That's very interesting. There's a lot going on here, but I see at how American's are never satisfied with what they have, and although there really are some poor people who have absolutely nothing, a lot of people spend more than they should and aren't grateful for what they do have. 

Americans: the most generous nation on planet Earth

Ray Bradbury's latest book "We'll Always Have Paris" has a poem in it at the very back, and it's about America, and basically how good we have it here versus other countries, and the first line is "You are the dream that others dream." (I think). It was a cool poem, and unexpected from Bradbury, and very different from the rest of the book.

And my own personal anecdote: My family lives below what the government deems as the poverty level for our family size, YET: We own our house (with a mortgage), have two paid off vehicles, are able to pay all of our bills, have a TV with (basic) cable, internet access, phone (local and unlimited long), etc, etc, etc. We don't make a lot of money, but we have the wisdom to use it wisely and to live below our means. I knew other "poor" people personally (old neighbors), who were on Medicaid, WIC, foodstamps - YET, because they refused to wisely manage the money they DID make (which was MORE than my family did), they were constantly late on their electricty, rent and phone bills, sometimes by more than a month. BUT they always managed to have their internet, expanded cable, beer, cigarettes and soda in their house at all times. I think much of our "poor" are only poor in knowledge and wisdom.

I've been to South Africa where the people live by the MILLIONS in "shanty towns" - where all you can see from one horizon to the next is cobbled-together one room sheds with no electricity or plumbing or paved roads... Even the WHITE people I met in South Africa don't live much better than my husband and I do, so it's not just the refugees. So it really makes me furious when I talk to someone complaining about how "bad" they have it, and further they complain, but no NOTHING to change their own circumstances. *rolls eyes*

 Dame Edith Sitwell had an interesting saying about such people. ""I am patient with stupidity but not with those who are proud of it."

I didn't know the last one was true. Huh.

Isn't it the truth?  That is very well written.  I wish you had a source on who wrote it.

@jennipenar - Thank you for speaking out about that.  I despise class warfare.  It's a shame people don't know what true poverty is in this country, because we're no where near that.  I mean, our government puts us in debt to make sure everyone has access to basic television for crying out loud.  I didn't realize having access to television was a right.  I hate to sound so bitter, but people like you and me who work hard for what we have are being punished, and that's just unAmerican.  I just enjoyed your comment and hearing your personal story.

The government's initial reaction to everything is throwing money.  Unfortunately for the government and us, most things are not all that helped by the throwing of money.  They are even less helped when that money that is thrown was stolen from other people.

@mrcolorful - Yeah, it's always easy to throw money when it's not your money.

@DirtyAndShaken - True, one of the real problems is that for government money throwing is also the 2nd 3rd and on through the tenth reaction to most problems.  Another problem is that most politicians seem to believe that it IS their money that we have stolen from them.

I would have made sweet love to you had you written this. Too bad.

Rec'ed.

Very, very true.

@ProfessorTom - I'm sure she'll recover from the heartbreak eventually.

@SwordAndSacrifice - I've had girls attempt to commit suicide because I've refused to have sex with them.

There's a huge leap from voting for someone and having them truly represent you. The problem is that the people that want to have power in the government are often exactly the people who shouldn't have it.

And you forgot to mention that while the poor keep getting poorer, the rich also keep getting richer. It's a vicious cycle, and I hope you can at least appreciate the good intentions behind trying to break it.

@GodlessLiberal - But the poor are not getting poorer at all. Right now we are in a recession, so some real poverty exists. But look into it, in the USA the poor would be very well of by most standards and are materially richer now that 30 years ago. And so long as everyone who tries can do well. Why would anyone care about the rich getting richer?

Oh and if the vote for an incombant who suposeidy does not repersent you, you have only yourseld to blame.

@trunthepaige - [But the poor are not getting poorer at all.] I'm not sure if the poor are getting poorer (recession aside), but I know proportionally there are more.

[But look into it, in the USA the poor would be very well of by most standards and are materially richer now that 30 years ago.]
True. But just because I'm healthier than someone dying of cancer doesn't mean I shouldn't try to improve my health.

[And so long as everyone who tries can do well. Why would anyone care about the rich getting richer?]
Because where you end up almost always depends on where you start. If you start out rich it is vastly easier to end up rich. If you start out poor your chances of moving up to middle or upper class are reduced by factors. And the rich getting richer is a problem because they are getting proportionally much richer than anyone else. Compare how much a CEO makes compared to his workers now to that same ratio forty years ago.

