Subscribe
Shop Local
Magazine
Gas Prices
Today's Poll!US poverty on track to rise to highest since 1960s
Monday, July 23, 2012
WASHINGTON (AP) — The ranks of America's poor are on track to climb to levels unseen in nearly half a century, erasing gains from the war on poverty in the 1960s amid a weak economy and fraying government safety net.
Census figures for 2011 will be released this fall in the critical weeks ahead of the November elections.
The Associated Press surveyed more than a dozen economists, think tanks and academics, both nonpartisan and those with known liberal or conservative leanings, and found a broad consensus: The official poverty rate will rise from 15.1 percent in 2010, climbing as high as 15.7 percent. Several predicted a more modest gain, but even a 0.1 percentage point increase would put poverty at the highest level since 1965.
Poverty is spreading at record levels across many groups, from underemployed workers and suburban families to the poorest poor. More discouraged workers are giving up on the job market, leaving them vulnerable as unemployment aid begins to run out. Suburbs are seeing increases in poverty, including in such political battlegrounds as Colorado, Florida and Nevada, where voters are coping with a new norm of living hand to mouth.
"I grew up going to Hawaii every summer. Now I'm here, applying for assistance because it's hard to make ends meet. It's very hard to adjust," said Laura Fritz, 27, of Wheat Ridge, Colo., describing her slide from rich to poor as she filled out aid forms at a county center. Since 2000, large swaths of Jefferson County just outside Denver have seen poverty nearly double.
Fritz says she grew up wealthy in the Denver suburb of Highlands Ranch, but fortunes turned after her parents lost a significant amount of money in the housing bust. Stuck in a half-million dollar house, her parents began living off food stamps and Fritz's college money evaporated. She tried joining the Army but was injured during basic training.
Now she's living on disability, with an infant daughter and a boyfriend, Garrett Goudeseune, 25, who can't find work as a landscaper. They are struggling to pay their $650 rent on his unemployment checks and don't know how they would get by without the extra help as they hope for the job market to improve.
In an election year dominated by discussion of the middle class, Fritz's case highlights a dim reality for the growing group in poverty. Millions could fall through the cracks as government aid from unemployment insurance, Medicaid, welfare and food stamps diminishes.
"The issues aren't just with public benefits. We have some deep problems in the economy," said Peter Edelman, director of the Georgetown Center on Poverty, Inequality and Public Policy.
He pointed to the recent recession but also longer-term changes in the economy such as globalization, automation, outsourcing, immigration, and less unionization that have pushed median household income lower. Even after strong economic growth in the 1990s, poverty never fell below a 1973 low of 11.1 percent. That low point came after President Lyndon Johnson's war on poverty, launched in 1964, that created Medicaid, Medicare and other social welfare programs.
"I'm reluctant to say that we've gone back to where we were in the 1960s. The programs we enacted make a big difference. The problem is that the tidal wave of low-wage jobs is dragging us down and the wage problem is not going to go away anytime soon," Edelman said.
Stacey Mazer of the National Association of State Budget Officers said states will be watching for poverty increases when figures are released in September as they make decisions about the Medicaid expansion. Most states generally assume poverty levels will hold mostly steady and they will hesitate if the findings show otherwise. "It's a constant tension in the budget," she said.
The predictions for 2011 are based on separate AP interviews, supplemented with research on suburban poverty from Alan Berube of the Brookings Institution and an analysis of federal spending by the Congressional Research Service and Elise Gould of the Economic Policy Institute.
The analysts' estimates suggest that some 47 million people in the U.S., or 1 in 6, were poor last year. An increase of one-tenth of a percentage point to 15.2 percent would tie the 1983 rate, the highest since 1965. The highest level on record was 22.4 percent in 1959, when the government began calculating poverty figures.
Poverty is closely tied to joblessness. While the unemployment rate improved from 9.6 percent in 2010 to 8.9 percent in 2011, the employment-population ratio remained largely unchanged, meaning many discouraged workers simply stopped looking for work. Food stamp rolls, another indicator of poverty, also grew.
