The gains of the war on poverty have been almost totally wiped out. The Census Bureau will report that poverty will reach a 46-year high when they announce their numbers later in the fall.
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.
The ranks of the poor have swelled in areas that have little infrastructure to deal with it, in particular the suburbs. With little need to erect anti-poverty programs in the past, municipal governments in suburban areas must now deal with a crush of poor individuals. And with the safety net endangered from attacks by Congress and a mania around the deficit, it’s unclear whether these municipalities will get the support they need from their states and the federal government in order to cope.
Of course, we’ve seen the country get more comfortable with poverty over the last thirty years. Since the Reagan Revolution, the poverty rate has never fallen below 11.1%, despite boom years in the 1990s. Those boom years occurred in parallel with the 1996 welfare reform bill, which has shown itself inadequate to handle growing needs during recessions. We have just seen on the farm bill both parties agree to cut food stamp benefits, with the only difference being one of degree. The poverty rate has become tolerable, a by-product of capitalism, a reflection of the permanent underclass that has taken hold in the current construction of the economy.
This report on poverty will be used largely as a talking point by each party, so they can seek office and implement their preferred economic programs, none of which have anything to do with singling out poverty for eradication. Both parties subscribe to the idea of a rising tide lifting all boats. And it’s true that a stronger economy will tend to reduce the poverty rate at the margins. But this elides the issue of a growing class of needy Americans who get neither the opportunity nor the benefits to lift themselves out of their current state.
Poverty may be a national disgrace, but it apparently does not at this point merit a national conversation in Washington, as sad as that sounds.






31 Comments


Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
Mission Accomplished. (TM)
Not too important, but I noticed ND in the second tier, green. Yet it’s data going back 3 to 4 years. It’s also a broad brush within any state,no?
ND is probably in the first tier by now, but I wonder how well some of that new drilling money is filtering into the poorest of the poor there. Maybe too soon to tell.
Ain;t none of those people affected.
Oh, shit, do I sound like Ann Romney. Hey, I apologize to all our legislaturds for that.
And, the “middle class” is seeing a constant erosion of their economic status. Recent articles from several sources say the Baby Boomer’s children will be the first generation (excepting the Romneys et al) to see a reduction in the standard of living enjoyed by their parents. The rich have seen a 20-30% increase in their relative wealth. The middle class….nothing since 1990.
the plutocracy is winning the war on citizens – this time in history is very similar to the Robber Baron era 100 years ago. If we don’t learn from history, we are doomed to repeat it – and we are :(
Pew Research Center compared the median net worth of age groups adjusted for inflation to 2010 dollars.
Age Group…1984……..2009…. Change
< 35……..$11,521…..$3,662…..-68%
35-44…….$71,118….$39,601…..-44%
45-54……$113,511…$101,651…..-10%
55-64……$147,236…$162,062…..+10%
65+……..$120,457…$170,494…..+42%
feel free to add the Obamas and the Bidens to that list!
Shit, no one wants to talk about it. The minimum wage leave people in poverty and the excessive unemployment drive wages lower to that level. Then, of course, all companies including Bain outsource jobs creating more poverty and lower wages. We should talk also about lack of medical care since all these people plus more have no health care. Productivity goes up, wages go down and the rich get richer. Something is seriously wrong here. Oh did I mention the banksters are putting people out on the streets after defrauding them to begin with. Finally our political parties are locked in combat. One of those parties is actively trying to make it worse and they have a cable network helping spread the propaganda. The other party is scared shitless to say NO to all this shit.
WOW!!!!! See my #4
So I was right, mostly??????
Done.
Dude, that’s pretty catchy. LIke I said, I like having you here.
Exxxxxcellent!
Depressing as hell. But right on the money as usual.
One party that won’t govern and one party that can’t.
I suppose they’ll carve that on our headstone.
According to the Washington Post: “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.”
So my memory is right:1972 was as good as it ever got. I thought it was just boomer nostalgia. After the “Grand Bargain” in December, they will drive a stake in the heart of Medicare, Medicaid and even the poor little Food Stamp program. According to the Heritage Foundation, as long as you have a car, a TV set and a roof of some sort over your head, you are in fine shape. And there must be plenty of food because so many people are too fat.
According to their ideas, until we have tin shacks in shanty towns with people picking through the garbage dumps, there is no real poverty in America. Maybe some hunger, misery, disease and despair, but not real poverty.
The increases in net worth for the post 55s are seen as too much by the PTB. That is why there is now such a push on the part of corporate America to cut Social Security, Medicare, and public pensions.
Excellent point ncg. Why would these people address a situation that doesn’t impact them or their puppeteers? The same applies to the pundidiots and the news readers. Nothing to see here.
As I’ve posted before, both candidates are portraying themselves as the Hoover in the Hoover vs. Dyson vacuum campaign, with both claiming to be the Hoover because it sucks less. Can Hoovervilles be far behind?
“Forward” says the Puppet-in-Chief.
There’s always the hope of a military coup d’etat.
Michael Moore said it best. “America is not broke. Not by a long shot. The country is awash in wealth and cash. It’s just that it’s not in your hands.”
That’s friggin hilarious.
Hmmm
Hmmm
I suppose there’s room enough for two biting, sarcastic wits here.
Ist hat OK with you Dave?????
We got about 3,000 people living under bridges here in Houston. Can;t enter a left turn lane without a homeless person approaching you.
..
..
..
Even on the freeway.
Obama has shown great leadership since clearly it was time to create the Catfood Commission and try and cut the social safety net /s
Yeah! We are No . 29 of 29.
Thanks. I was forced to pick up your mantle when you went absent for a brief period of time. Don’t disappear again without a warning.
Ahhh, back to the good old days when dark people knew their place, and working whites did not question their betters.
The lives of those at the bottom are a mere political game for the Democrats, Republicans and their elite cheerleaders.
The only upside is now that the middle class get a taste of what the poor have been going through forever we can hopefully put away the ignorant meme that the poor are poor because they are lazy, stupid and make poor life decisions. The poor are poor because it’s hard to pull yourself out of a pit when you don’t have mommy or daddy to bail you out when you are inevitably human and make a mistake.
Yes, and then the young people won’t be able to get help any more from their parents, sigh.
And no one will dare help their kids with education expenses and stuff either if they are likely to be so poor in old age.
Quite frankly it never should have been the parents’ responsibility to begin with to pay for the education and training for America’s workforce for umpteen million years (and to the detriment of their own retirement.)
There is a reason education is nationalized in many developed countries. They recognize it is to their societies benefit to maximize their resources and not price people who might have skills, but not mony, out of the market.
He’s completely clueless unless it comes to serving the wealthy interests. And to think this actually passes as liberalism in today’s politics. What a charade!
It’s depressing to see how this plays out in the hearts and minds. The entire “Boomers vs young people” shadow play seems to work to elevate austerity over prosperity, and to set hard times as the most we can hope for or imagine.
Yes, that’s what made me think to post it.
BTW, from my observation, the young may not have the net worth of the previous generation, but they have kick-ass tats, piercings, phones, game systems, and any number of other useless junk they throw their money away on.