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

[snarlingcoyote]

The air conditioning this is so weird I live in a high-income state and air conditioning is not typical, especially central air. There are million-plus homes that have a couple window units! I cannot relate to AC as a measure of poverty.

You live in a New England state. You do not live in a semi or sub tropical zone, nor in an arid desert zone. If you did, you would understand. It's roughly analgous in your region to someone not having heating oil. People can die without it.

Tell you what, come to Orlando in August and stay out in the heat for 3 weeks with an elderly woman and a new baby, then decide if it's a necessity or not.

 

[snarlingcoyote]

And 82% have cellphones! If this is poverty, count me in!!

Yes, because you can go into Dollar General and buy a cellphone for $30. You can't maintain a landline for that. In addition, if your cell phone runs out of minutes you can still call 911. You have to have a phone number if you are doing temp work or labor work so your boss or the agency can call you. If you're trying to get handyman labor, people have to be able to call you. If you're applying for jobs, same deal.

 

[luvsJack]

I've lived in the South all my life, and I grew up without air conditioning (we're talking 70s-80s). We had one attic fan in the middle of the house, and we had an oscillating tabletop fan in the kitchen. We survived. Sometimes we'd sleep out in lawn chairs in the field watching the stars. We never ate hot lunches during the summer, and we often had cold dinners as well.

I have also gone without heat. Personally, I'd give up the air conditioning first.

The people who literally die from lack of air conditioning tend to be the elderly who are in poor health. Healthy people can take the heat.

Also, while I was growing up, I never heard of anyone dying from the heat, but back then people spent the day on their porches and kept their windows open. I have the impression that these deaths tend to happen in places where people don't feel safe doing those things -- so they're faced with the choice of staying indoors in the unhealthy heat, or opening their doors and windows and opening themselves to the possibility of violence. Also, houses "back then" were built for the heat: They have high ceilings (because heat rises), and they have large windows placed for cross-ventilation. In the 70s, people started building with the assumption that air conditioning would be used; so rooms have windows on only one side, making furniture placement easier and ensuring privacy from neighbors. This was very common when I was growing up. I"m from a very rural area, where families tend to live on the same farm for generations.

You make the point yourself of why there are so many more heat related deaths now. Houses are built differently. And the increase of crime and the inhabitants of the house not feeling safe with windows and doors open. Fans only do any good if there is some air to pull and cool. Moving hot air is still just hot air.

I have been without air because of hurricanes, etc. After Katrina it was weeks before we had power. It was hot but thank goodness we weren't having the heat wave like we have had. 105-110 degrees and its too hot to stay in a house without air.

I have lived in the south my whole life too. I know how hot it gets here and how humid it can be. Yes there are elderly that die from the heat but there are younger people too and babies. A/C is necessary for any kind of life quality in the middle of the summer.

 

[herdtoDisney]

Hey, I'll take you guys' word for it about the air conditioning I'm just saying, it's hard for me to relate since it is a luxury here. I guess in many other places, it is a standard utility, like heat is here. Here, it's usually either in pricey new construction, or a retrofit. I didn't realize it was used, in studies, as a poverty indicator. Learn something new every day

 

[snarlingcoyote]

Hey, I'll take you guys' word for it about the air conditioning I'm just saying, it's hard for me to relate since it is a luxury here. I guess in many other places, it is a standard utility, like heat is here. Here, it's usually either in pricey new construction, or a retrofit. I didn't realize it was used, in studies, as a poverty indicator. Learn something new every day

I understand it must be hard to visualize the heat and the nasty nature of heat in the Deep South if you've never lived here. I lived in Northen MA, about 5 miles from the NH, a few miles west of 496. If you haven't lived in the deep South, it's hard to understand why AC is a necessity, especially for the very young and the very old. OTOH, folks here in Louisiana think that it's cold at 30 or 40 degrees and they just don't understand what it's like to have entire months where the weather never gets above freezing.

