Politics for Pros- moderated Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: KLP who wrote (421607)	4/13/2011 12:40:21 PM
From: Katelew	Read Replies (2) of 793838

You may want to consider this before drawing your conclusion. As a statistic, a poverty rate can never be zero. The reason is that it's a static measurement of a fluid group. People are continuously moving above and below the poverty line. Example, a women gets divorced after husband runs off. She can't get child support for awhile, maybe never. She qualitifies as poor and takes welfare. She enters the workforce, moves up the ranks, her household income (which by now might even include child support) increases until she moves out of the group. Most of the poor tend to be young, and many are caught up in temporary situations like this. I read once that the average length of time someone receives welfare is six months. Even if it were a year, this also implies an amorphous, everchanging group. Another group that would be included in the ranks of poverty would be many of the elderly living in state run nursing homes, whose monthly costs are being paid by Medicaid. Many in this group have (1) spent all their assets away or (2) signed all their assets away to other family members. Either way, they are now classified as impoverished.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next