Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Half of America In Poverty? The Facts Say It's True
Recent reports suggest that almost 50% of Americans are in poverty or at a "low income" level. The claim is based on a new supplemental measure by the Census Bureau that includes health care, transportation, and other essential living expenses in the poverty calculation.
The concept of "low income" is controversial. It has been defined as earnings between 100 and 199 percent of the poverty level, a claim which, if true, would place every American family making $50,000 or less at a near-poverty level.
Conservative organizations believe the whole 'poverty' issue is overblown. The Cato Institute blames LBJ and Obama for reversing a declining poverty rate. Forbes blames the calculations. The Heritage Foundation argues, "The average poor person, as defined by the government, has a living standard far higher than the public imagines...In the kitchen, the household had a refrigerator, an oven and stove, and a microwave." The case for a growing "consumption equality" is alternately defended and denied.
With emotions running high on both sides, we need to take a balanced look at the available data to determine how well the highest-earning family of the poorest 50% -- a family with a $50,000 income -- can survive. (The maximum individual income for the poorest 50% is about $30,000.)
Start with taxes. It is frequently noted by conservatives that the richest 1% pay most of the federal income taxes, and indeed they paid about 37 percent in 2009, more than the poorest 90% of Americans. But only the richest 5% of Americans have experienced income growth since 1980. And during that time, their tax rate has dropped from 34% to 23%. As for the 3 percent rate paid by the poorest 50%, the Tax Policy Center sums it up nicely: "The basic structure of the income tax simply exempts subsistence levels of income from tax."
More relevant to the poverty issue is that federal income tax is only a small part of the tax expense for lower-income families. According to a study by The Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, the poorest 50% paid about 10 percent of their incomes in state and local taxes (the richest 1% paid 5 percent). Congressional Budget Office (CBO) figures reveal that the bottom 50% pays about 9 percent of their incomes toward social security (the top 1% pays just under 2 percent). CBO also shows that the bottom 50% is paying about 2 percent of their incomes on excise taxes, a negligible expense for the people at the top. Another year of Bush tax cuts will chop another 1-2 percent off the taxes of the very rich.
So total taxes for the poorest 50% are 24 percent of their incomes (3% + 10% + 9% + 2%), as compared to 29 percent for the richest 1% (23% + 5% + 2% - 1%).
Other significant expenses for low-income people, based on the most conservative estimates from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the Census Bureau, the National Center for Children in Poverty, the Carsey Institute, and the Economic Policy Institute, include food (10%), housing (27%), transportation (6%), health care (5%), child care (8%), and household expenditures (5%). Expenses for insurance and savings and entertainment, although important to most households, are not being included here.
Energy costs hit low-income families especially hard, taking about 20% of their incomes. At the $50,000 income level the burden is closer to 12%, as generally agreed upon by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, and the American Gas Association.
Total expenses for the richest family in the bottom half of America?
- 24% taxes
- 27% housing
- 34% food, health care, child care, transportation, household needs
- 12% energy
That's 97% of their income. The richest family among 70,000,000 households is left with just $1,500 for a car, appliances, a TV, a cell phone, a loan repayment, an occasional night out. It comes to $30 a week, barely enough to take the family out for a pizza.
Critics bemoan the amounts of aid being lavished on lower-income Americans, making dubious claims about $16,800 in government funds going to every poor family and families with $90,000 incomes being classified as "near poor."
The fact is that only 4,375,000 families (out of 70,000,000 in the bottom half) received Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) in 2010, for a total expense of about $36 billion. Current federal budgets include about $350 billion for food, housing, and traditional 'welfare' programs for needy children, elderly care, and energy assistance. This averages out to about $400 per month per family.
Another fact is that earnings have remained flat for most people while productivity has grown 80% since 1980. If a $50,000 family had received a fair share from their contribution to America's growth, they'd be making $90,000, and they wouldn't need a dime from government.
