A shocking 37 million Americans live in poverty. That is 12.7 per cent of the population - the highest percentage in the developed world. They are found from the hills of Kentucky to Detroit's streets, from the Deep South of Louisiana to the heartland of Oklahoma. Each year since 2001 their number has grown.
That was 18 months ago, how can america solve its problem
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/world/story/0,,1712965,00.html
2007-11-03
13:42:34
·
25 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Politics & Government
➔ Immigration
The flickering television in Candy Lumpkins's trailer blared out The Bold and the Beautiful. It was a fantasy daytime soap vision of American life with little relevance to the reality of this impoverished corner of Kentucky
The Lumpkins live at the definition of the back of beyond, in a hollow at the top of a valley at the end of a long and muddy dirt road. It is strewn with litter. Packs of stray dogs prowl around, barking at strangers. There is no telephone and since their pump broke two weeks ago Candy has collected water from nearby springs. Oblivious to it all, her five-year-old daughter Amy runs barefoot on a wooden porch frozen by a midwinter chill.
Article continues
It is a vision of deep and abiding poverty. Yet the Lumpkins are not alone in their plight. They are just the negative side of the American equation. America does have vast, wealthy suburbs, huge shopping malls and a busy middle class, but it also has vast numbers of poor, struggling to make it in a low-wage econo
2007-11-03
13:59:50 ·
update #1
Yak Rider are you mad or just sad..Most "poor" Americans have a higher standard of living than middle class Europeans.
2007-11-03
14:46:25 ·
update #2
Education is a good start. Making sure that the people in the states with high instances of poverty receive the same education as those in wealthy states. If those above do not believe there is poverty, shocking poverty in the United States I invite you to take a trip into Mississippi or into middle Appalachia or Detroit, you may be shocked. I work with a group that travels several times a year to help the less fortunate with improvements to their homes (if they are lucky enough to have one) improvements such as a new roof that doesn't leak and keeps out the weather or plumbing, even simple insulation against the cold.
The children in these areas need special attention so that they can graduate with usable skills and receive either college or trade training for a brighter future.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/countryboys/readings/duncan.html
2007-11-03 14:09:49
·
answer #1
·
answered by Rabid Frog 4
·
4⤊
2⤋
The problem is the poverty line and the fact that its the same in every state . For example the poverty line doesn't incorporate where a person lives , if the person owns property etc . If one lived in Florida the heat bill would be alot less then New York for example . On the other hand rent is more in California then Kansas .
The point is - The poverty line takes non of the above into account and actually contributes to poverty . What the US should do is abolish the poverty line and take each case individually , but I don't see it happening .
2007-11-03 13:50:58
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
2⤋
I agree with one thing that you said "It is not a person's fault that they succeeded." For this to be true, however, you also must say that it is not a person's fault if they failed. NOBODY'S life is completely independent of environmental influence--if you're born into a poor family who cannot afford to live in a healthy neighborhood and provide a better-than-average education and cannot afford to pay for college or for health insurance, how can you truly be expected to get out of a mess like that? If you can't afford a car, you can't necessarily get to a good job. If you can't afford nice clothes, you are likely to be seen as less respectable than someone who is well-dressed. These are facts. If you are honestly confused by this, I suggest you turn off Fox News and pay for some education about about financial inequality in America. Based on the attitude in your question, I'm assuming you can afford it.
2016-04-02 03:19:04
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think "poverty" is relative. I know families with very modest incomes that live well, and, own property, travel, and, have decent lives. Then, I have a couple wealthier friends that do none of that and can't figure out how to save enough for a down payment. I think it is truly relative. An elderly person may be considered below poverty because their pension isn't a lot, but, they may own homes, acreage, cars, and, a boat.
Income alone doesn't truly determine wealth. Net worth is a better indicator.
2007-11-03 14:37:38
·
answer #4
·
answered by Amanda h 5
·
2⤊
0⤋
Many things contribute to poverty, education, drugs, alcohol and inherited poverty trappings like the ghettos of larger cities see.
At one time we had solved part of that problem by offering manufacturing, textile and farm hand jobs to the uneducated to help break the cycle of poverty but the free trade business of the greedy corporate world took that away.
Thats just one example but I think you can see that greed is the ultimate contributor of poverty. The bottom line is always how the landowner, grocer, automaker can make the most money on the backs of everyone with no remorse for the people it hurts.
2007-11-03 14:15:25
·
answer #5
·
answered by Enigma 6
·
5⤊
2⤋
Poverty is a funny word. When I think of poverty I remember those Sally Struthers commercials about kids living in mud huts with open sewage running down the streets and going hungry.
Poverty in America is nothing like that.
Forty-three percent of all poor households actually own their own homes. The average home owned by persons classified as poor by the Census Bureau is a three-bedroom house with one-and-a-half baths, a garage, and a porch or patio.
Eighty percent of poor households have air conditioning. By contrast, in 1970, only 36 percent of the entire U.S. population enjoyed air conditioning.
Only 6 percent of poor households are overcrowded. More than two-thirds have more than two rooms per person.
The average poor American has more living space than the average individual living in Paris, London, Vienna, Athens, and other cities throughout Europe. (These comparisons are to the average citizens in foreign countries, not to those classified as poor.)
Nearly three-quarters of poor households own a car; 31 percent own two or more cars.
Ninety-seven percent of poor households have a color television; over half own two or more color televisions.
Seventy-eight percent have a VCR or DVD player; 62 percent have cable or satellite TV reception.
Eighty-nine percent own microwave ovens, more than half have a stereo, and more than a third have an automatic dishwasher.
Read the article below that discusses what poverty in the USA really means.
2007-11-03 13:51:54
·
answer #6
·
answered by Uncle Pennybags 7
·
4⤊
3⤋
Most "poor" Americans have a higher standard of living than middle class Europeans.
2007-11-03 14:42:01
·
answer #7
·
answered by Yak Rider 7
·
4⤊
1⤋
well going to college to get a better job never hurt anyone. some family members and i have received help from the state to get into a trade school or college.
instead of lining up at the local food stamp office maybe go find a job would be good. there is plenty of work out there.
2007-11-03 15:50:05
·
answer #8
·
answered by antis with atole for brains 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
Hmmmm... ya really think so? The way those statistics work is that *all* the other "developed" countries lower the relative bar.. but, in fact, in a lot of them their "middle class" are worse off than our "poor". And I would be interested to know how many of *your* 37million speak English and are legal citizens.
2007-11-03 14:13:05
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
Americas "poor" live equivilent to middle class europeans...37 million seems like alot but there are 320 million people in the U.S.
2007-11-03 18:46:52
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