Bottom 20% spend $1.90 for $1.00 in wages

Damocles said:
Some interesting statistics about poor people in the US....

# Forty-six percent of all poor households actually own their own homes. The average home owned by persons classified as poor by the Census Bureau is a three-bedroom house with one-and-a-half baths, a garage, and a porch or patio.

# Seventy-six percent of poor households have air conditioning. By contrast, 30 years ago, only 36 percent of the entire U.S. population enjoyed air conditioning.

# Only 6 percent of poor households are overcrowded. More than two-thirds have more than two rooms per person.

# The average poor American has more living space than the average individual living in Paris, London, Vienna, Athens, and other cities throughout Europe. (These comparisons are to the average citizens in foreign countries, not to those classified as poor.)

# Nearly three-quarters of poor households own a car; 30 percent own two or more cars.

# Ninety-seven percent of poor households have a color television; over half own two or more color televisions.

# Seventy-eight percent have a VCR or DVD player; 62 percent have cable or satellite TV reception.

# Seventy-three percent own microwave ovens, more than half have a stereo, and a third have an automatic dishwasher.

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Welfare/bg1713.cfm
Click to expand...

How much do you think a microwave oven, or a color TV, or a car that may or may not work, or a stereo costs .. all of which the poor may have had for years?

How does that not make them poor?

Given rising unemployment and exploding healthcare costs, has it occirred to you how many Americans are one job loss, one healthcare emergency, or even one missed paycheck from joining the ranks of the poor.

They have TV's .. so I guess they'll be OK.
 
blackascoal said:
How much do you think a microwave oven, or a color TV, or a car that may or may not work, or a stereo costs .. all of which the poor may have had for years?

How does that not make them poor?

Given rising unemployment and exploding healthcare costs, has it occirred to you how many Americans are one job loss, one healthcare emergency, or even one missed paycheck from joining the ranks of the poor.

They have TV's .. so I guess they'll be OK.
Click to expand...
When did I say that they were not poor?

What part of "statistics about the poor" mean that they are "not poor"? The reality is it doesn't. What you are upset about is that the relative status of the poor in the US is usually considered "rich" in other nations.

The reality is that "poor" is relative to the situation of the nation.

If you are poor would you rather be poor here, or in Ethiopia?
 
exactly and this is how the blackas and Darla wing of the democratic party usually lose it for them.
The point is our poor aren't starving and are getting medical care for free. Smart dems know we still need to do more, but proportion my dumbass fellow.
 
Topspin said:
See Damo's post above moron.
Sure there are super poor living in cars.
But read Damo's post, do you know how man Europeans have ac. 35,000 died in the heat waves about 7yrs ago. That's Europe, how many on the continent of Africa you think have central AC. Moron
Click to expand...

"moron" ???

You're hiding your insane comment behind Damo's half-truth post and now you're comparing today's American poor with Africa and Europe because they didn't have AC.

How are you hiding behing Damo's article that called the poor? You said we don't have any poor.

"moron" ???

Hey, the poor, which even Damo's half-truth article called them, aren't as bad of as 17th century nomads in Tunisia.
 
blackascoal said:
"moron" ???

You're hiding your insane comment behind Damo's half-truth post and now you're comparing today's American poor with Africa and Europe because they didn't have AC.

How are you hiding behing Damo's article that called the poor? You said we don't have any poor.

"moron" ???

Hey, the poor, which even Damo's half-truth article called them, aren't as bad of as 17th century nomads in Tunisia.
Click to expand...
Hey, I provided a link.

It even speaks of the poor you are talking about, the ones in cars...

They are a very small group compared to what the census bureau calls "poor".
 
some people have not the desire nor capacity to be anything more then what they are. Yes we have poor people in America but I wonder how many of them choose to be poor.
 
Damocles said:
When did I say that they were not poor?

What part of "statistics about the poor" mean that they are "not poor"? The reality is it doesn't. What you are upset about is that the relative status of the poor in the US is usually considered "rich" in other nations.

The reality is that "poor" is relative to the situation of the nation.

If you are poor would you rather be poor here, or in Ethiopia?
Click to expand...

Frankly, I find that emboldened question stupid as fuck?

Are we talking about Ethiopian poor people or American poor people?

There is a growing number of American poor people and THAT is the AMERICAN question that must be addressed in real terms, not relative ones.
 
Topspin said:
But morons like you blackass and darla allways overstate their plight.
So nothing gets done
Click to expand...

You'll find your morons at home asswipe.

Your simpleton stupid ass comment has been proven to be brainless so now you've taken to looking for some face saving macho in the gutter.