Conservatives complain about the TVs and refrigerators owned by low-income people. But it's the height of insensitivity to admonish people who are trying to survive in a perversely unequal society.




136 Comments so far
Show AllOf course conservative organizations believe the whole 'poverty' issue is overblown, gee, what a surprise.
As to the refrigerator/TV argument, as anyone that has traveled to South America, Africa, the Middle East or Asia knows our poor are indeed among the rich of the world.
That misses the point that they live here. We are not comparing them with the worlds standards, but American standards. By those standards any but a radical right winger would admit that something is seriously wrong with the present situation in our country.
Not to mention that we aren't even ALLOWED to live here in the U.S. at the world's extreme poverty levels (OWS tent cities were busted up for "public health reasons"). The cons will have PLAGUE levels of disease to deal with if they allow extreme poverty levels. Also, fridges/TVs are the main part of empire's Bread & circuses policy to pacify the peasant/serfs, otherwise a REAL uprising will ensue. Just shows how completely stupid & forgetful the cons have gotten. They're forgetting how to manage their own empire. Maybe they're starting to believe in their own invincibility. Good. Hubris is setting them up for "Nemesis"'s harvest.
"Not even ALLOWED to live here in the U.S. at the world's extreme poverty levels (OWS tent cities were busted up for "public health reasons")."
Oh, the ignomy ! Oh, the injustice !
That people aren't allowed to just go pick some placde they don't own and 'occupy it' as if they did, while disregarding modern American baselines like sanitation, etc.
You're complaining that 'you don't have the right' to live like the poorest in a third world country ? Really ? Poor deprived baby ....
Youu object to 'the cons' not wanting deadly plagues ???? Really ???
There are around 40,000 homeless people in NY City, and Bloomberg has no problem with that. As a matter of fact he wants to end the Advantage program that gives subsides to help the homeless.
You pretend to be so cynical and hard crusted, yet you found the temerity to use a word like -did you mean 'ignominy'?
Oh, for a muse of fire that would ascend
The brightest heaven of invention!
A kingdom for a stage, princes to act,
And monarchs to behold the swelling scene
Then should the warlike Harry, like himself,
Assume the port of Mars, and at his heels,
Leashed in like hounds, should famine, sword, and fire
Crouch for employment.
Henry V, Act 1, Prologue
and injustice - how about losing everything you had?
KING RICHARD II
What must the king do now? must he submit?
The king shall do it: must he be deposed?
The king shall be contented: must he lose
The name of king? o' God's name, let it go:
I'll give my jewels for a set of beads,
My gorgeous palace for a hermitage,
My gay apparel for an almsman's gown,
My figured goblets for a dish of wood,
My sceptre for a palmer's walking staff,
My subjects for a pair of carved saints
And my large kingdom for a little grave,
A little little grave, an obscure grave;
Or I'll be buried in the king's highway,
Some way of common trade, where subjects' feet
May hourly trample on their sovereign's head;
For on my heart they tread now whilst I live;
And buried once, why not upon my head?
Aumerle, thou weep'st, my tender-hearted cousin!
We'll make foul weather with despised tears;
Our sighs and they shall lodge the summer corn,
And make a dearth in this revolting land.
Or shall we play the wantons with our woes,
And make some pretty match with shedding tears?
As thus, to drop them still upon one place,
Till they have fretted us a pair of graves
Within the earth; and, therein laid,--there lies
Two kinsmen digg'd their graves with weeping eyes.
Would not this ill do well? Well, well, I see
I talk but idly, and you laugh at me.
Most mighty prince, my Lord Northumberland,
What says King Bolingbroke? will his majesty
Give Richard leave to live till Richard die?
You make a leg, and Bolingbroke says ay.
NORTHUMBERLAND
My lord, in the base court he doth attend
To speak with you; may it please you to come down.
Down, down I come; like glistering Phaethon,
Wanting the manage of unruly jades.
