America Has The Richest Poor In The World

Show me that in how the government decides the poverty level

 

if one is living off of 26k in interest, they are not in poverty as they have a lot of money in the bank, they may be living like they are in poverty, but they would be doing that of ones own free will, but that is jmho

different gov organizations have different rules, some are net worth, some are income based, some are age based, ect...

 

In my opinion, our over thirty year War on Poverty may be credited for the UW having the richest poor in the world, but not actually solving official poverty.

 

http://liheap.ncat.org/profiles/povertytables/FY2011/popne.htm

You would only qualify for the nanny state freebies given to those of 200% of poverty.

 

And this is exactly part of the problem.

In many rural areas, you can easily survive at the poverty levels you provided. You live in a big city like LA, you do not have a prayer in hell, even at the 200% income.

Poverty is a made up figure, only to make politicians feel better about themselves.

 

Someone posted a long time ago that a person making $20,000 with a kid or 2 had an effective household income of around $60,000 with all the goodies they qualified to get. While a person making $40,000. with 2 kids actually lived in poverty because they got no freebies and had to pay taxes too.

 

More opinions. What is the income for a family of 3 to be in poverty?

 

Man I guess I am not poor yet. Keep Obama another 5 years and I will be

 

Looking at the script of what he has written, I'd say this was taken in Thailand.

 

Hypothetically, why would it matter as much, if a person could apply for unemployment compensation, whenever a person is unemployed and have recourse to that form of minimum wage which could solve for official poverty in the US?

 

We could be simplifying our social safety nets and improving the efficiency of our economy at the same time, merely by being moral enough to bear true witness to our own laws.

Should we really have to burden our elected representatives with anything more difficult to administer than a minimum wage that could simply pay the least efficient, to not provide labor input to the economy but still circulate money in our money based markets?

 

America's "poor" are so victimized and put-upon they gather en masse to riot over the opportunity to purchase $200.00 tennis shoes.

 

Minimum wage will never solve poverty.

Period.

You could set the minimum wage at $100 an hour, and you will still have poverty.

 

And look at the lines of them when a new game console comes out.

 

You are mistaking the minimum wage of our current regime over a hypothetical minimum wage that would subsidize the least efficient, with a form of minimum wage in our market based economy. The goal is to engender a new natural rate of unemployment below one percent.

 

maybe not, but it will keep us from becoming the next Mexico

I can not understand why anyone would want to do away with the min wage

 

Perhaps because it doesn't work?

 

seems to be working to me, keeping employers from paying people a dollar an hour

 

We could be improving our Standard of living and making improvements to other standards, by merely investing in the general welfare, such that we can engender a change in the natural rate of unemployment to meet a new equilibrium below one percent.

 

My first job I made 37 cents an hour. I could actually buy things with the money I made. I could take a girl to the movies and buy popcorn and have much more than half a day's pay left over. On $7.25 an hour today, a movie would bust your bank. It takes $100.00 to buy what you could have bought for $1.00 less than 100 years ago. You might ask yourself WHY?

I worked in a steel mill, UNION job, made $2.75 an hour if I remember right. I drove a competition Alfa Romeo and had a pocket full of money to spend. An aside, in those days I was not allowed to drive that "foreign made" car onto to US STEEL property. I had to park on the street and walk into the plant.

I made $4.00 an hour and was able to buy my first new car, a 67 Camaro Z-28 in late 66. Can a kid making $7.25 buy a new Z-28 today?

Minimum wage is a terrible prank on youth when their buying power actually goes DOWN.

EMPLOYERS, and I spent nearly 40 years as an employER, pay what it takes to get and keep good employees. Not all do. but not all are profitable and not all stay in business. Having and keeping GOOD employees is just a regular business costs. Cutting that cost, cuts your own throat. Paying someone $1.00 an hour when that person is not a good employee, is a waste of $1.00 per hour. Paying someone $125,000 per year when that person is a good employee is money well invested.

The only 4 letter word that liberals don't use regularly,,,,,,,WORK!

 

OK, call me stupid, but how does a minimum wage decrease unemployment?

That simply makes no sense, since every time it is increased, so does unemployment.

It is like saying you are going to put a heavier larger capacity engine into a car to make it get better gas mileage.

 

Who says I want to get rid of the minimum wage? I suggest you go back and reread what I have said about that.

I do not believe in a national mimumum wage, that is true. I think each state, county and city should set it's own minimum wage, based upon the economic needs of it's own region.

And this would be self-correcting. If it is to high, businesses will leave and look for employees elsewhere. It it is to low, then the employee pool will shift to look for work in other area, causing a loss of tax revenue.

But trying to make Rural Georgia pay the same minimum wage as Los Angeles is really stupid. And so is trying to make people in New York City live off of the minimum wage of rural Idaho.

 

Under our current regime, anyone who is not actively looking for employment is no longer counted as unemployed, such as when going to school or learning a new vocation or simply pursuing Happiness.

And, your analogy is not accurate enough for this concept; since, simply increasing the circulation of money in money based markets can be accomplished even by persons who are not employed.

A multiplier effect could be analogous to a breeder reactor by analogy, since it can be created merely by spending money in money based markets and that increase in the circulation of money.

There would be no reason for the States not adhering to their own minimum wage laws.

 

Lay off the pipe would you? How do you achieve UE rate of one percent or less?

You should submit your work to Nobel committee, I can see you will win Econ Nobel Prize this year. Thanks for the laugh as always.

 

This is quite silly..

Poor in San Francisco is not the same as poor in rural Alabama..

If you doubt it.. Look at cost of living index by US city.