The Shifting Demographics of Poverty

[one...two...tree 2,762]

There was some discussion on Twitter earlier today about one of my favorite themes—the large reduction in poverty associated with the Great Society and the uptick in poverty circa 1980. I’ve been persuaded that the best way to understand this is by looking at the Census Bureau’s numbers on “Poverty Status by Age, Race, and Hispanic Status” and “Poverty Status by Family Relationship” that you can download here .

Here’s a combined chart:

You see a lot of different things happening here. One is poverty among seniors declining thanks to Great Society expansion of retirement support programs. The other is a jump in poverty for non-seniors during the 1978-82 period that persisted throughout the Reagan-Bush years. This was in part driven by an increase in the proportion of female-headed households without husbands, but the same pattern appears within that subset. We then had a giant reduction in poverty among this group in the 1990s which was a combination of strong economic performance, “welfare reform,” and also the fact that the Clinton administration really wanted to make welfare reform work so threw lots of stuff—EITC expansion, SCHIP, etc.—at making it work. Then we saw a slow, steady erosion of that progress.

link

[^_^ 5,021]

I sense a theme. Republican bad, Democrat good.

Edited September 17, 2010 by Legacy member

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I sense a theme. Republican bad, Democrat good.

Policies, amigo....policies.

[Ban Hammer 13,360]

I sense a theme. Republican bad, Democrat good.

you shoulda caught on to that years ago.

[mawilson 2,133]

I sense a theme. Republican bad, Democrat good.

All I see are seniors getting richer and richer. Single mothers - not so much.

Poverty Status by Age, Race, and Hispanic Status

Hispanic Status?

[Jenn! 918]

Hispanic Status?

Right, implying that it could change.

[JohnSmith2007 353]

Policies, amigo....policies.

What do I see? In 2006 every category except seniors taking a big jump. What happened in 2006? The dems took over congress. So for once I agree with you, policies, amigo....policies.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Is this the "change" Obama promised?

[Pooky 3,795]

I know your trying to be funny ....BUT

Please bare with me

Where is Cleo and Mad to call you a Bigot.

Oh, FFS. It's "Please BEAR with me!"

I really DO NOT want to see the two of you getting naked in the P&R forum

[Ban Hammer 13,360]

Oh, FFS. It's "Please BEAR with me!"

I really DO NOT want to see the two of you getting naked in the P&R forum

and all this time i thought you was pooky bare.

[Pooky 3,795]

and all this time i thought you was pooky bare.

Oi! Watch it, you!

The only person needing to get bare round here is the Ewok, but no-one will let me near him with me shaver.

[Ban Hammer 13,360]

Oi! Watch it, you!

The only person needing to get bare round here is the Ewok, but no-one will let me near him with me shaver.

ewok may be a she, hard to tell with all that fur.

[evli1966 88]

Oh, FFS. It's "Please BEAR with me!"

I really DO NOT want to see the two of you getting naked in the P&R forum

Why thanks for the correction even if your a bit over zealous about it.

just a correction we might be sexy when Baring it all.

and all this time i thought you was pooky bare.

You can thank old white racists for that.

And not a word about the racist comment that was made.

It reinforces that when you call others Bigots it carries no weight.

But you sure had to input your own racist view though.

Edited September 19, 2010 by evli1966

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

What racist comment? I didn't read the whole thread.

The fact remains that those who decry inequality because they can't call Obamas wife a monkey without being accused of racism are ignoring why that state of affairs exists on the first place. How is pointing that out racist, Evli? I'm really looking forward to seeing you dig yourself out of that particular hole.

Have at it.

Edited September 19, 2010 by Its a MADHOUSE

[evli1966 88]

What racist comment? I didn't read the whole thread.

The fact remains that those who decry inequality because they can't call Obamas wife a monkey without being accused of racism are ignoring why that state of affairs exists on the first place. How is pointing that out racist, Evli? I'm really looking forward to seeing you dig yourself out of that particular hole.

Have at it.

The comment was in the post you quoted.

The point is you call anyone else a bigot that would use such terms to personally attack someone else or their family; in previous cases it is all about calling others Bigots when their point of view differs from yours or more recently muslims.

Specifically calling a black person Monkey is a racist comment you know this as does everyone else yet you avoided it in this situation because of sensitivity to IP from other topics in which you defend his/her point of view.

But if you want I can send you to a number of places here in the USA and you can call a black person a monkey and we will most likely never here from you again.

Now for your OLD WHITE comment it is in itself a bigoted comment your suggesting that it was only old white racist people in the white house or in congress.

The state of affairs does not exist because our president and family is black nor is it because the previous president or family was white nr if it remains will it matter if the presidents family is of any other ethnic origin.

To make racist comments when trying to debate or discus the state of affairs is garbage and prevents open dialogue as does to falsly accuse someone because their views differ with your own.

The OP is posting a graph which shows a correlation of the shift in poverty over the years that ports that was better during the Demo president years but ignoring the fact that during the most severe increases it was a demo majority congress.

Hole I see no stinking hole except the one your trying to climb out of.

Edited September 19, 2010 by evli1966