The question I have (and I need to read the whole article to find out) is… does the poll (and therefore the opinion of the people) actually reflect the true state of the economy?

One of the “businessisms” that I hate is “Perception is reality.”

What utter foolishness.  Perception is not reality.  Reality is reality.  The difference between our preception and reality is commonly called “sin” or (for you secularists out there) our “degree of psychosis.”

With the media drumming on about how bad the economy is, it is little wonder that people think that the economy is in bad shape.

YBIC,
Phil Snyder

One of the great truisms of polling is that people always think things are worse than they are.  Pessimisim Bias.  That’s why I’d put more weight on, say, predictions from the Fed.

Phil,

I suppose with gasoline prices continuing to rise the perception noted in the article is probably accurate. Higher gasoline prices have the largest impact on the poor and middle class. The macro economic news might be rosey but the micro reality may not.

This kind of reminds me of my grand children’s continuous complaint that “they don’t have enough toys.”  Mind you, they probably have twenty times more toys than I grew up with and easily fifty times more than Great Grampa, who grew up in the Great Depression. But what does that mean in the age of conspicuous consumption?

More ironic is the fact that the 20 - 35 year crowd today can’t stand the idea that they actually have to work for a living. And forget about the words “commitment” or “dedication.” This is such a global truth, regardless of the geographics/demographics that I shouldn’t even have to explain this observation to anyone.

Yes! Prosperity is all a matter of context, isn’t it?

Albeit,

Did you read the same article I did? This was not about 20-35 year olds. It was a general survey.

I’m sure things are very different than when you were young and from your parents and grandparent’s day. But what evidence do you have, besides your contempt for you grandchildren?

Gasoline prices are rising, health insurance is becoming a luxury, home prices are the highest they’ve been. These are not “toys” but necessities in today’s world. You can’t ride a horse anymore- so lacking public transportation, you need a car. You can go to the doctor without insurance, but anything beyond a cold and your talking serious cash. Try to buy a home? Prices are soaring! Even rents are high.

I don’t think it’s about complaining and lack of hard work. Perhaps you should sit down with your grandchildren and tell them your story.

President Bush, upon hearing news of a myriad of reports highlighting the rising economic inequality, acknowledged it himself. “The fact is that income inequality is real,” he told a crowd of Wall Street businessmen. “It’s been rising for more than 25 years.”

Pew Charitable Trusts issued a recent survey “Economic Mobility Project”:
“For more than two centuries,” the report states, “economic opportunity and the prospect of upward mobility have formed the bedrock upon which the American story has been anchored-inspiring people in distant lands to seek our shores and sustaining the unwavering optimism of Americans at home…. But new data suggest this once solid ground may be shifting.”
The report focused principally on intergenerational mobility, defined as the descent or ascent of children on the income spectrum relative to where their parents fell along that spectrum.  Between 1979 and 2004, there has been a nine percent growth in incomes of the poorest fifth of Americans, compared to a 69 percent growth in incomes of the richest fifth . The report also finds a “small, but fairly insignificant, amount of intergenerational progress” in income mobility.

These pollees simply repeat what the media is telling them.

bob lee,
i suspect it is much closer to what they checkbook tells them, rather than what the media tells them

One of the problems with income inequality is that progressive income tax rates don’t make the rich middle class.  They keep the middle class from becomming rich and they keep the lower classes (economically) from becomming middle class.

YBIC,
Phil Snyder

#6 Plainsparson: You stated, “But what evidence do you have, besides your contempt for you grandchildren?”

My grandchildren (all 11 of them) absolutely adore me, and I them. In fact, I’m babysitting two of them at this moment, asl I do five days a week. (So is retirement, I guess.)

“Contempt?”  Let’s try “real heart-felt concern” for this “Walmart” generation.  “Stuff” will not bring them the happiness they seek, while our Lord can and will bring fulfillment.  As with all of us, “the stuff” always seems to get in the way of our getting to God.

If you have a problem with this, well, then that’s yours to deal with.

One big problem in the area in which I live is underemployment.  People are still working but they have taken cuts in hours and/or pay.  Insurance costs are also are having a significant impact.  Most businesses can not afford to offer it and private insurance is beyond the means of most households.  Homeowner’s insurance
( when you can get it) is very high.  We also have the dubious honor of subsidizing the rich owners of coastal dwellings through state’s Citizens Insurance. 

The rapid rise in property values combined with the devaluation of wages has lead to a very shakey economy.  Compounding the problem is the fact that THE industry in this town is construction.  My husband has friends who have been doing just one or two jobs a week.  Fortunately my husband’s employer has a contract with one of the major homebuilders in the area.  They have cut back but the work so far is still steady.

So I would agree the economy is not in the best of health.  But I can still put food on the table,  I have a roof over my head, Ihave running water.  My insurance covers the cost of my MS care and my family is healthy.  That is a heck of a lot more than most of the world can say so I give thanks to the Lord for He is good.  I am certain that no matter what happens the things which are really important will endure.  God is with us, the rest is just piffle.

Folks, there is whole lot of cheap money floating around right now in the form of junk commercial credit.  Corporate Chapter 11’s will soon be on the rise because loans are being made just because people want to make more than the money market will pay.  Loan covenants get looser, credit criteria for business loans gets looser, and soon you have a bunch of defaulted loans.  If you are in bonds below A-, you will soon be in penny stocks post Chapter 11.

