Your first link is talking about a more specific group of people than I was referring to. It references about 7% of the population, people working at least half

Your first link is talking about a more specific group of people than I was referring to. It references about 7% of the population, people working at least half of the year who are below the poverty line. The 2013 poverty line was $11,490 for individuals, $23,550 for a family of four. I'd consider twice that to still be poor by any reasonable definition. In my area (around Atlantic City, New Jersey) you'd be lucky to find a two bedroom apartment for $1000/mo. So if a family of four crams into a two bedroom apartment, or an individual splits one with a roommate, that's half the 'poverty level' in rent. Without covering utilities, transportation, food, etc. As to your second point, I'm sorry, but I simply don't have the time to do the proper research on that one. You may be correct. I was primarily basing on anecdotal evidence from what I've seen and experienced in my local area. The statistics may also not be as clear as one would think. As I said, in my area, someone at twice the poverty level would still struggle to get by, and in many cities, I expect it is significantly more. At the same time, in many rural or semi-rural areas, housing costs become a much smaller factor, which leaves more room for things like a vehicle. Looking at the poor based on the amount of income, without looking at circumstances at an almost individual level is a difficult prospect. I will also say that it is easy to overlook things that go from a non-issue to a time and effort consuming problem when lack of resources is involved. Lack of transportation or a washer were just two examples that came to mind. Also note that if 74% of poor households have a vehicle, that means 26% do not. That is a fairly significant number, in my eyes.