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

Almost half of US families can't afford basics like rent and food

money.cnn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 112 posts

Re: Almost half of US families can't afford basics like rent and food

#31

Post by fuzz4lyfe »

oceanghost wrote: post #13
fuzz4lyfe wrote: post #5

If "Nearly 51 million households don't earn enough to afford a monthly budget that includes housing, food, child care, health care, transportation and a cell phone" Is true does that mean those households do without those things? Or are they subsidized via other methods? Medicare/medicaid for health insurance for example. Such programs often have income maximums that households may be attempting to optimise for. We o…

I live in a poor area of Southern California. I'd say the majority of the town receives state benefits. There are also stands that give away free cell phones and service (some state program). I have no idea how it works, but its there.

I have similar programs near me for all the items mentioned. I wonder if this metric actually means anything, if you did a similar survey in Europe I suspect you'd find many that can't afford private health insurance but since healthcare is often provided by the state that is meaningless as a barometer of human suffering.

Re: Almost half of US families can't afford basics like rent and food

#32

Post by deogeo »

danesparza wrote: post #14
fuzz4lyfe wrote: post #5

If "Nearly 51 million households don't earn enough to afford a monthly budget that includes housing, food, child care, health care, transportation and a cell phone" Is true does that mean those households do without those things? Or are they subsidized via other methods? Medicare/medicaid for health insurance for example. Such programs often have income maximums that households may be attempting to optimise for. We o…

I would argue that there are worse things than the sweet release of death. Living without dignity might be one of them. That being said, I'm not sure how I feel about having "cell phone" in that list of things that are considered necessities.

Cell phone could be necessary for many jobs (like deliveries). And cell phone + mobile data can be a cheaper alternative to computer + landline internet, which is pretty essential nowadays. Even if you argue you can do without, the money you'd spend on transportation to do in person what you'd otherwise do online would outweigh the price of a cell-phone. Not to mention the time you save, which can be used to avoid need to spend on childcare, or bring in more money with an extra job, or by using that time to cook, or... (haste makes waste).

Re: Almost half of US families can't afford basics like rent and food

#33

Post by CabSauce »

LUmBULtERA wrote: post #16

>"For instance, in Seattle's King County, the annual household survival budget for a family of four (including one infant and one preschooler) in 2016 was nearly $85,000." An $85,000 "budget" is needed for a 4-person household's "survival" in King County? Otherwise they're dying? Maybe United Way's underlying data explains this better, but CNN's conclusions don't seem well explained or supported. Edit: What's weird i…

>"households don't earn enough to afford a monthly budget that includes housing, food, child care, health care, transportation and a cell phone"

Literally the first line of the article.

Re: Almost half of US families can't afford basics like rent and food

#34

Post by akvadrako »

LUmBULtERA wrote: post #16

>"For instance, in Seattle's King County, the annual household survival budget for a family of four (including one infant and one preschooler) in 2016 was nearly $85,000." An $85,000 "budget" is needed for a 4-person household's "survival" in King County? Otherwise they're dying? Maybe United Way's underlying data explains this better, but CNN's conclusions don't seem well explained or supported. Edit: What's weird i…

I’m not sure why you’d expect any reasonableness from CNN. It’s clear they only care about clicks and focus on the outrage segment.

Re: Almost half of US families can't afford basics like rent and food

#35

Post by shijie »

This is quite a disingenuous title for CNN. The actual study reference in the article (and not even directly, one must go to the linked website and dig around for it) identifies a new subgroup of the US population that are "asset-limited, income-constrained, and employed," or ALICE.

Nowhere does it say in the study that these people cannot afford rent and food.

These people's financial stability is more tenuous, yes, but they can afford rent and food. What a silly and dishonest conclusion made by CNN.

Re: Almost half of US families can't afford basics like rent and food

#36

Post by helen___keller »

fuzz4lyfe wrote: post #5

If "Nearly 51 million households don't earn enough to afford a monthly budget that includes housing, food, child care, health care, transportation and a cell phone" Is true does that mean those households do without those things? Or are they subsidized via other methods? Medicare/medicaid for health insurance for example. Such programs often have income maximums that households may be attempting to optimise for. We o…

I strongly recommend viewing the actual source information instead of the cnn article

https://www.unitedforalice.org/home

The 51 million households aren't literally on the verge of starvation, they are "Asset Limited, Income Constrained, Employed" (ALICE) which is similar to being paycheck to paycheck in that they can survive but not thrive:

>When funds run short, cash-strapped households are forced to make impossible choices, such as deciding between quality child care or paying the rent, filling a prescription or fixing the car. These short-term decisions have long-term consequences not only for ALICE families, but for all of us.

Re: Almost half of US families can't afford basics like rent and food

#37

Post by fuzz4lyfe »

skrebbel wrote: post #25
pnutjam wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They end up shuffling between homelessness, homeless programs, and family / friends. A good portion of the children pass through the foster care system and the adults end up in jail or prison for various stretches. It's a very expensive system, and people's lives are wasted even if they are not out right killed.

> They end up shuffling between homelessness, homeless programs, and family / friends. 51 million people? A sixth of the US?

51 million households, assuming 4 per household roughly 200 million or 2/3rds.

I'm not buying it.

Re: Almost half of US families can't afford basics like rent and food

#38

Post by weberc2 »

skrebbel wrote: post #25
pnutjam wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They end up shuffling between homelessness, homeless programs, and family / friends. A good portion of the children pass through the foster care system and the adults end up in jail or prison for various stretches. It's a very expensive system, and people's lives are wasted even if they are not out right killed.

> They end up shuffling between homelessness, homeless programs, and family / friends. 51 million people? A sixth of the US?

51 million households, so almost half of the US. Even less believable.

EDIT: Why is this downvoted? The article states "Nearly 51 million households..."

Re: Almost half of US families can't afford basics like rent and food

#39

Post by leetcrew »

bachmeier wrote: post #17
algaeontoast wrote: post #2

In many of these cases it seems like having kids may have been an ill-advised life choice. Having kids is always a choice not a right.

1. Human beings will always make bad choices. There is nothing wrong with helping them when they do. 2. You can't blame children for mistakes made by their parents.

regarding 1), there is something wrong with helping people when they make poor choices, especially when "helping" is providing material assistance. you are basically subsidizing the unwanted behavior. at the margins, this causes more people to make the bad choice in the first place. this doesn't mean the government shouldn't help people who make mistakes at all, but it does mean the help has to be structured very carefully to minimize the perverse incentives.

Re: Almost half of US families can't afford basics like rent and food

#40

Post by CuriouslyC »

mach5 wrote: post #11
algaeontoast wrote: post #2

In many of these cases it seems like having kids may have been an ill-advised life choice. Having kids is always a choice not a right.

so only the rich should reproduce? absolutely disgusting mindset. nobody chooses a life of poverty, and the overwhelming inequality of our current society both perpetuates and exacerbates it.

If you can't care for your child, you shouldn't have one. The natural order is that children from unfit parents die. There are too many humans on this planet as it is.

If you're impoverished in your thirties, it is probably the result of a long history of poor life choices. You can get dealt a horrible hand with lots of tragedy and disadvantages and still be able to make it on your own in your thirties, as long as you're moderately intelligent and hardworking.

Post reply on HN