Demographers also say:
—Poverty will remain above the pre-recession level of 12.5 percent for many more years. Several predicted that peak poverty levels — 15 percent to 16 percent — will last at least until 2014, due to expiring unemployment benefits, a jobless rate persistently above 6 percent and weak wage growth.
—Suburban poverty, already at a record level of 11.8 percent, will increase again in 2011.
—Part-time or underemployed workers, who saw a record 15 percent poverty in 2010, will rise to a new high.
—Poverty among people 65 and older will remain at historically low levels, buoyed by Social Security cash payments.
—Child poverty will increase from its 22 percent level in 2010.
Analysts also believe that the poorest poor, defined as those at 50 percent or less of the poverty level, will remain near its peak level of 6.7 percent.
"I've always been the guy who could find a job. Now I'm not," said Dale Szymanski, 56, a Teamsters Union forklift operator and convention hand who lives outside Las Vegas in Clark County. In a state where unemployment ranks highest in the nation, the Las Vegas suburbs have seen a particularly rapid increase in poverty from 9.7 percent in 2007 to 14.7 percent.
Szymanski, who moved from Wisconsin in 2000, said he used to make a decent living of more than $40,000 a year but now doesn't work enough hours to qualify for union health care. He changed apartments several months ago and sold his aging 2001 Chrysler Sebring in April to pay expenses.
"You keep thinking it's going to turn around. But I'm stuck," he said.
The 2010 poverty level was $22,314 for a family of four, and $11,139 for an individual, based on an official government calculation that includes only cash income, before tax deductions. It excludes capital gains or accumulated wealth, such as home ownership, as well as noncash aid such as food stamps and tax credits, which were expanded substantially under President Barack Obama's stimulus package.
An additional 9 million people in 2010 would have been counted above the poverty line if food stamps and tax credits were taken into account.
Robert Rector, a senior research fellow at the conservative Heritage Foundation, believes the social safety net has worked and it is now time to cut back. He worries that advocates may use a rising poverty rate to justify additional spending on the poor, when in fact, he says, many live in decent-size homes, drive cars and own wide-screen TVs.
A new census measure accounts for noncash aid, but that supplemental poverty figure isn't expected to be released until after the November election. Since that measure is relatively new, the official rate remains the best gauge of year-to-year changes in poverty dating back to 1959.
Few people advocate cuts in anti-poverty programs. Roughly 79 percent of Americans think the gap between rich and poor has grown in the past two decades, according to a Public Religion Research Institute/RNS Religion News survey from November 2011. The same poll found that about 67 percent oppose "cutting federal funding for social programs that help the poor" to help reduce the budget deficit.
Outside of Medicaid, federal spending on major low-income assistance programs such as food stamps, disability aid and tax credits have been mostly flat at roughly 1.5 percent of the gross domestic product from 1975 to the 1990s. Spending spiked higher to 2.3 percent of GDP after Obama's stimulus program in 2009 temporarily expanded unemployment insurance and tax credits for the poor.
The U.S. safety net may soon offer little comfort to people such as Jose Gorrin, 52, who lives in the western Miami suburb of Hialeah Gardens. Arriving from Cuba in 1980, he was able to earn a decent living as a plumber for years, providing for his children and ex-wife. But things turned sour in 2007 and in the past two years he has barely worked, surviving on the occasional odd job.
His unemployment aid has run out, and he's too young to draw Social Security.
Holding a paper bag of still-warm bread he'd just bought for lunch, Gorrin said he hasn't decided whom he'll vote for in November, expressing little confidence the presidential candidates can solve the nation's economic problems. "They all promise to help when they're candidates," Gorrin said, adding, "I hope things turn around. I already left Cuba. I don't know where else I can go."
Associated Press writers Kristen Wyatt in Lakewood, Colo., Ken Ritter and Michelle Rindels in Las Vegas, Laura Wides-Munoz in Miami and AP Deputy Director of Polling Jennifer Agiesta contributed to this report.
