Home > Top of the Morning > Top of the morning

Top of the morning

Post on January 29, 2010 by 5 Comments »

sun145

Here are some sobering numbers from a recent report by the Brookings Institution—more than 30 percent of the nation’s population earns less than 200 percent of the poverty level in 2008—that is more than 90 million people.

The report explores the rise of poverty in the suburbs and the results are worse than they look. The study does not include 2009 when poverty and unemployment rose significantly. Happy Friday.

Possibly related posts:

  1. New poverty data highlight the need for a public response
  2. Poverty extends its reach across NC
  3. Poverty Rate Edges Up During the Official Recovery of the Great Recession
  4. What about the kids?
  5. North Carolina Policymakers Could Use Tax Code to Fight Rising Poverty

This entry was posted in Top of the Morning. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments (Closed):5

  1. IBXer
    January 29, 2010 at 9:56 am

    All this shows is that poverty began to rise rapidly in 2007, they year after the Dems took control of both Chambers of Congress.

  2. pino
    January 29, 2010 at 10:46 am

    The study does not include 2009 when poverty and unemployment rose significantly.

    Nor does the study include the last 40 years or so:

    In 1959 18% of the white, 55% of the black and 23% (though this is 1972 number) were living in poverty for a national average of 22%

    In 1999 those % changed to 10%, 24%, 23% and 12% total respectively.

    Further, while being poor in America relative to other American’s is one method of measuring, it is also useful to see what being poor in America is like compared to the rest of the world.

    The average living space per person for someone listed as poor? 721 sq feet. The average living space for all of Europe, independent of poverty status? 396 sq feet.

    Further, what does being poor in America give you?

    Some examples, in 2004:

    45.9% owned their home
    72.8 had a car
    97.3 had a color TV
    55.3 had TWO color TVs
    62.6 had cable or satellite

  3. gregflynn
    January 29, 2010 at 11:20 am

    You’re pointing at Democrats with Bush’s veto pen. There have been 2 recessions since 2000 separated by an anomylous growth spurt 2005-2007 caused by the housing bubble. Blaming Congressional Democrats for the crash is like blaming your boss for a Monday morning hangover.

  4. gregflynn
    January 29, 2010 at 12:09 pm

    The price of private health insurance is not directly related to the cost of care. Profits, recission, non-care spending, caps, denial protocols, and, in particular, profits or losses from insurance company investments and derivatives all figure into the price. In a good economy premiums don’t necessarily cover the cost. In a bad economy premiums can rise to cover much more than the cost of care including investment losses.

  5. gregflynn
    January 29, 2010 at 12:10 pm

    Sorry, health care comment in wrong thread