The Poor Really Aren't Poor

Here's the conclusion of the latest analysis by the Heritage Foundation on Poverty in America:

The living conditions of persons defined as poor by the government bear little resemblance to notions of "poverty" held by the general public. If poverty is defined as lacking adequate nutritious food for one's family, a reasonably warm and dry apartment to live in, or a car with which to get to work when one is needed, then there are relatively few poor persons remaining in the United States. Real material hardship does occur, but it is limited in scope and severity. The typical American defined as "poor" by the government has a car, air conditioning, a refrigerator, a stove, a clothes washer and dryer, and a microwave. He has two color televisions, cable or satellite TV reception, a VCR or DVD player, and a stereo. He is able to obtain medical care. His home is in good repair and is not overcrowded. By his own report, his family is not hungry and he had sufficient funds in the past year to meet his family's essential needs. While this individual's life is not opulent, it is equally far from the popular images of dire poverty conveyed by the press, liberal activists, and politicians. But the living conditions of the average poor person should not be taken to mean that all poor Americans live without hardship. There is a wide range of living conditions among the poor. Roughly a third of poor households do face material hardships such as overcrowding, intermittent food shortages, or difficulty obtaining medical care. However, even these households would be judged to have high living standards in comparison to most other people in the world. Perhaps the best news is that the United States can readily reduce its remaining poverty, especially among children. The main causes of child poverty in the United States are low levels of parental work and high numbers of single-parent families. By increasing work and marriage, our nation can virtually eliminate remaining child poverty.

Gosh, I guess things are much better than I thought. I guess every poor/homeless person in America moved to South-Central L.A. when I wasn't looking, because there sure are a lot of them there. CAP has a slightly more critical view of this Heritage analysis. Snippet:

LIES, DAMN LIES, AND THE HERITAGE FOUNDATION: In other cases, Heritage blatantly distorts the facts. The first figure of the report entitled "Ownership of Property and Consumer Goods Among Poor Households" asserts that 98.9% of poor households *own* a refrigerator, 64.7% *own* a washer dryer and 75.6% *own* a Refrigerator. But these assertions are based on aggregate data from the Census Bureau's American Housing Survey 2001. The Heritage data is based on figure 2-4, which includes home owners and renters. The majority of those below the poverty line are renters and, of course, renters generally do not own the appliances. As a result, Heritage's figures grossly overstate property ownership by the poor. HERITAGE IDEA #1 – WOMEN SHOULD GO BACK TO BEING BEATEN: The policy team at the Heritage has two creative solutions for the non-problem of poverty. First, "if poor mothers married the fathers of their children, almost three-quarters would immediately be lifted out of poverty." But a 1999 study reported by the Journal of Social Issues found that 74% of poor women (defined in the study as those on welfare) had experienced severe domestic violence as adults and 12% have experienced severe domestic violence in the previous year. In light of that data, Heritage's "solution," suggests that many poor women should simply return to spouses who physically abuse them. HERITAGE IDEA #2 – OLD AND JOBLESS SHOULD JUST FIND A JOB: The other "solution": have each poor family work 2,000 hours per year. Such a remedy simply isn't an option for many 3.4 million seniors who live in poverty. It also ignores the fact that 8.4 million unemployed people looked for work in December, the economy has shed around 2 million jobs in the last three years, and the unemployment rate stands at 5.7%.