 

[goofyredraider]

Yep, A/C is not a luxury here in Texas.
Our A/C died when my husband was deployed in in July 2009. I was here with three kiddos, one of which is severely asthmatic, and I called my FIL who lives in Northern Indiana...he about laughed at me when I was in tears over it...and told me to toughen up. It was 110 DEGREES THAT DAY. He didn't understand just how hot it gets here because he's never been here in the summer!

My son was having severe asthma attacks as a result. Had we not repaired the a/c, I have no doubt he would have been in the hospital or worse. We stayed in a motel 6 for 2 days while it was being repaired...and it was so hot that the paint in my house started to peel. Oh, and it gets hotter in August here
So, yeah, it isn't much of a luxury here.

 

[SandrA9810]

AC is critical in the south, and not a luxury. Heat on the other hand, is very much a luxury, and you can usually get by with just a little space heater.

I don't understand how heat is considered a necessity and AC is not, when the extreme of either can kill people. The upside to after a hurricane, is it's a huge force of low pressure which usually brings in the cool air. So the following week or so, the temperature can drop 10 degrees below normal.

I hear stories all the time of people in the South, Georgia, Florida, Carolinas, of people dying from being without proper AC. I wouldn't wish any one to freeze in the north. The only upside, is you can bundle up, and create a fire for warmth. You can only get down to your birthday suit and still be sweating up a storm.

 

[cornflake]

A lot of the south and southwest would not have the population centers they do without air conditioning. It allowed those areas to be centers of business, commerce and population.

For the 'I grew up without AC in the south and we lived, sleeping on the porch,' people, first, welcome to climate change. Second, as someone else notes, houses are built far differently than they were pre-ac, when they were built specifically to maximize airflow and retain cool air and heat in the winter. That's absolutely not the case now. Third, yes, people did die in the heat, it just didn't make the counts on CNN.

As well, without AC, your electronics will not be happy. All your electronic goods, most sophisticated and sensitive first, will suffer in prolonged, severe heat and humidity. That's why, without AC, the south and southwest wouldn't be what they are, you can't run offices like we have offices today in 40 days of 100+ heat, the computers will give up the ghost.

I'm in the South, which the article says is one of the hardest-hit areas, and I don't see this. I was at Walmart yesterday, and it was insane -- getting up and down the aisles was crazy because the crowds were so heavy. The mall's worse; we don't go there at this time of year because we literally can't get a parking space. My husband and I went out to dinner last Saturday night. Our first-choice restaurant was packed with a 40-minute wait time, so we went to a sports-bar nearby, and we got the last table. At school I see the majority of our teens wearing expensive clothes, a smattering of Coach bags among teens, the vast majority of our juniors/seniors driving cars of their own, and it's a rare high schooler who doesn't have a cell phone.

Clearly, people are spending money. If 50% of us were living in poverty, I think I'd see a different picture.

Yes, yes, this is a spendy time of year, and some of those people are probably over-extending themselves beyond what they should spend . . . but, again, I don't think we can assume that'll account for 50% of the population.

Don't get me wrong: I know of plenty of people who are in need. My oldest volunteered yesterday with a church group, and she came home with some sad stories. Goodwill's absolutely busier than it was a couple years ago. But I don't see 50% of the people around me in need.

I suspect this was lazy reporting. I suspect the person who wrote the article saw that 45K is the median income for Americans (I'm guessing that's true), and he falsely stated that since that's the "middle spot", the people making less must be "in poverty".

The bolded is really the issue. The people around you, that you see, that you interact with, are, more than likely, in your general socioeconomic group. Yes, there will be outliers and people who were in your same socioeconomic class but have suffered financial hardships recently. However, the 50% figure doesn't mean half the people you know, because the people you know are the ones you work with, your kids go to school and activities with, who shop where you do, who live in the same neighbourhood, etc.

If you widen the area, you'll find an area of people with a living standard far below yours and I guarantee they'd say that 50% of the people THEY know don't have kids who have their own new cars, coach bags, go out to dinner on a whim, etc.

 

[DisneyWalle]

AC is critical in the south, and not a luxury. Heat on the other hand, is very much a luxury, and you can usually get by with just a little space heater.

