This is very true...as I live in a city that claims in the newspaper that 80% of school kids are on reduced-price or free lunch and with unemployment that reached nearly 20% in recent years, as the teens and parents gather in school meetings with cell phones lighting up and beeping, with expensive sneakers, with every kid probably having a game-collection at home, and every house having a TV and probably a microwave...I love Grand Rapids! To the consternation of school teachers, this city continuously votes down school millage while over 300 new restaurants opened within 2 years, and it's a small city, with lots of overweight people...Michigan has the highest ice-cream eating population in USA, and is one of the top 3 states with snowmobile owners...in my neighborhood, the Dollar General with so much elderly shoplifting is across the street from the deli that specializes in handmade expensive sausages and imported booze & cheeses and chocolates, both are always crowded every day. I love Michigan and I love USA, where it's tough to try to "stay poor" in the eyes of the media, but most people succeed at it :)
***
Study: Americans ‘in Poverty’ Are Seldom Poor
Most of the Americans the federal government defines as “in poverty” are “not poor in any ordinary sense of the term,” according to a new study — especially when compared to the poor in less developed countries.
“To the average American, the word ‘poverty’ implies significant material deprivation, an inability to provide a family with adequate nutritious food, reasonable shelter, and clothing,” the study from The Heritage Foundation states.
“The actual living conditions of America’s poor are far different from these images.”
The Census Bureau reports that there are 43 million Americans living in poverty. To help them, taxpayers spend some $900 billion a year in federal and state dollars — over $20,000 for each person deemed poor — through more than 70 means-tested programs providing cash, food, housing, medical care and more.
But according to the government’s own survey data, in the past decade the average household defined as poor by the government lived in a house or apartment with air conditioning and cable TV, The Heritage Foundation study found.
The household had a car — one-third had two or more cars — two color televisions, a DVD player, and a microwave.
“The home of the average poor family was in good repair and not overcrowded,” the study observes.
“In fact, the typical poor American had more living space than the average European — average, not poor.
“When asked, most poor families stated they had sufficient funds during the past year to meet all essential needs.”
Study authors Robert Rector and Rachel Sheffield cite U.S. Department of Energy data showing that in 2005, the most recent year on record:
• 62 percent of poor American households had a clothes washer in the home, and 53.2 percent had a clothes dryer.
• 65.1 percent had more than one TV.
• 54.5 percent had a cellular phone.
• 38.2 percent had a personal computer.
• 36.6 percent had an answering machine.
• 29.3 percent had a video game system.
• 25 percent had a dishwasher.
• 5.2 percent had a photocopier — and .6 percent even had a Jacuzzi.
The study also found that 5.9 percent of households “sometimes” did not have enough food, and just 1.5 percent “often” did not have enough.
“Some poor Americans do experience significant hardships, including temporary food shortages or inadequate housing, but these individuals are a minority within the overall poverty population,” the study authors concluded.
“Poverty remains an issue of serious social concern, but accurate information about that problem is essential in crafting wise public policy. Exaggeration and misinformation about poverty obscure the nature, extent, and causes of real material deprivation, thereby hampering the development of well-targeted, effective programs to reduce the problem.”
Former Congressman Ernest Istook, now a distinguished fellow at The Heritage Foundation, echoed that sentiment in a recent Newsmax blog: “By defining poverty so broadly, we drain resources that instead could be focused on those who truly are in dire straits.
“And we spend billions that could be cut from the budget instead.”