• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Census shows 1 in 2 people are poor or low-income

j-mac said:
So Yahoo is supporting Obama's class warfare meme....I am shocked I tell ya!


j-mac
Click to expand...

a lot of Obastard's support comes from young libertines who trade economic self interest and the long term stability of America for the instant gratification of a party that they think will advance the social environment they prefer
 
whysoserious said:
Generally when making a claim, such as data being spun, you back it up with some sort of proof or evidence.

-wss
Click to expand...


You started with your snarky little comment, I say you first back up your claim that Obama administration is just using census data to make this argument....Then we can move on.


j-mac
 
rosie1 said:
"Class Warfare" is a phrase right wing talk likes to use a lot. There is no class warfare, except that which has been going on against the shrinking middle class and poor. Census figures can't be denied.
Click to expand...

blaming the rich for the failures of other is a mantra the left uses a lot. if the middle class is shrinking its because the achievers are moving up and the shirkers-seduced by the entitlement addiction-are slacking back into welfare dependence
 
TurtleDude said:
a lot of Obastard's support comes from young libertines who trade economic self interest and the long term stability of America for the instant gratification of a party that they think will advance the social environment they prefer
Click to expand...

It does make one wonder why they supposedly passed High School, yet are so ill informed as to how wealth redistribution doesn't work, and never has.

j-mac
 
j-mac said:
You started with your snarky little comment, I say you first back up your claim that Obama administration is just using census data to make this argument....Then we can move on.

j-mac
Click to expand...

Well, I don't know what comment I made was "snarky" nor do I know where I said the "Obama administration is just using census data to make this argument". However for my claim that Yahoo is just using census data, from the OP:

Census shows 1 in 2 people are poor or low-income

Yes, it's the title of the thread, the title of the article, and it is in the 2nd paragraph of the article - so I am not sure how you missed it (data from www.census.gov)

-wss
 
j-mac said:
It does make one wonder why they supposedly passed High School, yet are so ill informed as to how wealth redistribution doesn't work, and never has.

j-mac
Click to expand...

You missed the title of the thread, the title of the article, and didn't make it to the 2nd paragraph of the article, and you want to discuss people's education levels?

-wss
 
The government pulled us out of the Great Depression. What kind of an even greater mess would we be in now if the banks had been allowed to fail this time? That part of the stimulus was started under Bush. Government helped the auto industry out successfully also. Asking 1% of people who have been making record profits to return to a reasonable tax scale we once had is only fair. As for productive members of society, the millionnaires club isn't any more productive than anyone else. Someone slaving away working two minimum wage jobs is very "productive."
 
whysoserious said:
Well, I don't know what comment I made was "snarky" nor do I know where I said the "Obama administration is just using census data to make this argument". However for my claim that Yahoo is just using census data, from the OP:

Census shows 1 in 2 people are poor or low-income

Yes, it's the title of the thread, the title of the article, and it is in the 2nd paragraph of the article - so I am not sure how you missed it (data from Census Bureau Home Page)

-wss
Click to expand...

Ok, you're right...Just read it, and other than this section:

Robert Rector, a senior research fellow at the conservative Heritage Foundation, questioned whether some people classified as poor or low-income actually suffer material hardship. He said that while safety-net programs have helped many Americans, they have gone too far. He said some people described as poor live in decent-size homes, drive cars and own wide-screen TVs.

"There's no doubt the recession has thrown a lot of people out of work and incomes have fallen," Rector said. "As we come out of recession, it will be important that these programs promote self-sufficiency rather than dependence and encourage people to look for work."
Click to expand...

I see little else than the AP promoting Obama's class warfare, and bemoaning how we need more entitlements. Again, am I missing something?


j-mac
 
"About 97.3 million Americans fall into a low-income category, commonly defined as those earning between 100 and 199 percent of the poverty level, based on a new supplemental measure by the Census Bureau that is designed to provide a fuller picture of poverty. Together with the 49.1 million who fall below the poverty line and are counted as poor, they number 146.4 million, or 48 percent of the U.S. population. That's up by 4 million from 2009, the earliest numbers for the newly developed poverty gauge."

From the article. By renaming what used to be considered lower-middle class with low-income, we have effectively split the middle class. I accept that this new "class" has grown in a period of recession, high unemployment and Obama, but what we have here is trying to convince one third of the US population that the are no longer middle class but are now considered low income. I do not recall if there was a term other than lower-middle class before it was redefined in 2009.
 
j-mac said:
Ok, you're right...Just read it, and other than this section:

I see little else than the AP promoting Obama's class warfare, and bemoaning how we need more entitlements. Again, am I missing something?

j-mac
Click to expand...

Hey where did you get that quote from? Seems weird that if they were trying to push the "Obama class warfare" that they would include a conservative statistician.

-wss
 
Meathead said:
"About 97.3 million Americans fall into a low-income category, commonly defined as those earning between 100 and 199 percent of the poverty level, based on a new supplemental measure by the Census Bureau that is designed to provide a fuller picture of poverty. Together with the 49.1 million who fall below the poverty line and are counted as poor, they number 146.4 million, or 48 percent of the U.S. population. That's up by 4 million from 2009, the earliest numbers for the newly developed poverty gauge."