In the base court? Base court, where kings grow base,
To come at traitors' calls and do them grace.
In the base court? Come down? Down, court!
down, king!
For night-owls shriek where mounting larks
should sing.
Richard II | Act 3, Scene 3
Glad to see you at least read the article,now you have seen the facts!
Don't be so simple. By definition the homeless have no place to call home. ANY where they choose to squat is going to cause trouble for someone - eventually. I'd much rather they squat on the rich and make some noise.
But you are correct, the dirt-poor in this country don't have the "rights" that the average poor in most of the rest of the world do.
The ignominy and injustice is that here in the richest country the world has ever seen we have in-equality the likes of which haven't been seen since, what, the fall of the Roman empire? Ever?
The USA is catching up quickly in the numbers of absolute poverty.
As long as we import poverty and unemployment through our work VISA and open borders program there will be less and less people paying taxes and more and more people needing assistance and the standard of living will continue to fall.
48% of the people in the US do not pay taxes and supported by the 52% that do. When those #s flip, we're in big trouble.
your lucky in Pakistan 90% people don't pay taxes.....and you can see how that works there......Goffa...
amerika is well on the way to becoming a genuine third world country. almost there.
Hi,
Thank you for writing this article. It was interesting to see just how fast a $50,000 income is spent. However, childcare is not a necessity for everyone. Some people choose to be SAHM or SAHDs and make it work by sacrificing their more comfortable lifestyle to be able to raise their children.
I have lived in poverty for half of my life. I am 23 years old. I have learned to do without things that others my age do. Such as mindless shopping sprees, binge drinking and spending one's entire earnings for the week in one weekend, going to the movies, ect. Sometimes poverty allows you to realize what's important in life and be thank for what you do have, and sometimes it really sucks.
“Another fact is that earnings have remained flat for most people while productivity has grown 80% since 1980. If a $50,000 family had received a fair share from their contribution to America's growth, they'd be making $90,000, and they wouldn't need a dime from government.”
This is so true! I believe inflation should be tied better to wages. The more things cost the more money people need to make to be able to afford a home ect.
I am30 years older than you,have been through a BK,have 1.50 in savings, am on SSI,
have been living on 10,968.with some loans & friends giving some brakes on fresh food.
I have survived for two years.my rent is 300,by 15th I start to ask for other help as Iam down to 150.00 left for the next two weeks.work you say, have attempted & given up on conventional work,I'm too old or overqualified. part time work was killing my back & feet from standing for 8 hours.As for retail, which I had done for many years no way Jose. Too Old
So I like you do without, Friend's give cloths, pet food etc.,I borrow money appx 150.00 each month & pay back 10%/ eack month on each loan.My car as been in need of tires,so I did not pay rent,this month&since no work has come I have not paid Car insurance yet,I will,even If I live on Soup.So even at 12,000 a year with others help,can you live in a major city on 1,000 a month with a car& a dog,and a cat.? forget the $30,000 try under 11 or 12 grand ,if you have no friends or family you are truly sol
Pay taxes on what and with Air?
Thank you for this post. I'm headed your direction. I'm a highly educated "foreigner" but affliected with truth. Used to work as a government employee with a regulatory agency but can't stand the BS. Now poor. F @$K capitalism!
"the Middle East or Asia knows our poor are indeed among the rich of the world."
Depends which parts of the ME or Asia.
BIttymouse - you admit the truth of my statement
"IOW, you're upset not that they 'live in poverty' ( which they don't even know the meaning of, from a world view ), but rather that they are not in the top 1 % of the top 1 %, while others are."
And yet you conclude that 'something is seriously wrong '.
You confuse a societal gurantee of outcome and result, with one of opportunity.
America offers the latter, not the former. And, if you're honest, you will agree that no country in the world offers the former ( not in reality, even if offered by words and promises ). None ever has, not in reality. Many have promised, none have delivered. And none ever will, because it flies in the face of human nature.
