3 ms·

> by those measures there are no poor people in the US That doesn't feel like a meaningful metric when there are as many as 17% of mothers with young children

by badRNG 6y ago

> by those measures there are no poor people in the US That doesn't feel like a meaningful metric when there are as many as 17% of mothers with young children experiencing food insecurity [1]. Perhaps that's due to COVID, but 11% of households were food insecure as recently as 2018 [2]. Around half a million Americans are homeless, and 35% of them are shelterless [3]. Are all of these people "not poor" and are they "middle class"? This all to say that how we think about poverty should focus more on the outcomes that people actually experience (access to food, shelter, healthcare, etc) than key economic indicators. Claims like "the War on Poverty is over" and "there are no poor people in the US" don't seem to match up with the lived experiences of many Americans. [1] https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2020/05/06/the-covid-19-crisis-has-already-left-too-many-children-hungry-in-america/ https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2020/05/06/the-covid... [2] https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food-nutrition-assistance/food-security-in-the-us/key-statistics-graphics.aspx https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food-nutrition-assistance/fo... [3] https://endhomelessness.org/homelessness-in-america/homelessness-statistics/state-of-homelessness-2020/ https://endhomelessness.org/homelessness-in-america/homeless...

charwalker 6y ago
You're agreeing with their point with good evidence. Whatever set of metrics or filters are used to identify 'poor' needs to vary based on the context of the conversation. I think most metrics have been left as is for decades to have consistent reporting like how we can say 'Poverty has fallen X% in [COUNTRY] since [20 years ago]' But that doesn't give a fair view for all nations. Food insecurity is a metric that would quickly show poor improvement over decades, at least compared to current metrics. Maybe access to affordable housing, water, power, and other items on the first 2 level of Maslow's Hierarchy would work better. In the end, we may learn a lot about 'first world' economies like the US and the areas failed by capitalism. I think many of the metrics pulled out could be used to argue either way Numbers on food insecurity could be spun as "We need to fund and support our citizens and make this better" or "Look how far ahead we are so do nothing or cut programs to save money!"

by badRNG 6y ago

charwalker 6y ago

You're agreeing with their point with good evidence. Whatever set of metrics or filters are used to identify 'poor' needs to vary based on the context of the conversation. I think most metrics have been left as is for decades to have consistent reporting like how we can say 'Poverty has fallen X% in [COUNTRY] since [20 years ago]' But that doesn't give a fair view for all nations. Food insecurity is a metric that would quickly show poor improvement over decades, at least compared to current metrics. Maybe access to affordable housing, water, power, and other items on the first 2 level of Maslow's Hierarchy would work better. In the end, we may learn a lot about 'first world' economies like the US and the areas failed by capitalism. I think many of the metrics pulled out could be used to argue either way Numbers on food insecurity could be spun as "We need to fund and support our citizens and make this better" or "Look how far ahead we are so do nothing or cut programs to save money!"