posted on September 28, 2003 05:07:42 AM
Satan promises the best, but pays with the worst;
he promises honor and pays with disgrace;
he promises pleasure and pays with pain;
he promises profit and pays with loss;
he promises life and pays with death.
I thought this article was worth sharing. Not that it will bring back the 2.7 million jobs we've lost since 2001.
Poverty rate at 12.1 percent, up from 11.7 percent in 2001 - By Martin Wolk, MSNBC
Sept. 26 — In a report that offered fresh ammunition to critics of President Bush’s economic policy, the government said Friday that the nation’s median income fell nearly $500 in 2002 and the poverty rate climbed for a second straight year.
THE CENSUS BUREAU REPORTED that 34.6 million people, or 12.1 percent of the population, were living in poverty, up from 32.9 million people or 11.7 percent in 2001, when the economy fell into recession after a decade of growth. The median household income, when adjusted for inflation, fell 1.1 percent to $42,409, according to the bureau, which released two comprehensive annual reports looking at poverty and income in America.
“These estimates reflect the effect of the recession that began in March 2001 and ended in November 2001,” said Daniel Weinberg, chief of the Census Bureau division that produced the report. He noted that median household income has fallen 3.4 percent since 1999, after adjusting for inflation, statistically the same as in the 1989-92 period, which followed the 1990-91 recession.
With inflation well under control, rising unemployment is the prime culprit behind declining household income. Since the end of 1999 the unemployment rate has risen from 4 percent to the current 6.1 percent, and the economy has lost a net 750,000 jobs. With fewer people working, and the number of U.S. households growing by about 2 million a year, median household income fell for a third straight year. Half of U.S. households had incomes that were above the median, and half were below.
Declining federal income taxes had little impact on median household income last year. After adjusting for the impact of taxes, median household income fell 0.8 percent, the bureau said.
The rise in the poverty rate was accounted for entirely by economic conditions in the Midwest, where the number of poor people rose to 10.3 percent of the population from 9.4 percent in 2001, the bureau said. The poverty rate was unchanged in other regions. The poverty rate for blacks, including those who identified themselves as multiracial, rose to 23.9 percent from 22.7 percent in 2002, when there was no multiracial option.
The poverty rate for children was statistically unchanged at 16.7 percent, meaning about 12.1 million children were living in poverty, up from up from 11.7 million in 2001. That is well below the recent peak of 1993, when 22.7 percent of children were living in poverty.
One main reason is that the economic boom of the 1990s drove down the unemployment rate and ultimately boosted the wages of low-wage workers, said Robert Greenstein of the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, a research group that focuses on issues affecting lower-income Americans.
The Census Bureau defines poverty using a matrix of on income and household composition, but excludes any adjustments for regional differences in cost of living. On average a family of four is considered to be living in poverty if it has total monetary income of less than $18,392. The average poverty threshold for a single person is $9,183.
Many have criticized the calculation as outmoded and inaccurate, and the Census Bureau has been studying possible alternative measures, although any change would be up to the White House Office of Management and Budget.
In its latest report the bureau published several figures adopting recommendations from the National Academy of Sciences that take into account non-cash benefits like food stamps and housing subsidies as well as geographic differences. The changes would result in a slightly higher poverty rate of 12.3 to 13 percent, depending on the methodology, the bureau said.
Joseph Dalaker, one of the authors of the report on poverty, said it was not surprising that the poverty rate rose even as the economy began to expand after recession in 2002. “Poverty does tend to rise even after the recession is formally declared over,” he said. “Poverty is a lagging indicator.”
The reports were released as a growing body of data indicates the economy is rebounding strongly after a long period of slow growth.
“The economy is moving in the right direction,” Bush spokesman Scott McClellan said. “But the president is not satisfied. ... It’s important to create the conditions for job growth and that’s why the president continues to say that there’s more that we can do.”
Median household income, when adjusted for inflation, has fallen for three straight years, primarily because of rising unemployment. (All figures in 2002 dollars.)
Gross domestic product grew 3.3 percent in the second quarter, according to the latest revision, and many analysts believe the rate will rise to 5 percent or higher in the current quarter, which would be the fastest pace since 1999.
Retail sales and housing remain strong, but a report on durable goods orders Thursday showed surprising weakness in the long-suffering manufacturing sector. But by far the weakest aspect of the economy is employment. Since January 2001, the economy has shed 2.7 million jobs, including job losses for the past seven straight months, raising questions about the sustainability of the expansion.
Democrats pounced on Census Bureau the report as more evidence of a failed economic policy.
“Today’s announcement by the Census Bureau confirms what many Americans already know — President Bush’s economic policies are making it more difficult for middle-class families to succeed,” House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said in a statement. “President Bush’s only economic plan — ill-advised tax cuts for those who need them least — has not created jobs. It has only created obstacles for Americans working hard to get ahead.”
posted on September 28, 2003 06:15:01 AM
The millions of Americans who rent their homes -- a disproportionately poor, disproportionately young group -- face an increasingly bleak situation. A new report released Monday by the National Low Income Housing Coalition (NLIHC) reveals that the national housing wage (the amount of money per hour a full-time worker would need to make in order to rent a two-bedroom apartment on less than 30 percent of his or her income) for 2003 stands at $15.21, a 3.75 percent increase over 2002.
posted on September 28, 2003 07:17:02 AM
It is funny how the fact the previous administration encouraged false wage increases and even in some cases falseifying the books so as to make the company look stronger than it was, and of course all the dot coms that came in went with high paying jobs...
2001 was just a carry over from from previous years...
I do agree that income levels are falling... but it could be the fact that some here see a "Global Economy" and want our standard of living to decrease at the same time increasing those of other countries...
AIN'T LIFE GRAND...
[ edited by Twelvepole on Sep 28, 2003 07:31 AM ]
posted on September 28, 2003 07:48:41 AM
adjusted for inflation??
what inflation??
i think in some areas,it is deflation.
-sig file -------The thrill is gone!!
[ edited by Twelvepole on Sep 28, 2003 07:31 AM ]