Is the goal then to reduce everyone in the world to the lowest common denominator? That to be impoverished can only mean to be naked, malnourished, unsheltered and without hope?
There is no confusion in the hearts and minds of most human beings that the greatness of the human race, of our nation and of any evolved society exists not in some nebulous definition of 'opportunity' but rather in the equality and liberty which is bestowed upon the broader citizenship, in its entirety.
Do you seriously think justifying a race to the bottom, to equate the population of the greatest nation to that of an underdeveloped third world country, is how we should measure our progress, our greatness, our humanity?
You too have an opportunity. You have the opportunity to open your eyes, heart and mind to the greatest of human capacity, to care, and to realize there is a greater richness beyond that of self-aggrandizement, to be of service and to promote those very opportunities for others that you are so fondly and adamantly saying should exist.
Well-stated, Cosmo Billy. I don't think this clown really buys his own rubbish. I think he's just paid to state it, or play comic relief off of someone else's (pre-arranged) straight man arguments.
In addition to the case you make for the truly rich society, the one where benefits are spread around more holistically... you could also ask this fool carrying water for the rich if he really thinks the upper 1% honestly earns what they've got? Or how it is that CEO salaries were once 40X that of workers, but that they now are in the ballpark of over 300X that sum... whereas wages have stayed frozen at more or less the same level for 30 years.
There ARE certainly facts that can toss any "argument" the dingbat poses straight into the trash can.
And I agree with the poster who said the apologist for the 1% ought to try poverty on for size for a few months, and then come back with his "report" to this forum.
Sioux,
I like the new meme, which asks essentially, what is the endgame? Is it a 1% solution or a 99% solution?
We respect freedom and resolve to honor humanity.
Aloha.
Case in point: my next door neighbor's daughter, who has four boys by four different men and is on welfare. If that is not working the system, then I don't know what is.
Are there religious organizations discouraging the use of contraceptives?
So what sort of punishment would you wish on this single mother and her children. Does she not already live in poverty? Do you wish starvation on them? Do you wish to help them rise out of the cycle of poverty, or do you wish to condemn them?
In the country where I live, such single women are supported, given free contraceptive options (despite the best efforts of Christians) and we make sure they do not starve. A bit of socialism does not create the epidemic of indolence that you fear. It does not cause more of this to happen, just as abandoning them will not prevent more. I would like to go further and say that we make sure that their children of the single mother would have the same opportunities in life as the well off, and the chance to rise from this cycle of poverty, but that would be far from the truth.
So it really comes down to your opinions of sexual morality and has nothing to do with economics at all.
WTF ?
"What does contraception have to do with not having sex with multiple partners?"
- it means that children will not be brought into this world on a whim (whether the child's parent has one partner or four partners). you seem to be more concerned about imposing your judgement on the woman (where does that come from ?) than on the unfortunate outcome of not using contraception (or getting an abortion). we pay more dearly as a society, when people are ill prepared to be parents. let the state provide free reproductive services (including abortion) to all.
"Typical of Socialists, you are an immoral lout who thinks that our bodies are just sex toys and who doesn't understand the first thing about what sex is for and how it is to be used."
- wrong, it's capitalism that exploits people's desires in such a way as to sell products, making their bodies sex toys. just click on yahoo.com for a second and look at the sexy celebrities listed on their newswire.
this manipulation of the public mind (using sex and power as memes linked to consumtion) flourished in america and probably is more responsible for teenage pregnancies in america than the socialist public sex education classes. watch - 'the century of the self' - documentary about advertising/propoganda and edward bernays.
The Century Of The Self-Full Length Documentary
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IyPzGUsYyKM
or read chris hedges book, 'american fascists', to see how the exploitation of women is an integral part of the proud corporate american vision.
"If my neighbor's daughter had behaved herself, she wouldn't be in the situation she is in and the government wouldn't be robbing me of my money to pay for her choices."
