 960,000 of Goldman Sachs money into the campaign and then appointing Goldman Sachs high level employees to the Treasury ?

They did add a couple of trillion to TARP and they also allowed increases in off shore drilling (BP-Gulf anyone) .

But me? They cut my and everyone else's unemployment insurance $100 a month last July.
Oh and I can't afford my $450 COBRA payment either since they took the 60% COBRA subsidy away too.

So Bush and his gang was an evil Bastard to be sure... but I'm not seeing much middle class love from the current administration myself.

[ixion]

6. Mission Accomplished

the top 1% are popping champagne corks, you can be sure.

[placton]

7. Obama did his share to make this happen

but, hey, the rich are richer - you know, Obama's now and future buddies.

[MH1]

8. Huh?

[w8liftinglady]

9. Poverty levels have been worsening for a long time...it's made it easier to recruit troops

texas rates prior to Bush


poverty rates after bush had 8 years( image too big to post here)
http://www.ers.usda.gov/Data/povertyrates/PovListpct.asp?st=TX&view=Percent&longname=Texas

The only time we see a benefit is when a Democrat is in power...and it even took Clinton a few years to begin dropping the rate

[w8liftinglady]

10. and as you look at the second chart,you can see the county disparity...

[earthside]

11. But ... But ... But ...

... how can this be?

This is "Recovery Summer!"

The recession is over, isn't it?

New claims for unemployment benefits were down last week and wholesale inventories were up. I saw it here on DU that those numbers mean the recession is over.

But if one in seven Americans are poor, how can this be a 'recovery'?

I'm so confused.

[Techn0Girl]

16. Yeah... facts are such inconvnient things aren't they? ;)

[ProudDad]

23. Gee, the republican candidate for state senate in my district

told me at a debate a week ago that today's poverty level was the lowest it has ever been...

Could he have been mistaken?