6 ms·
While "1 in 6" appeals as a lot, the actual statistic of 15.1% poor people seems significantly less harmful -- as, ipso facto, the vast majortity of all America
by x03 15y ago
While "1 in 6" appeals as a lot, the actual statistic of 15.1% poor people seems significantly less harmful -- as, ipso facto, the vast majortity of all American people (84.9%) are not poor.
Isn't this the way the model essentially works out in our system? There is a small "working class" at the bottom, then a giant bump in the middle for the middle class, and a tiny spot at the top for the 1% of wealthy -- wealthy, not merely rich -- individuals.
I wouldn't simply try to brush off poverty, as surely every effort must be made to ensure social mobility among the classes (both up and down), but in a country as large as America having 45 or so million poor people isn't only to be expected, but actually relatively necessary for our economic model -- which, on the whole, works quite well for most people.
- sp332 15y agoI think the problem recently is that the bump in the middle is getting relatively smaller, as rich people seem to be getting richer while the poor and middle-class get poorer.
- hugh3 15y agoIs that true, or just oft-repeated political rhetoric? (Telling the middle class that they're being ripped off is, of course, a time-honoured political ploy.) I'm sitting in the middle of the income curve right now, and it looks fine around here. In terms of income distribution the main effect of the recession has been to destroy wealth at the top end of the scale, since these are the folks who owned all the assets which are now performing poorly.