Online:
Census Bureau: http://www.census.gov
National Association of State Budget Officers: http://www.nasbo.org
Marry Me
Comments
JCLifer 11 months ago
Good job, Barrack! I'm sure that we can easily stand another four years watching this country and its citizens sink into the abyss.
spelchek 11 months ago
Change we can believe in.
asb 11 months ago
The American people know who's actually to blame. The teabag congress has ignored or voted down every attempt at job creation put forward by Obama or the Democrats, refused to do anything about revenues except clamor for even more for the rich, and happily paid with IOUs the bills for two unbudgeted wars, all while stating "our main goal is to make sure Obama doesn't win a second term . . . " Mkay, that's Obama's fault. Limbarf said day one "I hope he fails." The teabag congress is dozing as hard as it can to assure that he does, and you guys are either tools enough to buy it, or actively working against your own interests; out of hate.
asb 11 months ago
Good people want Obama to fail? That's absolutely wrong. Wishing a policy to fail, or a re-election bid, but failure of the president is a failure of the nation, and while I konw that's what you want, and what Limbarf want's, and what the teabag congress wants, it's not what good people want. All of our problems come from Obama and like minded people? And you say conspiracy tags are uncalled for. I thought Roosevelt, Truman, Johnson, Carter and Clinton set this failure in motion . . . You live in a world of darkness and fear Grace, and it all comes from you. Not even FOX could so perfectly create doom in what often appears to be an intelligent mind.
Sequoia 11 months ago
Grace, your handwringing over some mythical past that never existed is weak and unpatriotic. You're thinking of "Mayberry," which is a TV show and not real life.
I think this article is right on point. theatlanticwire.com/national/2012/07/us-not-decline-unless-you-want-it-be/54889/
This country belongs to we the people. It is our time. Let the naysayers say what they will. Naysayers have never built anything, let alone a strong society. Don't let them get to you. Don't let them stop you. Don't give up. The past is gone, and we're not going back. The future is now, and it is ours. Take it. Fortune favors the bold.
That's about all the encouraging cliches I can come up with right now.
Well, just one more:
YES WE CAN.
spelchek 10 months, 4 weeks ago
"No one believes your 2008 Obama slogan anymore." -- I never started.
mmhh 11 months ago
Anyone remember 8 years of Cheney/Bush? Or are your attention spans actually that short?
asb 11 months ago
Greed and concentration of wealth caused by de-regulation of finance and giving the top few the greatest tax cuts, while blaming the poor and the middle class, seem to be more culpable than social policy.
MO4LIFE 10 months, 4 weeks ago
The failure in the economy was caused by bush-cheney. We had the largest surplus in history when Bush took office andhe started two wars and didn't pay for them and then gave the biggest tax cut in history to the rich. You want good economic years go back and study the Clinton Years! Now that was goo economic policies which gave us the surplus that Bush flushed down the toilet so all his rich little cronies could have the tax break and the deregulation that put us in this mess. Grace you need to wake up and Smell the Bacon take your head out of the dirt and understand that if you are not in the 1% the Fright don't care about you they ar laughing behind your back while puting the middle class in the poorhouse. But just Keep those blinders on and you will realize you gloom and doom outlook is what the Repukelicans want from you so that real change cannot happen.
GeoDan 10 months, 4 weeks ago
"There was no surplus" "The feds never balanced the budget" According to the Economic Report of the President, 2008 the federal government had a surplus for fiscal years 1998, 1999, 2000 and 2001. A fiscal year runs from Oct. 1 to Sept. 30 of the following year with the year designated by the year in which it ends. Thus FY 2001 ran from Oct. 1, 2000 to Sept. 30, 2001. So there were in fact 4 years of surplus. I used the 2008 report because it was prepared by George W. Bush's Council of Economic Advisors.
GeoDan 10 months, 4 weeks ago
Actually the numbers I cite are from George W. Bush's Council of Economic Advisers. So, if someone was playing politics, draw your own conclusion.
MO4LIFE 10 months, 4 weeks ago
not according to Candidate Romney when he praised Clinton in hi speech last week!!!!!!!
spelchek 10 months, 4 weeks ago
"The failure in the economy was caused by bush-cheney. " -- And your savior doubled down on the same policies. Grow up.
Sequoia 11 months ago
From the story: "The problem is that the tidal wave of low-wage jobs is dragging us down and the wage problem is not going to go away anytime soon."
It is the movement conservative wing of the GOP that has allowed big business to run roughshod over workers and unions and pay them a pittance compared with rising costs.
Are you honestly suggesting this has anything to do with Obama? No one buys that lie.
When people say "less government," that's often a code for "more corporate explotiation."
Romney wants to hand American workers over to the wolves for the sake of a few of his buddies, so they can put trillions of dollars in foreign accounts. America first? Yeah right.
asb 11 months ago
It's their job to run roughshod over their employees, that's how it works. There's nothing inately wrong with that as long as the employees have recourse and a say, and the businesses are well regulated.
MO4LIFE 10 months, 4 weeks ago
more like republican tea party thinking.
Sequoia 10 months, 4 weeks ago
Look, asb is right. It's simple. Corporate boards and officers have a fiduciary duty to maximize value for shareholders. Workers are a liability on the books, not an asset. That's why, in the absence of regulation, workers' wages will go to subsistence level in a "pure" capitalist system (or jobs will go to other countries where the wage is practically subsistence). Stating these facts are not "demonizing" business. This is just how it works.
As a conservative, I believe that human nature is basically flawed, and so, generally, when CEOs have the chance to give themselves huge paychecks, even if they don't deserve it, that's what they'll do. After the do-what-feels-good Baby Boomers came along, blatant greed and looting isn't even something that people are ashamed of or embarassed about anymore. Getting as much money as possible is seen as a perfectly acceptable end in itself. Now our culture tells kids to "get rich or die tryin'."
Technology and scale mean that business is now global, not national. That's why American workers are hurting. That's the problem that no politician really knows how to solve, and global corporations have no real sense of loyalty or patriotism, because they have markets in every developed country on earth. They don't belong to countries. It's like a new kind of sovereignty.
If we keep fighting, maybe we can pass a law that ties CEO wages to worker wages. Then, no matter where the labor is located, the top can only make a certain multiple of the lowest wage. The more you pay the workers, the more you can pay yourself.
Why not?
connor 10 months, 4 weeks ago
No Grace she isn't a conservative by any definition I can find. In some aspects she can be classified as a Progressive Conservative but her views and/or opinions about motives for traditional institutions from time to time tends to cancel that out as well.
I actually doubt that you can actually be a Progressive conservative ala Taft, in today's world anyway but rejoice in the fact that she can still call herself whatever she wishes. It means some parts of the Constitution are still viable and safe from attack. At least for the time being.
Sequoia 10 months, 4 weeks ago
As a conservative, I believe family is the foundation of our society. I support policies that conserve families. A parent ought to be able to work a 40 hour week, then be able to spend the rest of her time raising her children. In my day, one parent could work and the other could stay home, and the family could have a decent life. That's changed, rapidly, and such rapid change is not conservative.
Just because you've joined a conservative "movement" that looks at business before anything else, where corporations are people and people are "consumers," doesn't mean I have to fall in line. Conservatives think for themselves. They don't fall in line with "movements." That's what I hated about hippies! So-called "conservatives" today are a lot like hippies, because there things you "have" to believe to be part of the group, and because both groups advocated radical change based on ideology without adequate consideration of unintended consequences.
Here's a number of other conservative positions I hold:
An aversion to rapid change; a belief that tradition and prevailing social norms often contain within them handed down wisdom; and mistrust of attempts to remake society so that it conforms to an abstract account of what would be just or efficient.
A desire to preserve the political philosophy and rules of government articulated in the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution. A belief that it is imperative to preserve traditional morality, as it is articulated in the Bible, through cultural norms. The conviction that government should undertake, on behalf of the American polity, grand projects that advance our "national greatness." An embrace of localism, community and family ties, human scale, and a responsibility to the future. A belief that America shouldn't intervene in the affairs of other nations except to defend ourselves from aggression and enforce contracts and treaties. A principled belief in federalism. The belief that whenever possible, government budgets should be balanced. Consciousness of the fallibility of man, and an awareness of the value of skepticism, doubt and humility. Realism in foreign policy. Non-interventionism in foreign policy.
Sequoia 10 months, 4 weeks ago
How can regulated wages be un-American? America already regulates minimum wage, so that doesn't make sense.
