'Dismal' prospects: 1 in 2 Americans are now poor or low income

[eliza61]

Funny how we all survived without cellphones for all those years but now they are a neccessity! And you have to pay a MONTHLY FEE for your cellphone (you don't pay $30 at the Dollar Store and that's the end of it) The average family in the U.S. pays over $100 a month for their plan (and that's not including data plans!) Our land line bill is $24 a month. You can make excuses all you want, but if you're not willing to cut back on spending, you will never get out of the hole.

we all survived at one time without cars but yet no one is advocating going back to horse and buggy either.

I have no problem with cutting back except you seem to think that the only way to do it is your way.

We don't have a line line, no one I know has them anymore and I know when my company hires we are not going to call anyones house phone and then wait for them to get back to us. especially in this day of competitive applicants. My family owned a successfuly NYC restaurant for many years and when we called some one if they did not get back to us in a few hours we moved on. So when we have job fairs we always ask is this your cell or home # and if they say home we ask can they get their messages instantenously.

so maybe some one who has a cellphone has cut back in other areas.

So basically from what I'm understanding and I apologize if I've got it wrong you're saying that you have these set of standards that some one has to follow and if they're not, they are not willing to get out of a hole.

I know people who are searching for a job who feel their computer is an abolute necessity, yet I'm willing to bet every one here would also say how "we survived without them" before and if they were really serious about pulling themselves out of a hole they would get rid of it.

Our standard of living has risen, the things we deem as necessities has risen so IMO to say some one who has a cellphone is not serious about getting out of debt (I'm assuming thats what you meant by gettingout of a hole, I apologize if thats not what you meant) is no more relevant than saying people who are not willing to give up their electricity and use firewood for heat. I know thats a bit of an exaggeration but you get my drift.

Unless you know the entire financial situation of a person struggling and their reasons behind it, it's just a blanket generalization.

Now I didn't own a cell phone up until 2 months ago, for me I simply find them extremely annoying and the only reason I have a trac phone is because Dh made me get one. LOL. I drive 48 mile each way to work on 95 so for peace of mind. I have an old flip phone for 9.99 and my monthly contract is ~22 bucks not including taxes. so its waaay cheaper than land line.

 

[eliza61]

Funny how we all survived without cellphones for all those years but now they are a neccessity! And you have to pay a MONTHLY FEE for your cellphone (you don't pay $30 at the Dollar Store and that's the end of it) The average family in the U.S. pays over $100 a month for their plan (and that's not including data plans!) Our land line bill is $24 a month. You can make excuses all you want, but if you're not willing to cut back on spending, you will never get out of the hole.

Not saying this is wrong but I find that all that glitters is not gold and the dis has some very definite ideas about what a "poor" person should or should not do.

For instance one complaint is always about how the people on food stamps are always rocking designer clothes and getting their nails done.

I rock designer clothes that I get at a 2nd hand store, they call them vintage now. LOL or the salvation army. My sons love the SA in our area because many wealthy people donate their gently used clothes so to look at my sons you would think they drop 150 bucks on jeans when they get Sean John clothes for 7 bucks.

just sayin

 

[denisenh]

i stopped reading the replies because it looks like my thoughts are echoed by others.
you can make a "decent" wage but after taxes of every kind (federal , property, state in some cases), all kinds of insurance (auto, home, life, health) because heaven forbid you don't do the responsible thing, you are left with squat.

How old are you? Because inflation changes things.

Growing up $45k was a darn good income for me - but I graduated high school in 1984. I remember when I started making $32k and I had a "good job" - I was single. When my husband moved in, we made a combined $60k (and this would have been around 1995) and had quite a bit of money.

But that was almost 30 years ago. Gas was under $1 when I graduated from high school, under $2 when my husband and I married. I could get a pound of hamburger for $.99 in 1984, for less than $2 in 1995. My utilities were cheaper, my insurance was cheaper. To have the same lifestyle of 15 years ago, I'd need twice as much money.

I'm not sure a household income of $45k is poor, but for most Americans it isn't going to provide a middle class lifestyle if you have a family. Especially when you consider that we just cut funding for Pell grants - if your kids are going to be middle class and you make $45k, you'd better plan on funding their educations....and that is going to be hard on $45.