I don't understand how heat is considered a necessity and AC is not, when the extreme of either can kill people. The upside to after a hurricane, is it's a huge force of low pressure which usually brings in the cool air. So the following week or so, the temperature can drop 10 degrees below normal.

I hear stories all the time of people in the South, Georgia, Florida, Carolinas, of people dying from being without proper AC. I wouldn't wish any one to freeze in the north. The only upside, is you can bundle up, and create a fire for warmth. You can only get down to your birthday suit and still be sweating up a storm.

I second this! I have lived my entire 36 years in rural south alabama and over 12 of those years without A/C. However, A/C is a requirement in our home because our 11 year-old son is an asthmatic. So A/C is as important as food and water for us or we might as well live at the hospital's emergency room.

 

[eliza61]

A lot of the south and southwest would not have the population centers they do without air conditioning. It allowed those areas to be centers of business, commerce and population.

For the 'I grew up without AC in the south and we lived, sleeping on the porch,' people, first, welcome to climate change. Second, as someone else notes, houses are built far differently than they were pre-ac, when they were built specifically to maximize airflow and retain cool air and heat in the winter. That's absolutely not the case now. Third, yes, people did die in the heat, it just didn't make the counts on CNN.


The bolded is really the issue. The people around you, that you see, that you interact with, are, more than likely, in your general socioeconomic group. Yes, there will be outliers and people who were in your same socioeconomic class but have suffered financial hardships recently. However, the 50% figure doesn't mean half the people you know, because the people you know are the ones you work with, your kids go to school and activities with, who shop where you do, who live in the same neighbourhood, etc. If you widen the area, you'll find an area of people with a living standard far below yours and I guarantee they'd say that 50% of the people THEY know don't have kids who have their own new cars, coach bags, go out to dinner on a whim, etc.

Ding, ding, ding!! Well said cornflake. That's why I have such an issue with folks here who stereotype poor people. For the most part, people tend to associate with a very small % of the general population and they tend to be those that are like "us" some how. Yet if you ask the dis they seem to know all these poor folks from the ghetto who are lazy. Really?
That's why I am very skeptical of all these dissers who know seem to know all these welfare folks who they say are living la vida loca, going to disneyworld, driving luxury cars etc etc.

Just as you said, the folks I "hang out" with, my family and BFF's all are in my socio-economic group. Since my churchs outreach is in Camden NJ which is one of the poorest communities in the country, I work amongst poor and sorry after 15 years, I've yet to see a disser there. I'd be a happy camper if htey had access to the internet.

 

[eliza61]

AC is critical in the south, and not a luxury. Heat on the other hand, is very much a luxury, and you can usually get by with just a little space heater.

I don't understand how heat is considered a necessity and AC is not, when the extreme of either can kill people. The upside to after a hurricane, is it's a huge force of low pressure which usually brings in the cool air. So the following week or so, the temperature can drop 10 degrees below normal.

I hear stories all the time of people in the South, Georgia, Florida, Carolinas, of people dying from being without proper AC. I wouldn't wish any one to freeze in the north. The only upside, is you can bundle up, and create a fire for warmth. You can only get down to your birthday suit and still be sweating up a storm.

Also remember that the "when I was a kid" argument really is not a good indication of what is necessary. How far back do we go. At one time we didn't have running water in our houses and yes while we managed to survive, pretty much I would consider that a necessity. My parents didn't have the polio vaccine and yes they survive but I would not want my kids living without those medical advance.

Once again, be careful of the standards. Yes, in order to exist one may not need heat or a/c but is that the goal. Bare existance? The object shouldn't be to make the argument to lower the standard of living so much that you can't tell the difference from Alabama to Ethiopia.

Could I exist in texas without A/C? possibly. Folks in sub sahara Africa do survive but is it a standard our want our country to start adhering to? No.

 

[lisam427]

The system needs to be changed to help those that are in a temporary bad situation not to help those that enjoy being in a permanent bad situation because they get so many "free" handouts - such as food stamps, medicaid etc.[/QUOTE]



i couldnt say this any better. i totally agree with this poster!!!!

