Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Poverty in America: Greater Than Statistics Indicate

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 216 posts

Re: Poverty in America: Greater Than Statistics Indicate

#11

Post by FakeComments »

sovietmudkipz wrote: post #3

This comment post is going to be pure speculation. I think the numbers in this article are right. Over the past 75 years, relative poverty has grown at a dramatic pace. Sure, everyone's quality of life has improved across the board but relative poverty is the important metric. In the past 15 years more and more of a household income is tied up in basic needs; bills and rent/mortgages are consuming higher percentages…

> Sure, everyone's quality of life has improved across the board but relative poverty is the important metric.

I completely disagree — the total standard of living is the only one that matters. If you’re better off than you used to be, you’ll keep buying into society and things will keep getting better.

I think there’s four factors:

1. It’s hard to view your status in absolute instead of relative terms, because it requires historical context, so most people misuse relative poverty as a proxy for absolute poverty.

2. People have capitalized on that misperception to advance their political agendas, causing increased civil tensions.

3. There are many unaccounted for things in applied economic models, and their scale could easily call into question our broader choices — and people are routinely told to shut up and stop talking about it. (I usually quip that we have financial architecture, but not financial engineering.)

4. People are afraid that the spread in relative poverty will be used to extort wealth until they’re forced back into absolute poverty — which there are signs of happening.

I agree with your conclusion, broadly. The fix to relative poverty is changing market dynamics so that small businesses are more viable while colossal ones are less so.

Re: Poverty in America: Greater Than Statistics Indicate

#12

Post by FakeComments »

prolikewh0a wrote: post #7
NeoBasilisk wrote: post #4

The fact that US life expectancy has fallen for 2 years in a row speaks volumes. edit: lmao please explain the downvotes

This is mainly due to the drug epidemics isn't it?

You’re both right if the drug epidemic is partly fueled by economic woes, as it seems to be.

Re: Poverty in America: Greater Than Statistics Indicate

#13

Post by pessimizer »

kryogen1c wrote: post #8
tristor wrote: post #2

I hoped for a lot more out of this article. In the end it leaves us with no conclusion and no real substance for their argument. It's likelier than not that what is proposed is true, but fundamentally all they've done is make idle speculation.

Couldn't agree more, lost interest here: >Psychologist Abraham Maslow believed that safety ranked second only to food and shelter as a basic human need. Someone who has food and a roof over their head today, but doesn’t know whether they will tomorrow, should be considered poor. I find this premise extremely unsatisfying and non-obvious to say the least. Life is dangerous. There's no such thing as safety. Everyone's…

I hope that you're not advocating that "fault" be used as a inverse measure of poverty. If so, depending on your religious and political bent, there probably isn't and has never been any poverty anywhere.

Re: Poverty in America: Greater Than Statistics Indicate

#14

Post by chiefalchemist »

"Thanks in part to increased government assistance, U.S. poverty according to this measure has fallen, especially for children."

Pardon me but I'm a tight-ass when it comes to words / language and how their use effects perception.

In short, (gov) assistance does __not__ decrease poverty. It might sugar coat poverty. It might keep the poverty stricken alive. Etc.

But poverty remains the same. It's there. Alive and well. The level of denial about poverty in the USA is very disheartening.

As a side note. I found the book "Evicted" by Matt Desmond to be extremely insightful. The Poverty Industrial Complex is a powerful force.

http://www.evictedbook.com/

Re: Poverty in America: Greater Than Statistics Indicate

#15

Post by skh »

sovietmudkipz wrote: post #3

This comment post is going to be pure speculation. I think the numbers in this article are right. Over the past 75 years, relative poverty has grown at a dramatic pace. Sure, everyone's quality of life has improved across the board but relative poverty is the important metric. In the past 15 years more and more of a household income is tied up in basic needs; bills and rent/mortgages are consuming higher percentages…

What is interesting to me is that it is a Biblical principle to have jubilee years and in my experience some of the most ardent opponents of debt forgiveness are right wing Christians. The fact is that we all subsidize each other. Poor people in major cities tend to use public transportation more than others and thus their taxes subsidize road building. I don't have children and subsidize k-12 education for those that do.

The broader question is what sort of society do we collectively want?

Re: Poverty in America: Greater Than Statistics Indicate

#16

Post by pessimizer »

sovietmudkipz wrote: post #3

This comment post is going to be pure speculation. I think the numbers in this article are right. Over the past 75 years, relative poverty has grown at a dramatic pace. Sure, everyone's quality of life has improved across the board but relative poverty is the important metric. In the past 15 years more and more of a household income is tied up in basic needs; bills and rent/mortgages are consuming higher percentages…

> Sure, everyone's quality of life has improved across the board but relative poverty is the important metric.

If you give the entire world credit for the advancements in China. I'd say instead that China is doing really well, and everyone else is doing about the same.

Re: Poverty in America: Greater Than Statistics Indicate

#17

Post by wolfram74 »

kryogen1c wrote: post #8
tristor wrote: post #2

I hoped for a lot more out of this article. In the end it leaves us with no conclusion and no real substance for their argument. It's likelier than not that what is proposed is true, but fundamentally all they've done is make idle speculation.

Couldn't agree more, lost interest here: >Psychologist Abraham Maslow believed that safety ranked second only to food and shelter as a basic human need. Someone who has food and a roof over their head today, but doesn’t know whether they will tomorrow, should be considered poor. I find this premise extremely unsatisfying and non-obvious to say the least. Life is dangerous. There's no such thing as safety. Everyone's…

If you live in an 'at will employment' aka 'no fault fire' state you could very easily be fired because of no fault on your part.

Re: Poverty in America: Greater Than Statistics Indicate

#18

Post by tracer4201 »

>A reasonable, common-sense definition of poverty should include not just an absolute measure of material deprivation and a relative gauge of a person’s situation compared to the rest of society. It should also strive to measure how secure people feel — in their homes, their health, and their jobs.

I generally agree, but this has potential downsides. A good friend of mine from college comes from a very conservative family. Despite doing well for themselves (father is a MD), these people are generally pretty insecure about non-whites having the ability to vote, immigration (legal or illegal), and all the other things they hear on Fox News or talk radio. They also own a home > $1million USD.

So do we consider them poor because they're insecure?

I guess my point is there should be some objective measure - e.g. Person A or Family B is more likely to become homeless if they lost their jobs or if one family member became disabled.

Re: Poverty in America: Greater Than Statistics Indicate

#19

Post by LateRuin »

kryogen1c wrote: post #8
tristor wrote: post #2

I hoped for a lot more out of this article. In the end it leaves us with no conclusion and no real substance for their argument. It's likelier than not that what is proposed is true, but fundamentally all they've done is make idle speculation.

Couldn't agree more, lost interest here: >Psychologist Abraham Maslow believed that safety ranked second only to food and shelter as a basic human need. Someone who has food and a roof over their head today, but doesn’t know whether they will tomorrow, should be considered poor. I find this premise extremely unsatisfying and non-obvious to say the least. Life is dangerous. There's no such thing as safety. Everyone's…

[flagged]

Re: Poverty in America: Greater Than Statistics Indicate

#20

Post by pkaye »

FakeComments wrote: post #12
prolikewh0a wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is mainly due to the drug epidemics isn't it?

You’re both right if the drug epidemic is partly fueled by economic woes, as it seems to be.

I largely believe it is due to economic woes in the US but they also realize there are many countries in the EU that have a drug epidemic despite have a better social net.
Post reply on HN