I think I'm done in this thread.
 
blackascoal said:
Frankly, I find that emboldened question stupid as fuck?

Are we talking about Ethiopian poor people or American poor people?

There is a growing number of American poor people and THAT is the AMERICAN question that must be addressed in real terms, not relative ones.
Click to expand...

When comparing the reality of being poor here to that of other places it isn't "stupid as f*ck".

In fact the very need to curse shows me that the point was well made. When somebody like you runs out of words and ends up using obscenities it is because there is no real argument against what was made.

The growing number of poor notwithstanding. What the statistics are saying are "poor" to help that number grow would not be considered poor in almost any other nation. And if you actually read the article, wouldn't be considered poor by American standards either.
 
Damocles said:
When comparing the reality of being poor here to that of other places it isn't "stupid as f*ck".

In fact the very need to curse shows me that the point was well made. When somebody like you runs out of words and ends up using obscenities it is because there is no real argument against what was made.

The growing number of poor notwithstanding. What the statistics are saying are "poor" to help that number grow would not be considered poor in almost any other nation.
Click to expand...

No it is a stupid question, and you just overstated your case by a long shot. It’s not that they wouldn’t be considered poor in almost any other nation. It’s that they wouldn’t be considered poor in a third-world nation. In fact, they would be considered poor in England or Canada, or any other Western nation.

And to compare third-world living to us, is disingenuous. Not to mention down-right silly. After all, one might as easily ask, if you were rich where would you rather live, Ethiopia, or fifth Avenue? Silly question, whose answer is meaningless in any context.
 
Darla said:
No it is a stupid question, and you just overstated your case by a long shot. It’s not that they wouldn’t be considered poor in almost any other nation. It’s that they wouldn’t be considered poor in a third-world nation. In fact, they would be considered poor in England or Canada, or any other Western nation.

And to compare third-world living to us, is disingenuous. Not to mention down-right silly. After all, one might as easily ask, if you were rich where would you rather live, Ethiopia, or fifth Avenue? Silly question, whose answer is meaningless in any context.
Click to expand...
No, this just shows that you didn't read the article.

What the census bureau reports as "poor" wouldn't even be considered poor by American standards. What most people think of as "poor" are not the conditions that those people live in.

Some of them are certainly poor, but reality doesn't match with the numbers we have been presented.

I remember commercials stating that one in five kids were going hungry. But when you look at the actual numbers it is only 3% of the "poor" that go hungry.

At least read the article. You have overstated your case.
 
One thing you can do with those numbers is show that it would cost us a heck of a lot less to help the actual "poor" as compared to the reported "poor" in America.
 
Damocles said:
No, this just shows that you didn't read the article.

What the census bureau reports as "poor" wouldn't even be considered poor by American standards.

Some of them are certainly poor, but reality doesn't match with the numbers we have been presented.

I remember commercials stating that one in five kids were going hungry. But when you look at the actual numbers it is only 3% of the "poor" that go hungry.

At least read the article. You have overstated your case.
Click to expand...

No, because those statistics have been played just as all statistics have been during the bush years. With going hungry now subdivided into categories which include “food insecure”. Hungry!

And for you to claim that a country that does not insure its citizens health care, holds an underclass which would be considered “not poor” in “almost” any other country, when the rest of the Western world ensures medical care to its citizens, is silly.

I notice you didn’t answer the question of “if you were rich”. Because you know how silly it makes your original red-herring question look.

And please drop your child’s trick of “I know you are but what am I” Every time someone makes a post to you, you repeat what they said back to them, claiming that they did it.
“You over stated your case.” “nuh uh you overstated your case!” Geez. Is that gettin old.
 
Damo realizes we are heading to second world status Darla. He is just trying to prepare us for the slide down the hill :D
 
Darla said:
No, because those statistics have been played just as all statistics have been during the bush years. With going hungry now subdivided into categories which include “food insecure”. Hungry!

And for you to claim that a country that does not insure its citizens health care, holds an underclass which would be considered “not poor” in “almost” any other country, when the rest of the Western world ensures medical care to its citizens, is silly.

I notice you didn’t answer the question of “if you were rich”. Because you know how silly it makes your original red-herring question look.

And please drop your child’s trick of “I know you are but what am I” Every time someone makes a post to you, you repeat what they said back to them, claiming that they did it.
“You over stated your case.” “nuh uh you overstated your case!” Geez. Is that gettin old.
Click to expand...
Again, this just shows you didn't read the article. You have sanitized your world and only allow information that agrees with your agenda.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top