There is also the reality that some of that disconnect is because the programs we use to get food to people who need it are, for a large part, working. Even to the point that some of those same poor can afford to purchase luxury items.
Bottom 20% spend $1.90 for $1.00 in wages
- Thread starter Topspin
- Start date
You got that quote from your article Damo, I already read it yesterday. Would you give it up? Trying to present poor people as living it up, is just Ronald Reagan’s fictional and mythical cadallic-driving welfare queen. It’s sickening.
And IF you read my post you would have seen I recognized that. Ignoring what I write to say things like this shows you have a disconnect with what people say when compared to what you want them to mean.
It also shows that your refusal to read the article notwithstanding your attempt to diffuse it with statements like "that article about poor people isn't about poor people" is ridiculous.
I didn't. I got that quote from BAC's quote boxes inside one of his posts.
Darla,
Go to the post linked here. Read the second quote box, read the last line. You will find where I got that quote from.
here is what I see in the second quote box:
Current Statistics
Over 9 million children are estimated to be served by the America's Second Harvest Network, over two million of which are ages five and under, representing nearly 13% of all children under age 18 in the United States and over 72% of all children in poverty.
According to the USDA, an estimated 12.6 million children lived in food insecure (low food security and very low food security) households in 2006 [ii]
Proper nutrition is vital to the growth and development of children, particularly for low-income children. Sixty-two percent of all client households with children under the age of 18 participated in a school lunch program, but only 13% participated in a summer feeding program that provides free food when school is out. [iii]
Fifty-one percent of client households with children under the age of three participated in the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC). [iv]
Nearly 41% of emergency food providers in the America's Second Harvest Network reported "many more children in the summer" being served by their programs. [v]
Emergency food assistance plays a vital role in the lives of low-income families. In 2002, over half of the nonelderly families that accessed a food pantry at least once during the year had children under the age of 18. [vi]
12.8 million or approximately 17.4% of children in the U.S. live in poverty. The rate of poverty for children under 18 remains higher than those aged 18- to- 64 and for those aged 65 and over. [vii]
Research indicates that even mild undernutrition experienced by young children during critical periods of growth impacts the behavior of children, their school performance, and their overall cognitive development. [x]
In fiscal year 2005, 50% of children were food stamp recipients. [xi]
During the 2005 federal fiscal year, 17.5 million low-income children received free or reduced-price meals through the National School Lunch Program. Unfortunately, just under two million of these same income-eligible children participated in the Summer Food Service Program that same year. [xii]
Current Statistics
Over 9 million children are estimated to be served by the America's Second Harvest Network, over two million of which are ages five and under, representing nearly 13% of all children under age 18 in the United States and over 72% of all children in poverty.
According to the USDA, an estimated 12.6 million children lived in food insecure (low food security and very low food security) households in 2006 [ii]
Proper nutrition is vital to the growth and development of children, particularly for low-income children. Sixty-two percent of all client households with children under the age of 18 participated in a school lunch program, but only 13% participated in a summer feeding program that provides free food when school is out. [iii]
Fifty-one percent of client households with children under the age of three participated in the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC). [iv]
Nearly 41% of emergency food providers in the America's Second Harvest Network reported "many more children in the summer" being served by their programs. [v]
Emergency food assistance plays a vital role in the lives of low-income families. In 2002, over half of the nonelderly families that accessed a food pantry at least once during the year had children under the age of 18. [vi]
12.8 million or approximately 17.4% of children in the U.S. live in poverty. The rate of poverty for children under 18 remains higher than those aged 18- to- 64 and for those aged 65 and over. [vii]
Research indicates that even mild undernutrition experienced by young children during critical periods of growth impacts the behavior of children, their school performance, and their overall cognitive development. [x]
In fiscal year 2005, 50% of children were food stamp recipients. [xi]
During the 2005 federal fiscal year, 17.5 million low-income children received free or reduced-price meals through the National School Lunch Program. Unfortunately, just under two million of these same income-eligible children participated in the Summer Food Service Program that same year. [xii]
And Damo, I don’t care where you got it from, presenting poor people in America as Topper’s fictional fat and happy lower-socio-economic classes, is just bs.
That is all you have tried to do on this thread. Claim that liberals “exaggerate” the problem and thus lose support. While in truth, it is you and conservative organizations like the Heritage, who attempt to revitalize the myth of the welfare queen, and claim that America’s poor are all eating too much and buying dvd players. (which now cost 30 bucks in walmart by the way).
That is all you have tried to do on this thread. Claim that liberals “exaggerate” the problem and thus lose support. While in truth, it is you and conservative organizations like the Heritage, who attempt to revitalize the myth of the welfare queen, and claim that America’s poor are all eating too much and buying dvd players. (which now cost 30 bucks in walmart by the way).
BS that is what you saw in the second quote box to the post I linked to with the quote.
Now you are deliberately lying.
I will quote the entire post now, including the quote boxes inside it so that you can see I quoted what he was quoting.
I get tired of deliberate obtuse posts like this crap.
The bolding in that second quote box was his.
This is the bs you have been posting Damo. And it really is disgusting that you would believe any of this from this highly agenda-driven source. 76% of poor people have air-conditioning do they? I personally know many people who aren't even poor who dont have it. What liars.
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.
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.
That is what I posted. Of the people the census bureau reports to be poor those statistics are real. I believe that they are because we have programs to help those people.
Dumbass, you told me to go to the link and look at the second quote box, which is what I did. Now, you have totally lost me. Do you even read what you write? How the fuck would I find something that bac wrote at the harvest link? You really stupify me more and more every day.
I don't for one moment believe it.
And this is exactly where we started out. And now where we ended back up. Are we done yet?
Do you believe for one moment that even if there should be an old air-conditioning unit in an apartment they have rented they can afford to turn it on?
Antiaris Toxicaria
Unique
Maybe everyone who is middle class in this thread should leave. If you are middle class telling the poor they are happy, you are wrong. If you are middle class telling the poor you have their best interests in mind, you are wrong. If you are middle class telling the poor you feel their pain, you don't.
I told you to go to the post linked by the quote of BAC's and to read his second quote box.
I was very clear.
I took that quote from BAC's post, not from my article.
I do, we have programs that help poor people in the US. Some of them are very successful.
When growing up where I did, most of the people I knew had microwave ovens yet were poor.
That you don't want to believe that we have some success with our current programs and wish to believe that all those people don't have anything you would be wrong.