> In a message dated 9/6/05 8:50:04 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> > I'm not sure the premise is entirely correct.? About 30% of the
> > (former?) population of New Orleans is below the federal poverty line,
> > yet 80-90%
> >
>
> The federal poverty line is just a politically-determined level at one time
> useful to liberal Democrats for beating middle-income Americans into a state
> of
> guilt in which the liberal Democrats could more easily consfiscate more of
> their income and give it to people who vote for liberal Democrats.
Yeah, yeah, I know, but I don't see how this is relevant to my point.
My point was that a lot of people stayed because they wanted to, not
because the didn't have the means to leave.
> The
> American poverty line today is someone around the (real) median income of
> Americans
> in 1950.
Actually, I just checked this, and it's not quite correct. At
least, not if you believe that Census and CPI numbers are pretty much
valid, rather than politically determined.
2005 Poverty line for family of 4: $19,350
Convert this to 1950$ using CPI: $ 2,396
Median family income in 1950: $ 3,319
So when adjusted for inflation, the mediam family income in 1950 was
38% higher than the poverty line in 2005. The median family income
for 2004 (latest available on short notice) is $44,389, which is 136%
higher than the 2005 poverty line (adjusted to 2004$).
I used the think that the poverty line was contructed in such a way
that about 12-13% of the families were always considered poor, but now
that I try, I've had trouble verifying this.
For what it's worth, you can't actually check to see what government
poverty line was in 1950, since they've only been calculating it since
1964.
See
http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/encyclopedia/p/po/poverty_line_in_the_united_states.htm
http://www.census.gov/hhes/poverty/povmeas/papers/elastap4.html
The first official poverty line for the United States was
developed by Mollie Orshansky for the (An independent government
agency responsible for the social security system) Social
Security Administration in 1964. It was amended, then later
adopted for the (36th President of the United States; was
elected Vice President and succeeded Kennedy when Kennedy was
assassinated (1908-1973)) Lyndon Johnson administration's (Click
link for more info and facts about War on Poverty) War on Poverty
as a general statistic on poverty. Orshansky's definition
calculated the minimum amount of (The financial gain (earned or
unearned) accruing over a given period of time) income a family
unit would need to purchase food for all family members to eat
the cheapest nutritionally acceptable diet described by the
(Click link for more info and facts about United States
Department of Agriculture) United States Department of
Agriculture. She then multiplied that number by three, the
average percentage that U.S. families spent on food. Orshansky
did not intend this figure to measure the minimum income
necessary for survival. Rather, she meant this as a statistical
tool in order to facilitate the studying of issues of
poverty. (From Fisher, 1992)