 

[ilovemk76]

Ding, ding, ding!! Well said cornflake. That's why I have such an issue with folks here who stereotype poor people. For the most part, people tend to associate with a very small % of the general population and they tend to be those that are like "us" some how. Yet if you ask the dis they seem to know all these poor folks from the ghetto who are lazy. Really?
That's why I am very skeptical of all these dissers who know seem to know all these welfare folks who they say are living la vida loca, going to disneyworld, driving luxury cars etc etc.

Just as you said, the folks I "hang out" with, my family and BFF's all are in my socio-economic group. Since my churchs outreach is in Camden NJ which is one of the poorest communities in the country, I work amongst poor and sorry after 15 years, I've yet to see a disser there. I'd be a happy camper if htey had access to the internet.

Some of us hand out with people from different socio-economic groups.

Your only exposure to the poor are the inner city poor. I know about rural poor, who are very different. We have a high percentage of rural poor who live around us. DH and I know about that life style, as we help in our area. We also help in the city and that is a very different group.

It was DH and I that showed the Salvation Army the amount of poverty in the rural area where we live. They like most, concern themselves with the city poor but do not notice the rural poor. City poor have access to far more services and are more dependent on those services. The rural poor are, what they term themselves, "proud people" who do not ask for help and find it harder to accept help. When they do accept help they are way more appreciative than the ones who feel entitled to services, since they get these services often.

DH and I help both groups but find the rural poor.

Rural poor are more self sufficient and they share what little they have with others in the same situation. Once you get to know them they will let you help, but it has to be in a way that still protects them as "proud people". Many of them live in trailers that are falling apart.

We have hired them to help us do tasks around the house, just to give them much needed money but let them hold their heads high because they did it by work.

Many of the rural poor actually work, but jobs are very low paying and everything is a long distance away. No new cars, just beaters.

I babysit their kids, when I can. DH and I will be doing that during our Christmas vacation. We do this because we enjoy the kids and it makes it easier on the parent(s).

Many more rural poor live in two parent homes than inner city poor.

 

[mrsklamc]

Ding, ding, ding!! Well said cornflake. That's why I have such an issue with folks here who stereotype poor people. For the most part, people tend to associate with a very small % of the general population and they tend to be those that are like "us" some how. Yet if you ask the dis they seem to know all these poor folks from the ghetto who are lazy. Really?
That's why I am very skeptical of all these dissers who know seem to know all these welfare folks who they say are living la vida loca, going to disneyworld, driving luxury cars etc etc.

Well, I don't think we have any ghettos, and they certainly don't go to disneyworld, BUT, I do work in a food pantry, and there are definitely newer model, but not luxury, cars, expensive fake nails, expensive cell phones. I DO agree that a phone line and air conditioning are NOT luxuries. And they are not people who are TRYING to take advantage of anyone. They just never learned anything about budgeting and a lot of them were TAUGHT growing up that it is the government's job to provide them food stamps and healthcare, and they have no idea how to budget, they just buy what they want.

 

[eliza61]

Well, I don't think we have any ghettos, and they certainly don't go to disneyworld, BUT, I do work in a food pantry, and there are definitely newer model, but not luxury, cars, expensive fake nails, expensive cell phones. I DO agree that a phone line and air conditioning are NOT luxuries. And they are not people who are TRYING to take advantage of anyone. They just never learned anything about budgeting and a lot of them were TAUGHT growing up that it is the government's job to provide them food stamps and healthcare, and they have no idea how to budget, they just buy what they want.

I think it's more of an taught thing than the "government" taking care of you. They do know that their standard of living is horrible and no one (that I've talk with) thinks that staying on public assistance is a lifestyle they want to have.
Add that to the fact that many especially in the middle class no longer believe the old adage of "if you work hard you can move up". Now they are fully aware of the fact that you can work you're fingers to the bone and with a blink of an eye find yourselves right back in poverty.
Budgeting is definitely a problem but not a surprising one to me. But why should they have been taught budgeting? Look at the conditions anyone growing up say after 1970's have lived in.
1) our entire economy is based on buying. Everyone from our elected officials (take your kids to disneyworld) to the banks have said spend, spend, spend. We learned the lesson well.
2) up until I think last year our savings rate was in the negative. When I was a little girl, banks gave you a toaster for opening up a savings account. since then we've done a 360 degree turn. Up until last year I think, many college campuses had credit card representatives handing out cc to college kids (with no jobs) like they were candy.
3) artificial exponential growth on housing markets caused us to lose our mind.
We thought the good times would keep rolling. Remember the old adage "housing markets will always go up".