I volunteer with the working poor and unemployed at my church. we run an almost full service center. we donot run a shelter. 4 years ago we opened our food pantry 2x's a week, now it's open 6 days a week.

Yes, it would be nice if all single mothers had the gift of fore sight to know their partners were creeps but you know when they come to the shelter the third week of the month because their limited food stamps are gone, trying to lecture them about their ability to "judge" a good partner seems crash and does absolutely NOTHING to prevent kids from going hungry.

Almost 99% of our clients are working poor. They are 100% willing to do just about any job that will pay decently. some may have child care issues but I've yet to have one person that didn't go to any interview we were able to get them.

I live in the Northeast which unfortunately is one of the highest col areas. I just looked at my insurance claim from Aetna, Aetna simply sends me an email notification whenever they pay a bill. I went to my doctor to schedule a colonoscopy (over 50, yuck) and they paid him $380 bucks. I often wonder how people with no insurance deal especially if you don't qualify for medicare.


Yes, we don't live in huts and we are not living like the poor folks in Ethiopia but I have to wonder, is that now some sort of standard we are aspiring to before we solve any of our problems? Are we really saying we want children to have bloated stomaches and flies in their eyes before we deal with childhood hunger or food insecurity? why do we have a rush to the bottom?

Interestingly enough I just got finish watching "A christmas Carol" and Scrooge yells.

Are there no prisons? Are there no workhouses?

'Many can't go there; and many would rather die.'

'If they would rather die,' said Scrooge, 'they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population."

I don't think anyone wakes up and says "I think I'll be poor for the rest of my life". so in this season of Christ, I think I'll pray that the millions of Americans who find themselves in a bad way, find the tools and get the assistance they need to help them get a hold onto the path of doing better.

It's not just the 1 in 2 families that's the issue. It's also that we, as a society have fallen. It used to be that the American standard was the one every other country aspired to. Now, we trail way behind in education, healthcare, standard of living and so on. Every year we drop further and further down the list. I find this very disturbing. And the gap between the few haves grows by leaps and bounds, while the middle class/working class is stagnant income wise, but expenses keep growing. The problem isn't that someone has a nice phone or a flat screen tv. It's that the cost of things like education and healthcare that go up drastically every year.

That's a household income, not an individual income. So, if you have 2 people working full time and earning at total of 45k before taxes. From that, you need to subtract the cost of daycare, health insurance, housing, utilities, transportation, groceries, etc.... It doesn't leave much. You'd be one illness away from financial disaster.

 

[Acklander]

Government CAN NOT create jobs! We need some personal fiscal responsibility in this country not to mention some financial education.

of course the government creates jobs. We live in a country where we pay taxes for government services. The government hires teachers and soldiers, and firefighters, and police. We also all chip in towards the infrastructure of roads and bridges and ports etc.... From the beginning of the country there have always been government jobs. And for a long time the US was considered one of the best countries to live on because we, as a country, invested in it's well being. It's only since regan that we've gotten on the cycle that its better to cut taxes so that the money trickles down instead of investing in our country. And weve suffered because of this. We've dropped down in the ranks for things like education, healthcare, infant mortality, and quality of life.
It's like, when you buy a house, you have to continually pump money into the upkeep. The same thing with a country.

 

[nunzia]

of course the government creates jobs. We live in a country where we pay taxes for government services. The government hires teachers and soldiers, and firefighters, and police. We also all chip in towards the infrastructure of roads and bridges and ports etc.... From the beginning of the country there have always been government jobs. And for a long time the US was considered one of the best countries to live on because we, as a country, invested in it's well being. It's only since regan that we've gotten on the cycle that its better to cut taxes so that the money trickles down instead of investing in our country. And weve suffered because of this. We've dropped down in the ranks for things like education, healthcare, infant mortality, and quality of life.
It's like, when you buy a house, you have to continually pump money into the upkeep. The same thing with a country.