- again, the patriarchal attitude and the complete lack of moral framing. so what are you going to do about you neighbor's daughter and her children ? how about giving them love and support and assistance w/out the holier than thou attitude.
...peace...
When her inability to control her sexual organ takes money out of my pocket through mindless propagation she made it my business to comment on any way I feel. And there is nothing I can do about it. THAT"S EXTORTION.
Oh dear here speaks the GOP voice......womon as a class have no choices...PIV sex is the norm and men demand PIV from womon....and mostly careless if they impregnate....get rid of PIV means you get rid of unwanted pregnancies...simplesssss
BANNED: Just for the record, I think you are a jackass. And if you ask why, it's because people like you want to always make it about that single Mom with an extra baby or two. And people like YOU are never bothered that it is not the "Welfare Mama" who's brought this country's economy to its knees, it's the following:
1. Deregulation!!! Which has by turns allowed:
A.The banks to gamble the public's money to the tune of losses into the trillions (thus undermining the economy, while mega-bailouts were made to these dishonest high stakes players.)
B. The corporations to ship jobs overseas to low-paying zones where there are no environmental laws or protections (And as a result, there are not enough decent jobs in the Homeland for citizens residing here.)
C. The lax tax environment that's enabled many big companies & corporations to pay NO taxes, as they find ways to off-shore their alleged tax base or primary location (like in 100 Square Feet of space in the Cayman Islands)
If you want to talk about economics, then talk about the way the MIC and weapons' manufacturers cannibalize about half the discretionary income of this land of the anything but free. And talk about the 3 points I listed.
I smell a rat when someone tries to center the analysis of the nation's fiscal woes on the welfare mama. It's another take on blaming Acorn or Francis Pivens! And taken straight out of the right wing playbook, a la Rush Limbaugh, "We don't do torture, those are just fraternity pranks" level of consciousness.
So for an ignoramus like you to chastise me, or tell me to get my head out of the clouds... is ludicrous. Plus, you'll have to be a WHOLE LOT smarter. There are a few people on this site whose minds are powerful enough, and broad enough in their scope to get me thinking, or occasionally challenging my position. You are decidedly NOT one of those. The rest who routinely prey upon me are a bunch of low grade intelligence lock-step thinkers who would not recognize a TRULY original concept if it hit them between the eyes.
Let's get that clear. You are not in my league, pal. You're just another poster who's tried to discredit me under another screen name before. Maybe you should lift your head out of the dirt and look towards the clouds to clear your mind of the crap it's taken in, in the place of what's real and true.
The thing is you obsess over welfare to the underserving poor while appearing blissfully unaware of the welfare to the undeserving rich, which involves much more money. As the article points out, TANF is only $36 billion. That's like, what, two weeks of Iraq War? The whole "welfare" sector comes to $350 billion a year. Meanwhile, since 9/11, we've spent about $800 billion a year on war and military.
Why the focus on what meager crumbs we toss unwed mothers and the blind eye to the trillions we spend on making the wealthy wealthier?
You talk about the poor deserving a swift kick to the rear, but what would that accomplish? It is not normal to want to do nothing with your life. It's not normal to have no ambition, no more thought about the future than what you're going to have for dinner. So these women that you judge so harshly are not pretending. They're not normal. They are already somehow damaged. The very fact that they don't want to do anything with their lives is proof of that.
What is your obsession with making sure every dollar handed over is paid in blood, sweat, or tears? Is it something biblical or something like that?
careful, this rhetoric stinks of immoral communitarianism. every god fearing christian american understands the importance of feeling superior to others. it's freaking human nature right ? i mean, why have war and exploitation if you can't feel great about it (the essence of american exceptionalism) ?
lol......
..peace...
Please don't call names. It suggests you are unable to articulate your ideas.
I will always remember when I was told, "keep the struggle alive."
As I do I learn to see beyond the struggle, and understand much more about those struggling.
It's interesting how a couple posters jumped all over the comments in this thread and dramatically changed the tone.
