.
Feedback

Life at the Bottom of the Barrel

This post shines a spotlight on poor people.

The current official poverty measure in the United States was developed in the 1960’s. Poverty thresholds  or the annual amount of cash needed to minimally support families of various sizes are updated annually to account for inflation.

The National Poverty Center (University of Michigan) has  tabulated selected poverty thresholds (2010 US Census data; cash thresholds do not include public housing, Medicaid, employer-provided health insurance and food stamps).  For example, a poor, single person under 65 is someone with an income of $11,344, a single parent with two children is defined as having an income of $17,568, and a family composed of two adults and two children can be considered poor if they meet the threshold income of $22,113.

The numbers in selected decades paint a rosy story of the decline in American poverty rates. In the late 1950s, the overall American poverty rate was 22.4% (39.5 million people) and the numbers declined steadily throughout the 1960s to a low of 11.1% (22.9 million people) in 1973.  From 2000 onwards the poverty rate increased each year to 12.7% in 2004. That was before the financial meltdown of 2008. Subgroup analyses of the same data show that, in 2010,  27.4% of blacks and 26.6 % of Hispanics were poor, compared to 9.9% of non-Hispanic whites and 12.1% of Asians. Moreover, in 2010, 16.4 million US children, or 22.0%, were poor.

The numbers can be adjusted with different formulae and cost-of-living determinations in specific areas; however, the reality is that the harsh economy has made many of us aware of people who are sliding from the precarious comfort zone of the middle class into the abyss of poverty.  The  minds of some people may also become clouded by tarring the working poor with the same brush as the homeless person trying to pry cash out of one’s wallet with a sob story or the activities of career-criminals.

Many people aspire to live in a Westport mansion and no one wants to live in a Norwalk homeless shelter or Bridgeport tenements for that matter. If one moves beyond the rose-tinted view of TV “talking heads"and looks at certain neighborhoods, it seems that one of the consequences of a bad economy is multiplying the number of people that reenact a daily ritual of begging for food or finding a place to sleep for the night. When homeless graduates (some of whom may have criminal records)  from back-to-work training programs have to vie for jobs with middle-class jobseekers, it is a safe bet that they will usually get the short end of the stick.

Poverty is viewed by some people as weakness or something that people "bring upon themselves"; however, ethical sensibilities dictate that we should not turn a blind eye to the plight of the poor, even as the middle class and the rich remain the focus of national attention. Any latent guilt or genuine concern we feel can be assuaged by tithing to a church, multitasking Android smartphone users can make charitable donations via the benevity app (Apple has chosen not to follow suit), and those preferring a personal touch can volunteer their time at any of the local charities tending to the needs of the poor.

Many unsung heroes perform daily service helping less-fortunate individuals to survive against all odds. It feels good to help others and that feeling can be magnified across society if we help people to help themselves.

In a country well governed poverty is something to be ashamed of.

In a country badly governed wealth is something to be ashamed of.

Confucius (BC 551-BC 479) Chinese philosopher

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Norwalk Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Thomas Paine June 18, 2013 at 01:50 pm
Why is it the panel for this event does not include a single advocate for gun-owners' rights? WithRead More all due respect to Chief McNamara, why does the panel not include a person who can speak to gun safety from a gun-owning civilian's perspective? ML, you claim that the assembled folks "do not offer judgements about gun ownership" but they are not including a single voice that can offer a perspective on gun ownership. I have been to "education" sessions sponsored by Meg's March for Change and they are one-sided indoctrinations into gun control advocacy. >>>> I was in Hartford for the public hearings in January when both Meg and March co-founder Nancy gave their personal testimonies and they all but threatened the legislators on the panel with election day retribution for all those who did not tow the gun-control line of thinking (i.e. March and CAGV). To suggest that Meg "does not offer judgements" is fallacious and disingenuous.