Of course..but Government can't (or shouldn't ) be in the business of creating jobs that should be in the private sector. And the jobs they create shouldn't be inflated into a perpetual cycle of bigger with bigger wages and bigger benefits on the backs of private sector workers. All wages, benefits, etc paid out FOR public jobs come FROM us in taxes..of course those who work for the Gov't pay those taxes too, but the tipping point has been reached where there is not enough coming in to cover all those gov't jobs, and all the programs that recruit more and more people to use their services so they can get more and more gov't funding. Meanwhile we borrow, what, 40 cents of every dollar we spend as a country? How can anyone think this is a good idea. We spend more and more on things and have worse and worse results. Gov't salaries used to be crappy because the benefits were great, now many Gov't salaries far outpace private sector salaries and yet, benefits also beat most of those with private sector jobs. And is the quality of that workforce impoved over the years? Something needs to be really seriously be done..we have to get our heads out of the sand.

 

[crisi]

Of course..but Government can't (or shouldn't ) be in the business of creating jobs that should be in the private sector. And the jobs they create shouldn't be inflated into a perpetual cycle of bigger with bigger wages and bigger benefits on the backs of private sector workers. All wages, benefits, etc paid out FOR public jobs come FROM us in taxes..of course those who work for the Gov't pay those taxes too, but the tipping point has been reached where there is not enough coming in to cover all those gov't jobs, and all the programs that recruit more and more people to use their services so they can get more and more gov't funding. Meanwhile we borrow, what, 40 cents of every dollar we spend as a country? How can anyone think this is a good idea. We spend more and more on things and have worse and worse results. Gov't salaries used to be crappy because the benefits were great, now many Gov't salaries far outpace private sector salaries and yet, benefits also beat most of those with private sector jobs. And is the quality of that workforce impoved over the years? Something needs to be really seriously be done..we have to get our heads out of the sand.

But they do create and destroy jobs just by being there. Whether they are creating jobs by spending money, or creating jobs by regulation (SOX created a ton of jobs within the private sector) or destroying jobs by taxing higher or insisting on benefits that make 3rd world labor more attractive, actions our government takes has a lot to do with jobs.

Personally, I don't think that jobs should be the only driver in making decisions (I like clean water and people making more than $3 a day), but I think its important to understand that many of the governments decisions have an effect on private sector labor. The government shouldn't be taking actions right now that have a negative impact on jobs and should be taking actions that have a positive impact on jobs - unless the other consequences of the action are significant enough to override the jobs concerns.

 

[MrsPete]

I find it hard to believe all of a sudden they are going to stop working just to get a free dinner in the hall of a Baptist church. LOL.

Glad you liked the fish analogy. It was fun to write.

No, I don't think that people who've bought into the idea of working will quit just so they can eat your free food once a week. But I do think that some people -- as long as they can manage to scrounge a meal from your church today, the Methodist church tomorrow, get Christmas gifts from this or that charity -- will not make the effort to leave their comfort zone and start working. Their reasons will vary widely: They've had bad luck in the job market in the past, they don't have education, they have small children, whatever. They're getting by, so why work harder? You have to walk a fine line between helping people and becoming an enabler, and the hard thing is that you don't know these people personally, so it's hard to know who's sincere and who isn't.

2) With inflated grades now who is not a straight A student?

About 25-30% of our students make honor roll every semester (High honor roll is straight As, Honor roll is As and Bs). About 15% of the Junior/Senior class is inducted into National Honor Society (meaning they've consistantly made honor roll semester after semester). So the majority of our high school students are NOT making straight As. It's just that parents don't tend to talk about their kids' average grades, and that throws off perception. Whether you're talking about the grades in my classroom or overall GPAs, they fall out into a bell curve: A few students doing very well, a few barely squeaking by, and the majority in the middle.

The majority of people out there are working for money instead of making money work for them.

There's some truth in this statement. Too many people don't grasp the concept of budgeting; rather, they choose their car based upon how much they qualify to borrow, they fail to understand just how detrimental compound interest is when it works against you (and, likewise, how compound interest can build up your savings), and so forth. They've bought into the idea that "you deserve" this or that product/service. They don't plan, and that means that they'll never get ahead.

Funny how we all survived without cellphones for all those years but now they are a neccessity! And you have to pay a MONTHLY FEE for your cellphone (you don't pay $30 at the Dollar Store and that's the end of it) The average family in the U.S. pays over $100 a month for their plan (and that's not including data plans!) Our land line bill is $24 a month. You can make excuses all you want, but if you're not willing to cut back on spending, you will never get out of the hole.