So tell me why is anyone shocked that people have not learned to live on a budget? When has anyone been taught to live on a budget?

These are the "averages" so folks yes I know everyone here taught their kids about living within their means and no one here took out equity in their houses but I've come to the realization that the dis in no way resembles real life.

I still don't understand the hate for a cell phone thing. Most don't have landlines as cell phones are now cheaper and no way can you look for a job without a cell phone, even the department stores hiring for the holiday are not going to wait and play phone tag with an applicant. We do job placement and an employee may wait 24 hours to hear back from an applicant at most, after that they are moving on to the next one. We make sure everyone in our center who signs up for our services has a cell phone.

 

[ilovemk76]

I think it's more of an taught thing than the "government" taking care of you. They do know that their standard of living is horrible and no one (that I've talk with) thinks that staying on public assistance is a lifestyle they want to have.
Add that to the fact that many especially in the middle class no longer believe the old adage of "if you work hard you can move up". Now they are fully aware of the fact that you can work you're fingers to the bone and with a blink of an eye find yourselves right back in poverty.
Budgeting is definitely a problem but not a surprising one to me. But why should they have been taught budgeting? Look at the conditions anyone growing up say after 1970's have lived in.
1) our entire economy is based on buying. Everyone from our elected officials (take your kids to disneyworld) to the banks have said spend, spend, spend. We learned the lesson well.
2) up until I think last year our savings rate was in the negative. When I was a little girl, banks gave you a toaster for opening up a savings account. since then we've done a 360 degree turn. Up until last year I think, many college campuses had credit card representatives handing out cc to college kids (with no jobs) like they were candy.
3) artificial exponential growth on housing markets caused us to lose our mind.
We thought the good times would keep rolling. Remember the old adage "housing markets will always go up".

So tell me why is anyone shocked that people have not learned to live on a budget? When has anyone been taught to live on a budget?

These are the "averages" so folks yes I know everyone here taught their kids about living within their means and no one here took out equity in their houses but I've come to the realization that the dis in no way resembles real life.

My Aunt is a teacher at a poor district. She has head many times the girls say, "They (government) will pay you to raise your baby." That is certainly of the mentality of "The government takes care of you." mentality.

I am your age or slightly older. I grew up in the same environment, well I did not march on Selma, that you did. I knew to save from an early age. I never heard the "housing market will always go up". I knew that it took 5 years from the time you bought a home until you recouped the closing costs, etc. from the purchase. I also knew that renting was the right choice if you would be moving to another local.

I have taught many kids that you need to budget and save. I also talk to them about 401Ks and retirement. Some will use that data and some will not. At least I tried to make their life better rather than just lecturing on the internet.

I go by the moto of teaching a person to fish rather than just give them a fish.

 

[Muushka]

One reason why people do know how to live on a budget is because they don't have to.

The government supplies what the family needs. Period.

I keep bringing up my childhood for a reason. When you grow up in an era that did not include welfare, you HAVE to live on a budget. Otherwise you would starve. By around age 8, I understood that we had a set amount of money to buy groceries. If we spent it on anything else, we could not eat.

There has to be something in between how I grew up and how welfare is given so freely today.

 

[Colleen27]

One reason why people do know how to live on a budget is because they don't have to.

The government supplies what the family needs. Period.

I keep bringing up my childhood for a reason. When you grow up in an era that did not include welfare, you HAVE to live on a budget. Otherwise you would starve. By around age 8, I understood that we had a set amount of money to buy groceries. If we spent it on anything else, we could not eat.

