Rhetoric vs. Reality

 

Saw an article in today's paper stating the Kentucky is one of the few states whose percentage of residents living in poverty increased in 2006. I can't remember the exact figures; something like 17% in the Bluegrass state compared to 12.3% nationally.

 

Sorry, no link in the online version of the Ledger-Independent.

Saw an article in today's paper stating the Kentucky is one of the few states whose percentage of residents living in poverty increased in 2006. I can't remember the exact figures; something like 17% in the Bluegrass state compared to 12.3% nationally.

 

Sorry, no link in the online version of the Ledger-Independent.

 

A lot of their stuff is from the AP, you may want to search their website.

Heard a little of this but the tail end was all I got, I did think it said it had increased.

Nice clip, thanks RTS. Reinforces what you and I already knew.

Is there any research that examines regional shifts of poverty?

 

For example I live in Virginia (home of the Heritage Foundation that made the above piece). Parts of Virginia (Beltway, Northern VA, Tidewater, over to Richmond are booming) but other parts (Southside and Southwest) are going backwards.

 

Here in Southside the loss of manufacturing jobs (textiles, furtniture, etc.) has devestated whole communities (my own included) because for decades the local economy and work force was built on these middle to good pay jobs and factory/mill work. Other industry was discouraged by local business men and governments. Now, all the textiles are gone and barely 1/3 of the furniture factories are still operating in the county/city.

 

People have gone from $15 an hour to jobs that pay $9 to $10. They have no skills or education for anything but mill/factory work. Some have gone back to school but many don't have the ability to do any better. Unemployment was 16% when I came here in 2000 and is now down to 8% but still leads the state.

 

When I hear about poverty in America these are the kinds of people I'm thinking of. These are people who made a good wage and modest living and went to barely making ends meet if at all.

 

I'm not asking for your bleeding heart but I think any discussion of poverty ought to include these stories and their data.

 

concerning immigration it is interesting that he notes that 25% of immigrants are listed in the poverty category and he immediately skips to point out that 1 out of 10 (10%) listed in poverty are illegal immigrants. Is that playing with the numbers? So 15% of legal immigrants are really who are declared impoverished but 85% of legals are above that line? That's not a bad stat is it?

 

He states: "The reason immigrants tend to be poor. . . " Do they tend to be poort? His own numbers say 75% are not. Wouldn't that kind of majority figure preclude a better statement is: "The reason immigrants tend to be above the poverty line is . . ."? Or would it be better worded: "The reason for 25% of immigrants are at the poverty level is because . . ."

 

It might be semantics to some but sometimes the discussion on immigration is to broad brush everyone when the data suggests otherwise.

From yesterday's Lex Herald-Leader:

 

Jefferson County had the most people living in poverty, 102,694. Fayette County's figure was 42,206. Bullitt County had the lowest poverty rate, with 4,209 of its 72,730 residents living in poverty.

 

"We're one of 10 states with poverty rates over 16 percent," Ziliak said. "There are 13,000 more Kentuckians in poverty this year than last year."

 

http://www.kentucky.com/news/state/story/161998.html

From yesterday's Lex Herald-Leader:

 

Jefferson County had the most people living in poverty, 102,694. Fayette County's figure was 42,206. Bullitt County had the lowest poverty rate, with 4,209 of its 72,730 residents living in poverty.

 

"We're one of 10 states with poverty rates over 16 percent," Ziliak said. "There are 13,000 more Kentuckians in poverty this year than last year."

 

http://www.kentucky.com/news/state/story/161998.html

 

Can't wait to see how people downplay this article.

 

IMO, if poverty isn't declining at or near the same rate that the top-tier earners are increasing their wealth, we're failing at addressing the causes of poverty.

What is the difference in what is the level of poverty in this country compared to what we see on the television with African countries?

 

Isn't our level of poverty, a pretty high standard of living compared to true poverty in other countries?

Not to downplay the level of poverty,( I know it exists and I see it everyday) but I was surprised to see the poverty line for a family of four is more than 21k per year. That, in a rural area, is a modest, but liveable, wage.

What is the difference in what is the level of poverty in this country compared to what we see on the television with African countries?

 

Isn't our level of poverty, a pretty high standard of living compared to true poverty in other countries?

 

No doubt you are correct.

 

But do we really want to be compared, from a poverty standpoint, with the third world?

What is the difference in what is the level of poverty in this country compared to what we see on the television with African countries?

 

Isn't our level of poverty, a pretty high standard of living compared to true poverty in other countries?

 

IMO, we shouldn't compare our poverty level with those of non-industrialized nations. It's simply not an equitable comparison.

 

To add to this discussion, there was a report I saw (can't remember where), that noted that the number of people without helath insurance is growing, and the growth is in the lower-middle class sector of the population. This is due in large part because they no longer can afford to participate in their employer-offered insurance because the employers are passing along more of the cost to the employee. Of course, this is due to rising premiums to the employer, as well as tough decisions by the employer to cut their underwriting to try to save costs and make profits. (Not saying employers are sacrificing their employees for profits. Many companies, especially smaller businesses, are struggling to make profits)

 

To add to this discussion, there was a report I saw (can't remember where), that noted that the number of people without helath insurance is growing

 

That's true on the nation as a whole, but in Ky we're actually maintaining. From the article I linked in post #7:

 

On a brighter note, the percentage of Kentuckians who lack health insurance (13.8 percent, or an estimated 564,000 state residents) is below the national average of 15.8 percent. The state figure was essentially unchanged from 2005.

What a state we live in , the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.

IMO, we shouldn't compare our poverty level with those of non-industrialized nations. It's simply not an equitable comparison.

 

To add to this discussion, there was a report I saw (can't remember where), that noted that the number of people without helath insurance is growing, and the growth is in the lower-middle class sector of the population. This is due in large part because they no longer can afford to participate in their employer-offered insurance because the employers are passing along more of the cost to the employee. Of course, this is due to rising premiums to the employer, as well as tough decisions by the employer to cut their underwriting to try to save costs and make profits. (Not saying employers are sacrificing their employees for profits. Many companies, especially smaller businesses, are struggling to make profits)

 

 

It may not be equitable, but from a humanitarian view - we don't have much to complain about.