For the rest, thank you for the well considered discussion and many personal stories.
May we all be blessed and be well.
Actually, this is supposed to be directed at the gentleman who wrote about his welfare mother neighbor.
I remember Clinton, who I supported wholeheartedly at the time, in spite of the fact that he went after the people on welfare. Then I was flabbergasted when he turned over $20 billion of tax payer money to a hedge fund that was sinking. Anyone who invests in a hedge fund has to sign a statement that they can afford to lose, I think, around $10 million dollars. So, people on welfare got the rug pulled from under them and millionaires got bailed out.
If the above example hasn't made things clear, consider the bankers who recently received around $11 trillion of tax payer money that has put this govt in hock to the gills. Yet, the "banksters" continue living high on the hog while people who have been in the work force for nearly 30 yrs. are making now what they did when they started working, that with 3 part time jobs and no benefits. How many welfare mothers will it take to use up $11 trillion???? There are always people such as yourself who start picking on welfare mothers and how many partners!! Jobs are being sent overseas because corporations and their political lackeys don't care about the people in this country but on maximizing profits. They also import cheaper workers while people here cannot find jobs, again to maximize profits. In addition, when they lose money they want the taxpayer to compensate them as they, with their political lackeys' help, privatize profits and socialize losses. So, sir, if you really want to go after those ruining the country, go after the politicians and their masters, the corporations, and stop picking on the bottom rung.
There are two kinds of people when it comes to this. One will say, "I'm sure some people are gaming the system, but helping the truly needy is more important," and the other will say, "I'm sure some people are truly needy, but thwarting the undeserving is more important."
Much better stated than my rant. Thank you.
very well said cosmo
Yeah, PJM, come live in my neighborhood, too. It's cold right now, but who can afford electricity? And that ambulance that drives right to your door? Just try that if you don't have a job with health insurance (or, really, even if you do). Do you have diabetes? Possibly need an inhaler? Wait until you find out what it's like when your income and job status won't let you afford such...what, opportunities?
I have had that ambulance drive to my front door. *WITH* insurance it cost $600 copay.
So much for that luxury.
My Dr. made an appt. for an MRI for my knee. I called the hospital in advance and asked them to call my insurance co to see if they covered it and what my co pay would be. They called back and said $800.
That cost will continue to rise as people who have no insurance continue to stick the hospital with unpaid bills. (It's not their fault that they can't afford insurance just a fact). They have a booth at the entrance to our hospital and a guard asks you if you have an appointment and with whom?
So Claudia, another libertarian blaming "the people" for not paying enough taxes, rather than focusing on why pay is so low. You do know, don't you, that CEO pay has gone up by many percentage points, while the average American worker's pay has not increased for the most part over the past 30 years.
In another comment, you pulled the libertarian favored stocking stuffer that it's the upper, what was it, 49% that pay all the taxes.
Is it tunnel vision? A need to hate your neighbor that makes you embrace the memes that blame individuals who are struggling, rather than those who work the puppet strings?After all, it's the upper elites that work the numbers, write the labor laws, and set the conditions that make sure that lots of people barely can get by.To miss this suggests that maybe you were dropped on your head as a small child, or somehow managed to miss each Christmas season's showing of "A Christmas Carol"? Then, too, you could be working for some dime-store branch of the Koch Brothers' network of P.R programs. Some in the forum might cut you slack for that... given the fact that these ARE tough times. There are always a few who can be relied upon to turn on their fellow man (or woman) to make a buck. Not exactly an honest living, but some are convinced that they get a moral pass if this type of thing is done to support their families.
Personally, I think most prostitutes have better ethics.
"(It's not their fault that they can't afford insurance just a fact)" It's just a fact that 48% of Americans pay no taxes. That's due to the lower standard of living since the invasion of cheap labor from south of the border.