I'm not saying that earning money is bad. And I'm not saying I have answers to end this disparity in a fair and productive way. But that isn't to say we should surrender to the status quo.

This is so very true.

During elections, I saw a video from someone who was a part of the Black Republicans and he put it very well.  To paraphrase:  "Who do the Democrats get power from?  The poor.  So to keep their power they need to keep you poor.  Who do the Republicans get power from?  The rich.  So to keep their power they need to keep you rich."  I'm not a Democrat or a Republican but I thought that was some quite interesting food for thought.

This is a very thought-provoking post.

@trunthepaige - Oh and if the vote for an incombant who suposeidy does not repersent you, you have only yourseld to blame.
    - That's true if there's a true alternative, but what happens when there's not a decent alternative? In today's politics, there is an increasing race to the middle ground so there are fewer and fewer issues between political parties so that the public can actually make a decision, knowing that if that party gets into power they will actually try to implement their program.

I was reading another article/opinion piece the other day that says that Congress is hamstringing itself by refusing to even consider any legislation if it runs the risk of filibustering - which is difficult to maintain at the best of times - so nothing gets done. Anything that does get done ends up being toothless simply because it was compromised down to the last detail so that it would pass through the Senate.

A seachange in attitudes needs to occur before we start seeing any signs of recovering, methinks. Spending our way out of this recession/depression is misguided at best, I think...

Yeah, generalizations are great. As far as the points GodlessLiberal brings up, you haven't actually defined anything about what poor actually means or is measured. If we try to make any kind of objective standard, it's really going to also be relative to the conditions of a society. The poor here may be "rich" compared to other countries, but that no less changes the fact that they're poor relative to the living standards of the country they're in. In a sense "comparative poverty" makes about as much sense as "comparative utility." You just cannot effectively (or objectively) do it. You also have to weigh in more than just income, which is the only real comparison you can make by looking at poverty levels or changing poverty levels. As I brought up in the Naturalistic Fallacy in Political Economy blog, there's numerous other standards we have to consider (see indicators toward bottom). There is no "absolute poverty" to measure. The poor here may have, say, a lower life expectancy or literacy rate, while having a larger absolute income per capita compared with a really poor Indian country (see Sen, "Development as Freedom" for more examples).

@GodlessLiberal - I have to say, your last comment articulated some very good points (I like the analogy to cancer and health). First off, you're absolutely correct about starting positions. J Stiglitz did some research justifying that in more abstract terms to economic efficiency, but it makes the analogous argument you did about individuals. Starting points, keeping economic situations the same, will change -everything- in terms of future outcomes. Furthermore, you mention about "surrendering to the status quo." I would say, along with the Naturalistic Fallacy blog referenced in my last comment above, is just another expression of where we tend to make the same fallacy. It is no less a way of saying "these are the facts, therefore [insert normative statement about the political economic environment]." 

I will have to think on this one.

@ProfessorTom - More proof that people who attempt suicide are insane.

The reason us liberals say the poor get poorer is because the minimum wage hasn't kept up with inflation. Technology has made some basic necessities of life cheaper but food has gotten considerably more expensive. There are also way more people considered poor by the American standard now than there has ever been.

Saying it's the poor's fault that they're poor is very naive. They don't have the resources or time to get a proper education for themselves or their children so how do you expect them to make smart decisions when it comes to voting. I know plenty of well educated people who vote without ever reading a congressman's voting record so how do you expect a poor person to do that?

I would have to agree, spot on!  Now, since I hear you like to fish, come take a look at my Hog I caught yesterday. She's a beaut!

Whats pretty crazy about our poor is lots of them pull out a cell phone to use. How does that happen anyway. Some people really are poor because they don't want money bad enough to work for it. They wiil just take whatever is given to them. Sure they will complain, but only because they want more for nothing.

I don't know who wrote that, but its really only the last part that stands out in my mind here. The idea that Americans want America to be like have-not countries is, at best, an exaggeration. I'm really unsure the number of people who want America to be like Namibia (for example) exceeds the number of Ross Perot voters in 1996 (for example.. don't know who the so-called "third-party" candidate in the US is today). But, as much of an exaggeration as that is, I can definitely see the point made here and, at the very least, sympathize with it.