43% of U.S. poor in "deep" poverty; highest since first statistics in '75

[DeepModem Mom]

WP op-ed: Perfect Storm for the Poor
In Income Data, Something More Damaging Than Katrina

By E. J. Dionne Jr.
Friday, September 1, 2006; Page A21

After a week of remembering the horrors of Hurricane Katrina, the most depressing realization is how easily our leaders forgot their fervent promises to lift up our nation's poorest citizens.

All manner of politicians and columnists said in Katrina's wake that this was the time to revisit the problems of the destitute. The anguish of the people of New Orleans's Lower Ninth Ward would have at least some redemptive power if the country took poverty seriously again.

It didn't happen. The innovative ideas that came from all sides were swept off the table. The poor became unfashionable once more. Congressional conservatives changed the conversation. A concern for the struggling gave way to debate over how to offset spending on Katrina with budget cuts -- directed in large part at programs for the needy.

Perhaps the release of the Census Bureau's annual report on income, poverty and health insurance coverage in this particular week is a sign that God and statisticians have a sense of humor. The report reinforces what we knew at the time of Katrina -- that the poor are still with us and that the middle class keeps losing ground....

***

...the proportion of the poor who are very poor has risen. People are considered in deep poverty if they have half or less of the yearly income of those at the poverty line. In 2005 half the poverty line for a family of three was $7,788; for a family of four it was $9,985. (Try living on that.) According to the new report, 43.1 percent of poor people lived in that sort of deep poverty -- a record since 1975, when the government started assembling such statistics....The top fifth of American households received 50.4 percent of all income last year, the highest proportion since 1967, when the Census Bureau started following that trend. The biggest gains were concentrated in the top 5 percent....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/31/AR2006083101443.html?nav=most_emailed

[stepnw1f]

1. This is the Main Agenda of the GOP

Maintain an upper-class and destroy any potential competition, the Middle Class.

[HysteryDiagnosis]

2. A close resemblance here....

http://ancienthistory.about.com/cs/romefallarticles/a/fallofrome.htm

Why did Rome Fall?

There are some adherents to single factors, but more people think Rome fell because of a combination of such factors as Christianity, decadence, lead, monetary, and military problems. Even the rise of Islam is proposed by some who think the Fall of Rome happened at Constantinople.

Since not all viewpoints are available on the Internet, this list of theories about the Fall of Rome is limited:

Decay
Financial Problems
The Dole and Barbarians
Economic, Military, Gradual
Christianity
Vandals and Religious Controversy
Division of the Empire
Lead
Hoarding and Deficit

[Ksec]

3. Men make less now than they did in the mid seventies !

Whose to blame here? I have a feeling its a corporate world along with the government which gave them every opportunity to screw the people but thats just my opinion. So whose to blame and how the hell do we change this?

[SammyWinstonJack]

4. Stupid FReepers! Still think your party gives a crap about you?

What exactly do they deliver on? Wake up and SEE the disconnect between what they promise too get your vote and what they actually do once they get elected. It's always the exact opposite.

[stepnw1f]

5. It's a Mind-Blower as to How Naive They Are

They have been already conned into giving away their Freedoms for insecurity. Out of fear, they give up their rights as American citizens... it really doesn't get any worse than that.

[tnlefty]

6. K & R, and thanks for posting this.

This is so frustrating to me, and I don't know how to make people around me care very much about it. Seems as though a mean-spiritedness that began with Uncle Ronnie has intensified to the point that I don't know how to break through the wall of uncaring - hell I can't seem to be able to make a dent.

[bamacrat]

7. Disgusting, all I have to say.

:puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :puke: :puke: :puke: :mad: :mad: :mad: :puke: :puke: :mad: :mad: :mad: :puke: :puke: :puke: :mad: :mad: :mad: :puke: :puke: :puke: :mad: :mad: :mad: :puke: :puke: :mad: :mad: :mad: :puke: :puke: :puke: :mad: :mad: :mad: :puke: :puke: :puke: :mad: :mad: :puke: :puke: :mad: :mad: :puke: :puke: :puke: :mad: :mad: :mad: :puke: :puke: :puke:

[bobbolink]

8. Since I was just soundly taken to task in my thread about poverty...

and mocked ("So, what, you think poverty should be the most important issue?", and etc.), I can say that I seriously doubt anything will change anytime soon.

John Edwards is the only one speaking up for poor people among the Dems, and he's only speaking for the "working poor" -- I guess the rest of us are chopped liver.

It's not an important issue at DU, as has been made abundantly clear to me.

So, it will continue...

"How many deaths will it take til they know, that too many people have died..?"

Thanks for posting this, and I do hope it gets some attention. It means a lot to me that you tried.

I'm not holding my breath.

It hurts deeply how little this issue count.

[DeepModem Mom]

14. Looks like we got a number of Greatest votes -- a hopeful sign? nt

[bobbolink]

16. That's hopeful, yes.

Will it translate into action?

The track record of DU isn't hopeful on that account.

But, thanks again for posting this!

And I'll leave you with this little tidbit someone else reminded me of yesterday....

"To get into heaven you need a permission slip from poor folk."

Michael Moore

[UrbScotty]

9. This is not NEARLY as serious as the attacks on the sanctity of marriage!

Two men loving each other is a far more dire situation than somneone not making enough to keep their head above water!

:sarcasm:

[ryanus]

10. What percentage of the total population was in deep poverty?

At first I thought it was 43% of the population was in deep poverty and I about fell off my chair. So 43% of the poor are in deep poverty, so what does that make the percentage of the entire population in deep poverty?

If I am reading the article right, 12.6% of the population is defined as poor, and 43% of them are in deep poverty, so makes 5.4% of the population in deep poverty, right? Still not good.

The article also says that the percentage of very poor has grown. I wonder what the economic mobility information is on this. Did the very poor grow because of people who were poor moving to very poor, or did immigration have a factor? Just wondering. Also, unemployment is at 4.8% or something like, I wonder what the overlap of the two groups is. And I wonder how many of the very poor are disabled somehow vs able to work. I would guess that most can't work.

[GirlAlex]

11. The unemployment numbers do not really mean anything

It's a measurement of how many people are collecting unemployment insurance for however long it lasts.

It does not include underemployment,those who have exhausted their Unemployment benefits, those who never applied or did not qualify for UE, etc.

Real unemployment is closer to 8-12% just like most first world countries.

Unfortunately for poor americans most first world countries have far better social safety nets than the one in place in the US, hence why our poor are the poorest in the world, all things considered.

[ryanus]

12. That's not how they measure unemployment

Unemployment is measured as those who are without employment, but have sought employment within the past 3 months (I think, or maybe it's 6).

It's broader than those collecting unemployment, and narrower than those who don't have a job. They must be looking to match the definition.

[mcscajun]

13. Problems with the numbers...

U3 is the measure that gets published, but U6 is the measure that takes into account the long-term unemployed and underemployed. It portrays the truth of our employment situation, not the gloss government likes to put on it.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=1249059&mesg_id=1249488

[mcscajun]

15. Poorest in the world? I think you maybe meant Poorest of the poor

in the Industrialized West.

And I'm not even so sure about that.

There are plenty of poor in the third world that are far worse off...but it IS criminal that in what once was the richest country in the world, we still have such abject poverty.

It's even more criminal that since the brief focus on poverty in the US that we had last year post-Katrina, that absolutely nothing has been done, nothing has changed one bit.