PJM You seem to forget that what we consider underdeveloped regions of the world are still recovering from a violent, greedy, colonial period that virtually enslaved much of the planet in the name of wealth and power. Here, at home, we train the poor to kill those in the "underdeveloped" world that threaten economic colonialism. What exactly do the 1% do to earn their fabulous wealth? Without slaves toiling beneath them, they would have nothing.
Seriously you need to stop poisoning your mind with right wing bullshit. And that's exactly what it is, right wing bullshit.
So the new standard for right wingers, is pointing to people who live in shanty towns, with dirt floors, and say to America's poor (soon to come to your neighborhood too), "what the hell are you complaining about, you're in the land of opportunity!"
As far as other countries are concerned, you don't seem to know anyone from another country, that would just laugh at your assertion, that there isn't a "societal guarantee of outcome and result". How about going to the freaking doctor? Huh? Many countries, pool their citizens' resources to provide single payer healthcare, AT A MUCH LOWER COST PER PERSON THAN AMERICANS PAY NOW, so that trip to the doctor is already paid for and GURANTEED by that society. How about the outcome, of not losing your entire life's savings and home, because of a serious illness to yourself or a loved one? Well that outcome is guaranteed NOT TO HAPPEN in Austria for instance, and a whole host of other countries that haven't been attacked YET by greedy bastard hedge fund managers from the depths of hellish visions, called Wall Street.
But this is the new standard for right wingers. It's just pathetic. They are now pointing to the Third World to tell America's poor just how great they have it. When in actuality, many countries in the developing world have more humane health care systems than does the US. Have you heard of Cuba?
Now don't go calling me a communist because you'll just sound even more ignorant.
I could be wrong but I don't know of anyone in this country that is denied health care. My clinic is not allowed to question anyone without a SS# as to their status. They get the same care that I do for nothing.
The difference is that if you have a house they can attach it for your bill. When you have nothing, they can take nothing.
Are you kidding? You won't be denied emergency, on-the-spot, life-saving procedures, but you won't be provided with free treatment on an ongoing basis. If you collapse on the street, and they bring you in to the ER, of course they're going to revive you. But if it turns out you collapsed because you have some disease that's going to require a course of treatment over time, you're on your own if you don't have insurance.
It costs about $28,000 to have a baby at my local hospital - pre to post natal. They go in my clinic and get total care, total school and support for those children even if they are undocumented. We had 124 illegal aliens on Social Services. There are about 30,000 in my county. If 16 of them had babies thats $448,000 Thats about $1,500 MORE a person in taxes. (16% of the population is Hispanic wile producing 42% of new births in 2009. So if they are Hispanic it's over twice $1,500)
Actually, the problem is that America increasingly does NOT offer opportunity. A lack of economic opportunity is precisely the flip side of economic inequality. It's getting harder and harder to stay in the middle class, and it's getting harder and harder for young Americans to launch into adulthood.
Buchheit sez: "Another year of Bush tax cuts will chop another 1-2 percent off the taxes of the very rich."
***
Uh, minor typo here. I assume you mean the Obama tax cuts, since the 'Bush tax cuts' expired in December of 2010.
PJM - the voice of the brainwashed, greedy, inhuman, new majority of disabused citizens.
Opportunity as such is gone - what we have now is the sight of people climbing over each other to make a living wage (due to excess profits gouged by the corporate greed machine).
Cosmobilly - thank you for better expressing what I can't.
In a long career dealing with corporate america, I have watched the PJMs increase in number and vicious greed. They have been brainwashed with the 'opportunity' myth. They really believe that if someone is poor, they are lazy because that is what their narrow value clique keeps repeating.
They ignore the lack of access to good schools and health care for those. They keep taking away the access.
One of the new mantras that started in the 80s and 90s was "Education is a privilege, not a right". I cringed when I began hearing it and thought it would never take hold. But look how the rich have eliminated college access and even now want to reduce public education further, if not eliminate it entirely.