From the article. By renaming what used to be considered lower-middle class with low-income, we have effectively split the middle class. I accept that this new "class" has grown in a period of recession, high unemployment and Obama, but what we have here is trying to convince one third of the US population that the are no longer middle class but are now considered low income. I do not recall if there was a term other than lower-middle class before it was redefined in 2009.
Click to expand...

Americans seem to use 'middle class' to mean what used to be called 'working class'; it's happening in the UK too. 40% of Americans believe they are either already in the economic top 1% or are soon to be so, and yet social mobility ceased many years since. Odd.
 
I am interested to see how they define "low income" or "poor."
 
digsbe said:
I am interested to see how they define "low income" or "poor."
Click to expand...

I guess poor is poverty level or lower and "low income" is just above poverty level up to 199% of it. So if the poverty level is $25k, low income would be $25,001-50k?

I'm not sure.
 
Penderyn said:
Americans seem to use 'middle class' to mean what used to be called 'working class'; it's happening in the UK too. 40% of Americans believe they are either already in the economic top 1% or are soon to be so, and yet social mobility ceased many years since. Odd.
Click to expand...
Where did you get that,Pen? Are you saying 40% of Americans don't live in reality. What? 40% think they will win the lottery or inherit from an imagary long lost uncle?
 
Penderyn said:
Americans seem to use 'middle class' to mean what used to be called 'working class'; it's happening in the UK too. 40% of Americans believe they are either already in the economic top 1% or are soon to be so, and yet social mobility ceased many years since. Odd.
Click to expand...


Dividing individuals into 'classes' such as the 'middle class' or 'working class' is purely a socialist paradigm. The very idea insinuates that upward mobility is not achievable in a free society. That is false for this country unless someone like Obama is re elected.


j-mac
 
rosie1 said:
Where did you get that,Pen? Are you saying 40% of Americans don't live in reality. What? 40% think they will win the lottery or inherit from an imagary long lost uncle?
Click to expand...

It was a recent survey, apparently, and it was quoted in a Guardian article in the last few days. I think it was part of a discussion of Republican oddities, but I'm not sure. I think, though, that like a lot of British people, they simply can't imagine how rich that top 1% is. I'll see if I can find the article.
 
j-mac said:
Dividing individuals into 'classes' such as the 'middle class' or 'working class' is purely a socialist paradigm. The very idea insinuates that upward mobility is not achievable in a free society. That is false for this country unless someone like Obama is re elected.


j-mac
Click to expand...

I'm afraid capitalism does that, chum - though it certainly puts a lot of effort into telling the mugs lies about it! :)
 
Penderyn said:
I'm afraid capitalism does that, chum - though it certainly puts a lot of effort into telling the mugs lies about it! :)
Click to expand...

So capitalism is the problem, is that what you are saying?


j-mac
 
j-mac said:
So capitalism is the problem, is that what you are saying?


j-mac
Click to expand...
Well, he does read the Guardian, so what else would he be saying? Btw, middle class in American English occupies the area between rich and poor. The Brits refer to middle class as those who are neither working class (lower class) and aristocracy. Usually white collar professional types and often wealthy, so there is not exact equivalent.
 
Meathead said:
Well, he does read the Guardian, so what else would he be saying? Btw, middle class in American English occupies the area between rich and poor. The Brits refer to middle class as those who are neither working class (lower class) and aristocracy. Usually white collar professional types and often wealthy, so there is not exact equivalent.
Click to expand...

Then he makes my point.


j-mac
 
whysoserious said:
I guess poor is poverty level or lower and "low income" is just above poverty level up to 199% of it. So if the poverty level is $25k, low income would be $25,001-50k?

I'm not sure.
Click to expand...

Under $45k for a family of 4 is "low income"
 
nijato said:
Amid the largest global recession since the Great Depression... oil prices act like the limiting reagent in the reaction known as real GDP growth.
Click to expand...

I wish it was still available but when oil went on it's climb to $150 I argued for probably two years that the climb was not based upon supply and demand wholely. I said based upon nothing more than a gut feeling that oil's proper market was around $80.

I argued mostly with one person that worked in the financial markets. He told me that oil was not ever going to fall and to get used to it. We now know that the run up to $150 was just a part of the financial bubble that burst. It indeed contributed to the problems. We have done nothing to fix that and while we are closer right now to what is likely a true market, the players that have absolutely nothing to do with oil still have it run up and it's still contributing to our current malaise.
 
EarlzP said:
Lets be fair the prices at the grocery store are being pushed up by greedy Wall Street speculators, remember the truth will set us free
Click to expand...

Indeed that is playing a part but those speculators are being financed by the government.
 
1Perry said:
This is simply an excuse for the government. The governments monetary policy has been nothing but bad for the lower classes.
Click to expand...

And you're for policies that favor them? I'll need your conservative card now. ;)


Obama promised to address the jobs going overseas. He's done absolutely nothing about it.
Click to expand...

And we expected? Republicans will do what?

Again, we vote for them, and answers are not easy or likely forthcoming. At the end of the day, government can only control the economy if they control the economy.
 
KevinKohler said:
No, they are not. Declining value of the USD plays a larger role than speculators.
Click to expand...

That does not dispute what he said. He didn't say the dollar played no role.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom