Half of America In Poverty and May Soon Be 75%

[John317]

The Real Numbers: Half of America in Poverty -- and It's Creeping toward 75%

The Census Bureau has reported that one out of six Americans lives in poverty. A shocking figure. But it's actually much, much worse.

May 26, 2013 |

The Census Bureau has reported that 15% of Americans live in poverty. A shocking figure. But it's actually much worse. Inequality is spreading like a shadowy disease through our country, infecting more and more households, and leaving a shrinking number of financially secure families to maintain the charade of prosperity.

1. Almost half of Americans had NO assets in 2009

Analysis of Economic Policy Institute data shows that Mitt Romney's famous 47 percent, the alleged 'takers,' have taken nothing. Their debt exceeded their assets in 2009.

2. It's Even Worse 3 Years Later

Since the recession, the disparities have continued to grow. An OECD report states that "inequality has increased by more over the past three years to the end of 2010 than in the previous twelve," with the U.S. experiencing one of the widest gaps among OECD countries. The 30-year decline in wages has worsened since the recession, as low-wage jobs have replaced formerly secure middle-income positions.

3. Based on wage figures, half of Americans are in or near poverty.

The IRS reports that the highest wage in the bottom half of earners is about $34,000. To be eligible for food assistance, a family can earn up to 130% of the federal poverty line, or about $30,000 for a family of four.

Even the Census Bureau recognizes that its own figures under-represent the number of people in poverty. Its Supplemental Poverty Measure increases, by 50%, the number of Americans who earn between one-half and two times the poverty threshold.

4. Based on household expense totals, poverty is creeping into the top half of America.

A family in the top half, making $60,000 per year, will have their income reduced by a total tax bill of about $15,000 ($3,000 for federal income tax and $12,000 for payroll, state, and local taxes. The Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Census Bureau agree that food, housing, and transportation expenses will deduct another $30,000, and that total household expenditures will be about $50,000. That leaves nothing.

Nothing, that is, except debt. The median debt level rose to $75,600 in 2009, while the median family net worth, according to the Federal Reserve, dropped from $126,400 in 2007 to $77,300 in 2010.

5. Putting it in Perspective

Inequality is at its ugliest for the hungriest people. While food support was being targeted for cuts, just 20 rich Americans made as much from their 2012 investments as the entire 2012 SNAP (food assistance) budget, which serves 47 million people.

And as Congress continues to cut life-sustaining programs, its members should note that their 400 friends on the Forbes list made more from their stock market gains last year than the total amount of the food, housing, and education budgets combined.

Arguments about poverty won't end. Neither should our efforts to uncover the awful truth.

Source: http://www.alternet.org/economy/real-numbers-half-america-poverty-and-its-creeping-toward-75-0

[John317]

What's the cause of this situation? What went wrong? Is there a solution-- something that can be done to fix it?

[phkrause]

Very sad indeed, the rich becoming richer and the poor poorer and the middle class disappearing.

[Tom Wetmore]

Thanks John317 for posting this awful truth. It has been an ugly fact that it seems most of those in Congress would rather ignore or deny. This is the fate of the majority of the population that they will not get ahead, they cannot save enough to retire on, they will work past normal retirement age just to survive and will end up in warn down and in poor health in a nursing home with no assets, or not nearly enough to sustain them until they die. Their children will not be in a position to care for them since they may be no better off either, unable for a variety of reasons. And so they will end their years dependent on Medicaid in a substandard facility, since the rich will get the better care in private pay only facilities.

You ask what caused this and what can be done to fix it? Excellent question.

These things did not happen over night. They have been decades in the making. Those in favor of minimal regulation of big business and against big government have successfully fed the economic engine that has produced this ugly fact of a disappearing middle class, a growing poverty class and a consolidation of wealth among a small number of the super-wealthy. The latter controls most everything with their wealth, including the lapdog politicians that depend on the their money to propagandize the public that they have their interests at heart just to get re-elected. Current events and inaction by those same politicians prove that to be a cheap trick and a lie. They serve the interests of those who paid for their election - big business.

That so-called big government did provide a safety net for the lower class, assurance that wages should grow with the economy, aid for education which used to be the hope of getting out of the poverty trap, and much needed funds to build and maintain the infrastructure of this country. But big business interests are not concerned with such things. They are only interested in maximizing profits and reducing any and all interference with their ability to do so. It's greed, plain and simple.

There will be no hope of changing this until the poverty bound majority of Americans wake up and realize they have been sold a lie and that this is the dismal failure of trickle down economics of the Reagan years that were revitalized on steroids by the Bush era. But even then it cannot be fixed until we put people in power that actually are looking out for the average person's interests and actually do what they were elected to do.

America has lost its way. Greed really isn't good.

[LifeHiscost]

Now how does that fit into

Quote:

(And finally, the ideas expressed above are solely my person views and not that of any organization with which I am associated.)

Quote:

Latitudinarian: a personal philosophy which includes being widely tolerant of other views, particularly (but not necessarily) on religious matters.

from wikipedia

God cares!

[phkrause]

Thanks John317 for posting this awful truth. It has been an ugly fact that it seems most of those in Congress would rather ignore or deny. This is the fate of the majority of the population that they will not get ahead, they cannot save enough to retire on, they will work past normal retirement age just to survive and will end up in warn down and in poor health in a nursing home with no assets, or not nearly enough to sustain them until they die. Their children will not be in a position to care for them since they may be no better off either, unable for a variety of reasons. And so they will end their years dependent on Medicaid in a substandard facility, since the rich will get the better care in private pay only facilities.

You ask what caused this and what can be done to fix it? Excellent question.

These things did not happen over night. They have been decades in the making. Those in favor of minimal regulation of big business and against big government have successfully fed the economic engine that has produced this ugly fact of a disappearing middle class, a growing poverty class and a consolidation of wealth among a small number of the super-wealthy. The latter controls most everything with their wealth, including the lapdog politicians that depend on the their money to propagandize the public that they have their interests at heart just to get re-elected. Current events and inaction by those same politicians prove that to be a cheap trick and a lie. They serve the interests of those who paid for their election - big business.

That so-called big government did provide a safety net for the lower class, assurance that wages should grow with the economy, aid for education which used to be the hope of getting out of the poverty trap, and much needed funds to build and maintain the infrastructure of this country. But big business interests are not concerned with such things. They are only interested in maximizing profits and reducing any and all interference with their ability to do so. It's greed, plain and simple.

There will be no hope of changing this until the poverty bound majority of Americans wake up and realize they have been sold a lie and that this is the dismal failure of trickle down economics of the Reagan years that were revitalized on steroids by the Bush era. But even then it cannot be fixed until we put people in power that actually are looking out for the average person's interests and actually do what they were elected to do.

America has lost its way. Greed really isn't good.

Exactly Tom. Once again I say very sad indeed.

[bonnie]

Thanks John317 for posting this awful truth. It has been an ugly fact that it seems most of those in Congress would rather ignore or deny. This is the fate of the majority of the population that they will not get ahead, they cannot save enough to retire on, they will work past normal retirement age just to survive and will end up in warn down and in poor health in a nursing home with no assets, or not nearly enough to sustain them until they die. Their children will not be in a position to care for them since they may be no better off either, unable for a variety of reasons. And so they will end their years dependent on Medicaid in a substandard facility, since the rich will get the better care in private pay only facilities.

[bonnie]

Posted by William A. Jacobson Wednesday, January 30, 2013

Daniel Blatt at Gay Patriot has a very perceptive observation about how massive regulatory intrusion ostensibly on the side of the little guy actually has the result of helping the biggest corporations who are the only ones able to handle the onslaught, Big government means more chain stores:

Given that big companies have large staffs to help them maneuver through regulatory hoops — and making the cost of compliance (through economies of scale) cheaper per storefront than for an independent operation, it seems that big government makes it easier for the big guys and more challenging for individual entrepreneurs.

Ironic that more often than not, those who lament the increasing presence of chain stores tend to vote for the politicians whose policies serve to give a competitive advantage to those chain stores.

We have touched on an analogous theme before in looking at how large pharmaceutical companies and AARP backed Obamacare.

[Tom Wetmore]

Interesting observations there, Bonnie... Not necessarily reflective of a wider reality, but interesting anyway.

As for the Medicaid vs private care in a facility. Absolutely correct. They couldn't legally give different levels of care in the same facility to Medicaid residents than they do to private pay residents, other than maybe a private room vs. semi-private. But that is not what I am talking about.

Getting into a facility in the first place typically requires a showing of ability to pay. Some facilities do not accept Medicaid at that point. And many only keep a Medicaid resident that was private pay and has used up all their resources. They cannot legally discharge such a resident, without an alternative adequate care plan and place to go. Not easy to place such a resident so they do keep them. But there are facilities that do take Medicaid residents on an initial admission and/or that have a majority of Medicaid residents. Because of the economics of what Medicaid will pay, if that is the majority of the residents in a nursing home the budget will be very tight, staffing will be lower, frills nonexistent, and the quality of facility, food and auxiliary services will be less than optimum. Many, but not all, of those facilities are in fact substandard. The quality of care does suffer under those conditions when compared to a facility that can afford to do better because it has greater resources from a much higher percentage of private pay residents to fund the difference.

[bonnie]

Interesting observations there, Bonnie... Not necessarily reflective of a wider reality, but interesting anyway.

As for the Medicaid vs private care in a facility. Absolutely correct. They couldn't legally give different levels of care in the same facility to Medicaid residents than they do to private pay residents, other than maybe a private room vs. semi-private. But that is not what I am talking about.

Getting into a facility in the first place typically requires a showing of ability to pay. Some facilities do not accept Medicaid at that point. And many only keep a Medicaid resident that was private pay and has used up all their resources. They cannot legally discharge such a resident, without an alternative adequate care plan and place to go. Not easy to place such a resident so they do keep them. But there are facilities that do take Medicaid residents on an initial admission and/or that have a majority of Medicaid residents. Because of the economics of what Medicaid will pay, if that is the majority of the residents in a nursing home the budget will be very tight, staffing will be lower, frills nonexistent, and the quality of facility, food and auxiliary services will be less than optimum. Many, but not all, of those facilities are in fact substandard. The quality of care does suffer under those conditions when compared to a facility that can afford to do better because it has greater resources from a much higher percentage of private pay residents to fund the difference.

Of course there are private pay only facilities. If I can afford to pay for a private room so be it.

My MIL was private pay and she did not have a private room.

Your claims and that of those that actually supervise such institutions,private and public pay don't agree.

Medicaid patients do not receive substandard food even in a facility that is mostly medicaid.

Nor are they short staffed.

Our local facility has the majority of medicaid patients. At least according to those that work there,perhaps you may know differently.

The food is not substandard,it is the same that goes out to meals of wheels everyday to a variety of elderly.Recreational,exercise times,rehab is not lacking and they have a full staff.

While the rooms may not be as elegant and they may not be private,they are more than adequate.

Medicaid is not what makes a facility substandard,it is the administration of that facility.

Both my sons administer many,many nursing homes,they do this 24/7 and are ultimately responsible for the care of each resident. Both have made SS,medicaid care a priority and are considered experts in that field. Guess whose take on what actually takes place I will believe?

I can't even begin to count the numbers of elderly that I have known over the years that have been in nursing home facilities on medicaid,a very few were private pay. Not one ounce of difference in the quality of care.If the care is there to begin with,private or public pay makes no difference.

[joeb]

Quote:

These things did not happen over night. They have been decades in the making.

Yup. Since government has been seen as the savior of the people. Since the progressives/marxists have come into power the situation has gotten much, much worse. Since the idea that we can spend our way to prosperity has become the norm in Washington.

That's what has changed in the last few decades, and that is what has brought on the steep rise in the number of people at the poverty level. The farther the government goes into debt the less money there is for the people.

[bonnie]

Yup. Since government has been seen as the savior of the people. Since the progressives/marxists have come into power the situation has gotten much, much worse. Since the idea that we can spend our way to prosperity has become the norm in Washington.

That's what has changed in the last few decades, and that is what has brought on the steep rise in the number of people at the poverty level. The farther the government goes into debt the less money there is for the people.

Remember all the things Obama railed about? To begin with a democratic congress and senate+White House and this wisest man to inhabit the WH doubled and tripled down on everything he complained about.

But instead of holding his feet to the fire we are now reaching back to Reagan.

I still want to know how it should "trickle up"

Many people had to invest,build and spend before it got down to my husband's level of work.

No big corporation stopped him or got in the way.

[bonnie]

Still would like to hear how big business would prevent me from starting a business,succeeding if I had the determination and the

ability.

How do all the small businesses that start up do so. Many fail,but those that have a strong business plan,initiative,the willingness to take the risk can succeed.

How do they do that?

[joeb]

Remember all the things Obama railed about? To begin with a democratic congress and senate+White House and this wisest man to inhabit the WH doubled and tripled down on everything he complained about.

But instead of holding his feet to the fire we are now reaching back to Reagan.

I still want to know how it should "trickle up"

Many people had to invest,build and spend before it got down to my husband's level of work.

No big corporation stopped him or got in the way.

It wasn't just the things he railed about. He doubled down on the very things he called unconstitutional....

[LifeHiscost]

Quote:

everything that goes into home building came from the top

If you know Who is at the top, you're absolutely correct.

God cares!

[bonnie]

If you know Who is at the top, you're absolutely correct.

Goa cares!

Unless you are looking for a grand conspiracy and someone BIG pulling the strings, home building is pretty straight forward.

The builder that saw us thru the Carter years and beyond joined with a couple of like minded individuals.Mortgaged their own homes to the hilt and put up a superior product.

Realizing even in a down turn that those with money still bought bigger and bigger homes,that is who they catered to and were very successful.In turn those in the building trade that followed that was needed to complete their project did as well.

No one waited for a government handout,they put everything they had into being successful.They chose the sub contractors wisely and all benefitted.

There was not a evil Big Corporation telling them they could or could not

[LifeHiscost]

Quote:

You and only you are responsible for every decision and choice you make, period .

Bonnie, you speak as if this world is your permanent home and all the good people making the good decisions will fare well and all the bad people that make poor choices will end up at the bottom of the heap, which you're sure they deserve just that and no more. I'm supposing you have little confidence in the Word since the original twelve disciples of Jesus, save one, lost their lives to an untimely end, as a direct result of their choices. Is that pretty much your platform for success for anybody in this world?

God cares!

[bonnie]

Not exactly sure where you get that.You are taking quite a leap.

No,I don't think this world is my permanent home..

Making good decisions does not always mean you will fare well.

You still are responsible for the decisions you make,good or bad or however they turn out.

Quite frankly this is an insult.......I'm supposing you have little confidence in the Word since the original twelve disciples of Jesus, save one, lost their lives to an untimely end, as a direct result of their choices.

The disciples that met an untimely end as a direct result of their choices,made the right choice.And I believe will end well for those disciples,not so good for the one

Not everyone that works hard succeeds as the world sees success. But everyone is ultimately responsible for the decisions and choices they make.Others can put stumbling blocks in your way and that they are responsible for and will answer to God for. I am responsible for making wrong decisions and choices based on what someone else does.

Blaming others for your lack of success,however you personally define success or making the wrong decisions is a cop out.

As this is basically a secular forum for the most part we are talking two different issues.Whether or not some big bad corporation is stopping someone from being successful in their chosen field

Your reference to knowing who is on top is not relevant.

Not one big corporation stood in our way of being reasonably successful.Nor for anyone else that started a business that was successful. That was because of determination and a strong work ethic,willing to go the extra mile and then some when necessary.Had this world been all there is,we could have certainly been far more successful financially.

For me,that is not how I measure success. A marriage that has lasted more than a half century,able to pay for a SDA education for our boys,four SDA christian sons, healthy,intelligent,hardworking with stable marriages,twelve grandchildren that are excelling far beyond our hopes is success to me.

Regardless of the financial rewards,doing the very best you can in any thing you set out to do goes a long way. Whatever the outcome financially I believe that is what we are to do.With God's help the rest will work out.

[Neil D]

People on medicaid do not end up in substandard facilities.

While there are certainly facilities that provide substandard care that is not the norm because of medicaid.

Medicaid patients are given the same care as private pay.Private pay may well pay for more amenities the medical care is the same.

My grandmother did not have a penny to her name and she received the same as the one next door that was private pay.

Hospitalization and round the clock nursing when required.

Two of my sons are in charge of numerous nursing homes and Medicaid and private pay receive the same standard of medical care.

[bonnie]

OOOoh, please...I work in the medical field...'People on medicaid do not end up in substandard facilities"...How ignorant!!! I've struggled with getting patients decent medical care...I've seen where companies will take ONE non-paying patient in exchange for 10 paying one...I've seen patiences with no money and needing care struggle to get MINIMAL care just to get basic needs taken care of...

[bonnie]

Since when does ANY business favor "more regulation not less"? This is statement is totally more misinformation. This is just rude, and trying to sell a philosophy that has shown not to work...

[Tom Wetmore]

Still missing the point, Bonnie. Side by side in the same facility, yes, Medicaid and private pay residents are treated the same. They should not and cannot be treated otherwise.

That your sons manage well run facilities is great. The facilities with which I am associated are well run too. 5 star rating of the nursing homes (ask your sons what that means), among top 10% in quality of care in the state of Maryland, #1 in the county and #6 in the state for our largest nursing home. (I am the chairman of the board...)

Here is the current list of clearly substandard facilities bad enough to be subject to special focus by CMS - http://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Provider-Enr...ads/SFFList.pdf These are what I am talking about. And beyond that there are many more that are ranked below average or much below average that are not on that list now. Many Medicaid seniors end up in these kinds of facilities.

You see, you are still missing the point. There are a significant number of poorly run, substandard facilities, potentially putting seniors at risk of harm. This is not the difference between primo care and basic care. It is falling short of acceptable basic care. Those facilities are not the same as the ones run by your sons, or my team. What I am talking about are the poorly run facilities that for a variety of reasons are substandard. But a significant contributing factor is the substantially reduced reimbursement rate through Medicaid that forces nursing homes to cut costs and cut corners to survive financially. While I cannot say for sure, I would say that most of the facilities on the SFF list are substantially dependent on Medicaid, with a very low percentage of private pay residents, if any. Very few seniors with sufficient financial resources of their own are likely to end up in or stay for long in any of these facilities. And those on Medicaid that do end up there have few options to go elsewhere so are typically stuck there.

That is what I am talking about.

But if you prefer to play the apples to oranges game, carry on... by yourself.

[joeb]

What's really strange, Tom, is that you think more government intervention is going to improve things. These institutions are already regulated to death, and for some reason you think more regulation is going to change things.

The government can't run anything efficiently. Look at our government. We're $100 trillion in debt and yet it thinks that throwing more money and more government at the problems it has created is the answer.

The definition of insanity is trying the same things over and over again and expecting different results. Thinking more government is the answer is obviously insane, as that's what gotten us into this situation in the first place.

[Tom Wetmore]

So what you are saying is that nursing homes should be free of governmental interference, i.e. regulation of any sort?

Do you understand why and how nursing homes are regulated in the first place?

Do you think that taking the government completely out of taking care of senior citizens would improve their lot in life?

In a zero sum game of that sort, no medicare and no medicaid. Only private pay or private long term care insurance (Have you priced that recently?). Where would that leave the 50%+ that this topic started out about?

[phkrause]

So what you are saying is that nursing homes should be free of governmental interference, i.e. regulation of any sort?

Do you understand why and how nursing homes are regulated in the first place?

Do you think that taking the government completely out of taking care of senior citizens would improve their lot in life?

In a zero sum game of that sort, no medicare and no medicaid. Only private pay or private long term care insurance (Have you priced that recently?). Where would that leave the 50%+ that this topic started out about?

And the funny thing is as soon as something goes wrong, who do you think will be the first to @#$%& about why the government is allowing that to happen! Sorry people can't have it both ways. The reason that government is in every "tom, dick and harry's" business, is because "tom, dick and harry" have done something that others have complained about, and no else has done anything about it!!