The 'voucher' school concept was the first shot in this campaign.
curmudgeon99 you are absolutely right. That Voucher system is elitist. State, Federal and Local taxes support schools. If you live in a high income area where your house is worth a lot of local taxes, you have more money to put into schools. That was the whole basis for bussing.
Now the value of real estate is falling, Assessments will be pushed downwards and there will be even less money for schools. We had to hire 2 "interpreters" and layoff an advanced placement teacher. That's not helping either. Many families are moving back home to stay with parents. If you had a house hold paying property taxes with one child and than another family with 4 children moves in, you are paying the same amount of taxes but have will have to increase school seating or build another wing and there is just no way to support that.
We need to give the 1% the same tax rate they had 12 years ago or a progressive tax rate. But the inequity in property worth is a problem I can't begin to tackle. Have any Ideas?
Health care is a "privilege" not a "right" here in the Corporate States of Americas. According to the "Social Darwinist Rich Peoples' Party" aka the Republican Party only those who can afford to pay for health care have a right to life. When I get into a discussion over "right to life" with some anti-abortionist (pro-lifer) I ask them if they support a "right to health care". As the answer is usually "no", then I say why should there be a "right to life" then? If there is a "right to life", that means that someone has to go through the cost of carrying the child to term, pay the hospital and doctor for the delivery, pay the costs involved in raising the child, including paying the taxes for education through high school. So "who" is going to pay those costs? Will the Catholic Church, the pro-life churches and their supporters pay this cost? It's easy to be "pro-something" if you aren't willing to pay the costs. This is the problem in our society when you get down to it. Lots of "pro" something or the other, but how many are willing to actually pay the costs involved? In this aspect the Europeans are far more "pro-life" than any of the "pro-life" people here in the USA.
BannedAgain: Yes, unfortunately, we live in a culture where many don’t play by the rules. But the problem starts at the TOP, where Big Business, Congress Critters, Presidents, and their Cronies get huge rewards for flaunting the rules that they consider are only for the “little people” and rigging the game for their own advantage.
You are to be commended for helping people. But please don’t aim all your anger at “the lefties” because you think they just whine rather than helping people like you do, and don’t aim it at the people at the bottom who behave like those at the top. You are “pony[ing] up” MUCH MORE for those at the top “who think that immoral behavior is just a game” than you are for those at the bottom. Your just “playing by the rules” while those on top flaunt them is only keeping the system going. Those at the top WANT you to aim your anger at the bottom, so that the top can continue their obscene behavior with your tacit consent. We would all be better off if you and we can work together to change the culture and figure out ways to punish the people AT THE TOP, not the bottom.
You write “The simple fact is that when you get a huge amount of people who are not willing to play by the rules, who think that morality is for others, and who expect that it is their "right" to be paid for their bad behavior…the whole system eventually collapses.” Perhaps that’s what it will take, so maybe everyone should stop playing by the rules meant for the suckers at the bottom! If you don’t like that solution, please help us think of a better one.
BABA: AMEN! The as-you-call-them Rethuglicans and Demoncrats and their overseers at the top love it when we fight amongst ourselves. I get just as frustrated as you at comments here and at other sites--both on the left and on the right. My only suggestion is that we can best fight each side’s confirmation bias by starting out with respect for both sides and finding the areas where we all agree FIRST. Only after mutual trust and respect are developed by working on issues where we all agree, is it wise to discuss the areas where each side is tender. I believe that the best way to help our country is not to tell the lefties or righties that they are wrong. That plays into everyone’s childhood dualistic, win/lose training and backs people into the proverbial corner, where we all fight even harder and blinder. Rather, it is to show how they and you and I are all partly right—and so is your neighbor’s daughter. It is to engage in true dialectic, not winner-take-all debate. We need to enlarge each other’s perspective, not destroy it. And to give each person the emotional support that allows their own cognitive and spiritual dissonance to do the rest. (Sorry—it’s much easier to preach than to do…)