What about a family's freedom to earn a decent wage for their work? That's freedom too. Somehow all you seem to care about is a corporation's freedom to exploit people. I care about people's freedom, too.
What's un-American is rejecting practical ideas by calling them un-American.
Americans favor practical answers.
Telling me that a particular specific idea is off limits because it isn't "conservative" is not conservative.
Conservatives think for themselves, and try to see the world as it is.
Sequoia 10 months, 4 weeks ago
Your idea that democratic legislation is "tyrannical" is what is twisted and insane. Our government is not a tyrant. It is us. It is we the people. Yes, we use our government to preserve and protect our individual human freedom from corporate interest who would like to reduce all of us to "consumers."
A human being is more free than a mere "consumer." We need our government to protect our freedom to have clean air, clean water, good schools, affordable health care, a decent wage. None of that sounds like tyranny to me.
But, a dirty environment, run-down schools, the choice between medical care and bankruptcy, working several jobs just to make ends meet... that's tyranny. We the people unite in our government to fight tyranny.
On the other hand, tyrants try to buy off our government away from we the people. That's what we have to fight against.
That's what this election is about.
Sequoia 10 months, 4 weeks ago
I agree that, right now, the government does not represent the interest of most individuals. It represents the interest of a corporate plutocracy. That's just as much a case of "voting (or buying) themselves largesse" as the welfare state, which is what I think you're talking about (look at voter turnout among welfare recepients to see if you think they are "voting themselves largess." They ain't. They don't vote.)
If you want to see who is using our government for their own largesse, just look at the institutions with the most largesse.
You support corporations giving themselves whatever they want, at the expense of we the people. That's not conservative, either.
connor 10 months, 4 weeks ago
You have shot a scattered pattern of mixed conservative and libertarian ideas into a broad statement. Some social conservative, some fiscal conservative etc. Fundamentally you can paint someone who insists on financing anything as a conservative just by claiming an end result that mirrors a conservative goal but how you get there is just as important.
Your road to conservative goals is a liberal progressive rope-a-dope. At best your are as I pointed out a Progressive Conservative dressed in 21st century clothes.
Sequoia 10 months, 4 weeks ago
"At best" I'm an individual human being who tries to think things through for himself.
"At worst" I'm some progessive conservative liberal libertarian. Any of those things is the worst thing a person can "be." All that is mumbo jumbo as far as I'm concerned. Ideology of any kind is the real rope-a-dope. I do what works, when it works.
I don't give two squats what ideology is reflected in "how I get there," as long as "how I get there" actually works. That's what makes me a conservative.
dokeus6 10 months, 4 weeks ago
You are saying that the way conservatives run the government has worked? Look at the mess this country is in because of the conservative theory of trickle down economics. You boast that our country got this way in the last three and a half years That is the biggest flat out lie there is. I know it. More than 3/4 quarters of the people who post on here know it but you are so blind that you can't see it. Your ideology is going the way of the dinosaur but you and your ilk want to keep things as they have been since Reagan was in office. It's time for a change alright.
dokeus6 10 months, 4 weeks ago
besides the depression? If you would check your facts grace it was your kind that started the depression.
RobHunterJohnson 10 months, 4 weeks ago
Thanks dokeus6, Rob is a Conservative as well! I have to wonder about some on this page. I'm very much center, but I have decided that the Republicans are not doing for myself or many others. I can compromise if allowed but it is a give and take which some cannot see at all. Rob
spelchek 10 months, 4 weeks ago
"How can regulated wages be un-American? " -- Let's start with yours and find out. Come on Sequoia, martyr yourself.
MO4LIFE 10 months, 4 weeks ago
80% of federal judges were put there by republican presidents which is why we have the BS Corporations are People Law fro SCOTUS.
JCLifer 11 months ago
We are so hosed.
connor 11 months ago
You cannot lay this problem squarely at the feet of either party honestly. Yet both of them are to blame because both benefit from it and have always come together to support the true culprit which is the Federal Reserve.