Well, let's tell the whole story: Back when we had a house phone, yes, our monthly bill was indeed something like $24 . . . but that was just for local service, not the whole bill. Living out in the country (away from businesses we called regularly) and living several hours away from family, we always had a significant addition for long distance service. Our bill back then was never lower than $60 and frequently was over $100. For one line.

Now we pay $120/month for four lines.

And it's more convenient. When my husband goes out of town for business (frequently), I don't concern myself with whether he's at the Marriott or the Holiday Inn. I just know he's on the other end of his cell phone, and it's not a long distance call. Next year when our daugther goes away to college, we'll keep her on our current cell plan, and our costs won't change. Back when I was in college, students who had phones had to pay the $24-ish house phone line fee -- as well as an installation fee every fall when we moved back into the dorms, and we can't ignore the previously-discussed long distance charges. If we were paying our house phone, a college student's dorm land line, and long distance today . . . we'd be paying over $120/month.

I agree that if you're "in the hole", cutting back is the only way to dig your way out . . . but I don't see basic cell phone service as outrageous.

What IS outrageous (if you're having trouble making ends meet), is keeping both a house phone and a cell phone, choosing a high-priced cell/data plan, and changing your phone frequently to have the fanciest, newest hardware.

 

[Colleen27]

Not saying this is wrong but I find that all that glitters is not gold and the dis has some very definite ideas about what a "poor" person should or should not do.

For instance one complaint is always about how the people on food stamps are always rocking designer clothes and getting their nails done.

I rock designer clothes that I get at a 2nd hand store, they call them vintage now. LOL or the salvation army. My sons love the SA in our area because many wealthy people donate their gently used clothes so to look at my sons you would think they drop 150 bucks on jeans when they get Sean John clothes for 7 bucks.

just sayin

Exactly. It isn't just the DIS - you'll find the same conversation going on in any forum where the demographics skew heavily to upper middle class. The perception seems to be that "poor" is like male, female, black, white, etc... Something you are and always have been, not a temporary state of being, but the reality is that MANY of today's poor are yesterday's working/lower-middle and middle-middle class who have seen their jobs go away, and they do have material things leftover from those better days.

And I'm with you on the expensive clothes. Most of my kids' friends wear mid-range designer brands like Aeropostale, American Eagle, Tommy, etc., including many who are on food stamps, getting free lunch, etc. Why? Because we have a fabulous resale boutique where tween/teen sizes in "brands" are cheaper than shopping Kmart sales. And since those are the only two places in town that sell clothing, why not get the better/trendier (and usually higher quality) clothing? Because it "looks bad" to be on food stamps and wearing name brands?

 

[Planogirl]

I agree that government can't create private sector jobs however through tax incentives and so on they can help foster a climate that lends well to job creation. They haven't done that IMO.

Off topic, is this political? I'd better shut up.

 

[leahjade]

you can make a "decent" wage but after taxes of every kind

We would all have more take home pay if everyone paid their fair share (not allowing almost 50% of the population to pay no taxes at all) and if we didn't have the government getting more and more involved in cradle to grave entitlement plans.

 

[leahjade]

agree that government can't create private sector jobs however through tax incentives

That's the key! Extremely high taxes, expensive rules and regulations have driven so many companies out of this country. Anyone who has ever owned a small business will complain to you how much government interference has cost them. Keep government out of business! Look what a mess they have made of social security, welfare etc.

 

[Colleen27]

Funny how we all survived without cellphones for all those years but now they are a neccessity! And you have to pay a MONTHLY FEE for your cellphone (you don't pay $30 at the Dollar Store and that's the end of it) The average family in the U.S. pays over $100 a month for their plan (and that's not including data plans!) Our land line bill is $24 a month. You can make excuses all you want, but if you're not willing to cut back on spending, you will never get out of the hole.

But those big bills are averages, not a minimum requirement for having cell phone service. My mom has a pay-by-the-minute phone from Kroger and she "earns" minutes based on her grocery spending. I'm not sure exactly how the details work because that's not the route we've gone, but she averages $10/mo for hers. A basic landline would easily cost more than that, especially if you live in an area (as we do) where most calls are "zone" calls and require an add-on plan or per-minute charges. Our home phone, on the other hand, costs $40+ for basic service plus that add-on plan that stops us from paying 10¢/min for any calls outside of our little town - no voice mail, no caller ID, no optional features at all.