There has to be something in between how I grew up and how welfare is given so freely today.

That's a pretty common misconception, but a misconception nonetheless. It stems from the stereotype of urban poverty, of people piecing together multiple families' welfare entitlements and/or under the table work while living in subsidized housing, which can put together a halfway decent standard of living in the short term but a dismal existence in the long term. But that's not what poor or low income looks like everywhere.

Unlike many (most?) DISers I live in a place where my friends and neighbors and the kids' classmates are in the group we're talking about. Most aren't impoverished but my town's median household income is below that 45K "low income" threshold and most homes are dual-parent/dual-income. These are people working multiple low-wage jobs, piecing together part time into a full time income but not with full time benefits, dealing with recurrent layoffs and closures, and just getting by.

Welfare is NOT easy to get. Medicaid in my state only covers adults if they are extremely poor (as in a fraction of poverty level) or if they're the sole caretaker of a child, so there's no help with the skyrocketing costs of insurance for a poor working family. Many have their children covered through the state's plan for the working/lower class but have no insurance for themselves and simply don't go to a doctor if it can be avoided. Subsidized housing in my county has a 2+ year waiting list that is all but closed to new applicants unless they're facing homelessness due to foreclosure/eviction, and even if a family makes it to the top of the list accepting the aid means moving from our safe little town with good schools to questionable neighborhoods in the county seat.

The only assistance that is readily available is food stamps in the event of a layoff/job loss, and only if the family has no assets; you can't have more than $5000, so you have to burn any college or retirement savings you may have scraped together before applying. Even a second car counts against asset tests, but in a town with few jobs and no public transportation selling the second car is tantamount to giving up on finding work.

People see this image in the media of the ghetto poor/welfare queens working the system and think that's the whole picture. It isn't. Far from it. But as long as people can convince themselves that the poor aren't really poor, the working class are only struggling because of their smartphones and manicures, and the government won't let anyone go without, they can justify not giving a damn.

 

[eliza61]

My Aunt is a teacher at a poor district. She has head many times the girls say, "They (government) will pay you to raise your baby." That is certainly of the mentality of "The government takes care of you." mentality.

I am your age or slightly older. I grew up in the same environment, well I did not march on Selma, that you did. I knew to save from an early age. I never heard the "housing market will always go up". I knew that it took 5 years from the time you bought a home until you recouped the closing costs, etc. from the purchase. I also knew that renting was the right choice if you would be moving to another local.

I have taught many kids that you need to budget and save. I also talk to them about 401Ks and retirement. Some will use that data and some will not. At least I tried to make their life better rather than just lecturing on the internet.

I go by the moto of teaching a person to fish rather than just give them a fish.

And I think more folks are "going" back to that motto but remember we are talking about a mindset that we have willingly advocated and supported for 40 years.

How long did folks take to come around to 401K's? It wasn't an instant hit and even still many do not fully take advantage. for so long we were use to companies paying *****ons.

 

[NotUrsula]

One reason why people do know how to live on a budget is because they don't have to.

The government supplies what the family needs. Period.

I keep bringing up my childhood for a reason. When you grow up in an era that did not include welfare, you HAVE to live on a budget. Otherwise you would starve. By around age 8, I understood that we had a set amount of money to buy groceries. If we spent it on anything else, we could not eat.

There has to be something in between how I grew up and how welfare is given so freely today.

Are you really in your 80's? I never would have guessed.

Lately I keep running into the misconception that "welfare" is a new thing. It isn't; the first Federal program was enacted in 1935 and there were numerous state and local programs in existance long before that; up until the 1940's getting government assistance was known as "being on the dole." If there was no welfare in your childhood, it was probably because your parents either did not qualify for some reason, or chose not to apply. My MIL is 81 years old, and her family collected welfare when she was a child (though if you were not family you would NEVER get that information out of her; she is deeply ashamed of it.)

The framework of the current state/federal funding structure was put into place in 1965. Welfare was actually much easier to get in the 70's and 80's than it is now. Stricter eligibility requirements and lifetime caps were put into place during the Clinton administration.