No I am not a Libertarian but I agree with them on this point. The creation of FIAT wealth and constant inflation always has this effect in the end. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer because inflation really only benefits those who already own an inflatable good whether it is land or a copper mine or what-have-you in sufficient quantities. Only those entities that keep a constantly revolving credit line that actually comes in under the growing inflation rate will prosper. Even if you were a hard working individual with massive savings, interest alone cannot keep your real wealth steady.
Ask yourself why with such a horrible economy and poverty the stock market is always booming or comes back so swiftly? Because that money is de-coupled from the true labor based economy and above the inflation rate.
We no longer have an economy that accurately reflects labor value and this is the ultimate end to such a thing.
It only benefits the super rich institutions ultimately and government is as much a super rich institution as the big business' are.
JMO 10 months, 4 weeks ago
Of for the Love of God people! I'm so incredibly SICK of the political posturing!
No president EVER wanted America to FAIL! That may be the most ridiculous statement I've ever seen!
No congress ever wanted America to FAIL!
The problem is everyone is so darn pis-sy with each other they won't compromise and work together. Ever. Some of you folks on this board are prime examples. Complain and complain and complain about how the "liberal socialists" or the "right wing teabaggers" are ruining everything. But NO ONE - and I mean everyone including Romney and Obama - will get their heads out of wherever they've stuck them long enough to WORK TOGETHER to come up with a REASONABLE solution to the problems we've got. The plain and simple fact is it doesn't MATTER who caused them! It doesn't matter if this started with Obama or Bush or Reagan or Lincoln! What matters is fixing it!
And before I'm accused of griping without a plan to fix it, I'm the first one to say I'm NOT qualified to do a thing. I'm not an business person and I don't know more about economics than how to spell it. But someone out there OUGHT to have a plan. And if everyone would quit pointing fingers and start shaking hands instead, this country's immediate future would be looking far brighter.
And yeah, I ranted and probably should delete this while I have editing time...but I meant enough of it I think I won't. But this may well be the last political thread I read.
JCLifer 10 months, 4 weeks ago
It cannot be fixed. Everybody wants to be wealthy and many do not want to earn it. There simply is not enough wealth to go around. Someone is going to have to be poor. Someone will have to do the hard dirty work. Someone will have to be exploited. There is not enough to go around.
MO4LIFE 10 months, 4 weeks ago
Reagan and Clinton didn't reduce spending they raised taxes to get the economy moving. Or is that a myth too Graceful?
MO4LIFE 10 months, 4 weeks ago
Reagan raised taxes more times than any other president in History so you just blowing smoke because 17 tax increases cannot equal an overall reduction in taxes. That is completely and totally illogical FAUX NEWS BS!
RobHunterJohnson 10 months, 3 weeks ago
Grace , what did the Bush boys do? Rob
JMO 10 months, 4 weeks ago
And those attitudes are exactly what I was talking about. The obstinate finger-pointing and blame game continues, with no end in sight. Sadly, you prove my point.
spelchek 10 months, 4 weeks ago
I know what you mean. Especially when things are going so well.
JCLifer 10 months, 4 weeks ago
50th salaries are not helping. Missouri the horrible hill billy state is the laughing stock of the rest of the country.
eileen10 10 months, 4 weeks ago
sad but true.
kentheco 10 months, 3 weeks ago
Ten Years After: I'd Love To Change The World (1971) Songwriters: ALVIN LEE
Everywhere is freaks and hairies Dykes and fairies, tell me where is sanity Tax the rich, feed the poor Till there are no rich no more
I'd love to change the world But I don't know what to do So I'll leave it up to you Population keeps on breeding Nation bleeding, still more feeding economy Life is funny, skies are sunny Bees make honey, who needs money, monopoly
I'd love to change the world But I don't know what to do So I'll leave it up to you
World pollution, there's no solution Institution, electrocution Just black and white, rich or poor Them and us, stop the war
I'd love to change the world But I don't know what to do So I'll leave it up to you
RobHunterJohnson 10 months, 3 weeks ago
Ken, I Watched in concert Alvin Lee, and Ten Years After back in the 74 at Kiel. What a great concert! JMO the finger pointing from 2 on this page is incredible an in perpetual motion. Rob
Please review our Policies and Procedures before registering or commenting
Or login with:
OpenID