And as Eliza pointed out, employers are not apt to wait around on waiting for an applicant to return a message, especially in the current job market where most openings are flooded with applicants. My brother just got a second job as a delivery driver for a sub shop - he got a call in the morning that the manager was scheduling interviews for that same afternoon, and got the call he was hired the next day. That's how it goes for jobs where every one of the hundreds of applicants is reasonably similarly qualified; there's no reason to wait for one to call you back when there are dozens available to show up on your schedule.

 

[Colleen27]

That's the key! Extremely high taxes, expensive rules and regulations have driven so many companies out of this country. Anyone who has ever owned a small business will complain to you how much government interference has cost them. Keep government out of business! Look what a mess they have made of social security, welfare etc.

There's a flip side to that, though, and personally I enjoy having reasonably clean air & water, knowing that the products I buy are reasonably safe, etc. And not everyone who owns a small business will complain; I don't feel like we run up against any burdensome regulations in the course of running DH's business and would happily welcome better enforcement of certain existing regulations because they'd be a boon to our business.

 

[Colleen27]

We would all have more take home pay if everyone paid their fair share (not allowing almost 50% of the population to pay no taxes at all)

Well, no. The more affluent half would have more take home pay, while the half that is already struggling, unable to save for the future, and perhaps relying on those entitlement programs to make ends meet would have less.

 

[leahjade]

My point wasn't unique to cellphones. I do have a problem with someone saying they can't pay their mortgage yet have a family cellphone plan, cable tv and internet and are not willing to cut down expenses in any way. EVERYTHING is not a neccessity. Sometimes drastic measures are needed to get a budget back under control. By someone saying $60 a month for this or $100 a month for that isn't going to pay off my debt isn't getting it. These "neccessities" add up.

 

[crisi]

We would all have more take home pay if everyone paid their fair share (not allowing almost 50% of the population to pay no taxes at all) and if we didn't have the government getting more and more involved in cradle to grave entitlement plans.

Well, except those of us trying to raise a family of four on less than $150,000 - we'd have less money.

 

[Acklander]

We would all have more take home pay if everyone paid their fair share (not allowing almost 50% of the population to pay no taxes at all) and if we didn't have the government getting more and more involved in cradle to grave entitlement plans.

I'm much more concerned that bank of America and GE doesn't pay taxes than the family of 4 living on 25k a year.

 

[Acklander]

That's the key! Extremely high taxes, expensive rules and regulations have driven so many companies out of this country. Anyone who has ever owned a small business will complain to you how much government interference has cost them. Keep government out of business! Look what a mess they have made of social security, welfare etc.

Businesses have, historically, done a very poor job of regulating themselves which is why you have government involvement. Yes, you can get stuff cheaper in China. There a communist country. They don't have to worry about getting top doll or for the investors. They don't have to provide benefits to the employees, the government provides that. It's not fair to continually compare industry in the US with industry in a communist country unless you want to provide the benefits of a communist country as well. And yes, they have less regulations there. That's why many times when you see recalls for things like arsenic in the dog food or on baby toys it's from products that are produced
In countries with little regulations. Government involvement would not have come about if the businesses had been responsible in the first place.

 

[leahjade]

"The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money

Margaret Thatcher

That's what happened in Greece and is happening in other European countries right now when they are less people working and the population is aging. They are not enough working citizens to foot the bill for the ever-growing government programs and "freebies"

 

[Colleen27]

Businesses have, historically, done a very poor job of regulating themselves which is why you have government involvement. Yes, you can get stuff cheaper in China. There a communist country. They don't have to worry about getting top doll or for the investors. They don't have to provide benefits to the employees, the government provides that. It's not fair to continually compare industry in the US with industry in a communist country unless you want to provide the benefits of a communist country as well.

And deal with the living conditions that go hand in hand with that... Air quality in China's industrial areas, for example, is so bad that it is causing severe and chronic health issues for millions upon millions of people ranging from low birthweight in babies to epidemic rates of lung cancer and asthma and is estimated to be the cause of death for 3/4 of a million people every year. LA's air quality hits the 150 range on bad days and that's widely considered America's worst city on that count; the pollution index for Beijing is twice that on a regular basis and often tops out the scale at 500.

It is easy to rail against expensive government regulation driving industry overseas as long as you never think about the alternative...