Just watch.

Brad hit the nail, so I’ll hit it again. Much of the ‘below prime’ market was nebulously justified upon a tide of rising expectation. With the economy just rising slower and in some regions going sideways, then somebody is going to start selling challenged assets short. So unless boom times return, you will see people saying they are ‘worse off’.

Despite high gasoline prices, the economy is not bad right now.  The data show it.  However, the press wants it to be, so they can blame (guess who?) Mr Bush.  So they manufacture a poll of timid souls, who “feel” it is getting worse.

wilfred, for the wealthy the economy is good - for the middle class, so-so - for the poor in the u.s., it does not come close to any definition of good

The official poverty rate in the U.S. has increased for four consecutive years, from a 26-year low of 11.3% in 2000 to 12.7% in 2004. This means that 37.0 million people were below the official poverty thresholds in 2004. This is 5.4 million more than in 2000. The poverty rate for children under 18 years old increased from 16.2% to 17.8% over that period. This poverty rate for minors in the United States is the highest in the industrialized world, with 30% of African American minors living below the poverty threshold.

that is from our very own Federal Register, not a poll or a survey

my desk dictionary defines timid as:
lacking conviction or boldness or courage
I can think of no more fitting description of how so many of us in faith communities have responded to this tragedy

#16 bob carlton
Thank you for these insightful statistics. Can you tell us:
Of the 37 million, how many are children?
Of the children, how many were born without married parents?
Of the children, how many were born of parents illegally in the USA?

#16- You wrote, “for the wealthy the economy is good - for the middle class, so-so - for the poor in the u.s., it does not come close to any definition of good “

Well, Bob, this pretty much describes the economy of any nation, most of the time. 

About the “rich getting richer”:  In a growing economy, the rich will always get richer, because most of their income is from capital gains & dividends.  This is non-news.  If they aren’t getting richer, things must be so bad, the poor are really in trouble.

wilfred, with your logic, there is no problem with poverty growing in the u.s. and so many of the poor being children ?

the opposite of timid is often seen as swaggering - an apt description of the joy we should all feel in trickle-down economics, right ?

Albeit,
It is becoming unheard-of for someone to stay with the same company, building seniority and pensions, as part of the loyalty and dedication you mentioned. Why? Companies’ bottom line includes the cost savings of replacing older, more “expensive” workers with entry level employees to save money. Circuit City has been taking to task for its very public layoff of most experienced staff but they all do it. Pensions have also been replaced with 401Ks. Americans have to shoulder more and more of their health care and retirement even though salaries haven’t risen much.

My annual raise was always taken up by increases in health-care premiums alone. The health plan would change every few years, too, providing less coverage and more out-of-pocket expense. Add in the increases in gas prices, food, and other essentials and it’s easy to see why people aren’t optimistic. Folks aren’t making it and many are having to resort to using their credit cards to make up the difference, which is a bad plan.

I have a very bad feeling about what may come shortly after the new president is elected. That’s a popular time for the economy to tank and there are so many problems now—the incredible National Debt, the fact that China holds much of our debt and power over our currency, the skyrocketing foreclosures, and the cost of the war. It’s not looking good.

One pundit put it this way (paraphrased), when asked about the rich getting richer (and paying 86% of all taxes in the country, by the way):

If the rich didn’t get richer, they wouldn’t be able to create more jobs. It’s the rich that start companies that hire people. The poor can’t do that, so this is a good thing that will cause the economy to grow and unemployment to go down.

libraryjim,
jesus went out of his way to embrace the poor, the powerless and those on the edges of society

your “pundits” POV seems like a modern-day version of the Sadducees

In terms of the poor children where I live, they are mostly children of single mothers and of illegal immigrants. Often both.
We can’t eliminate poverty with an open border policy because there are always more poor and uneducated coming. It is like being in a boat bailing water when there is a hole in the bottom of the boat.
We can’t eliminate poverty with poor uneducated single mothers having children because they virtually guarentee their children replicate the “culture of poverty”.

deja vu,

i am just speechless.  your statement reflects a pov i can not even imagine

prayers for you

Deja Vu,

I think we are veering off the course of the original article.
However, I’m not sure what you mean. Are you saying there is poverty because of poor uneducated single mothers haveing children and that creates cycles of poverty?

What would you suggest as a solution to this problem/ cycle?

Bob,
It is the rich who create jobs and companies and who get richer doing it.  One of the problems that I have with our tax system is that it keeps middle class people from becoming rich and poor people from becoming middle class.

There is a strong correlation between being raised by a single parent household and poverty.  There is a cycle of poverty and a pathology to persistent poverty that leads to continued poverty in a family and geographical area.

It is also true that Jesus has a strong perference for the poor (especially in Luke).  That is one reason that I am against federal programs to help the poor.  Charity, when given person to person or in a smaller group setting, creates a bond between the giver and receiver and both are advanced spiritually when giving occurs.  Government programs have so many unintended side effects that keep people in poverty that they defeat their purpose and enhance the pathology of poverty.

What do we do?  Well, we should be promoting faith based programs that help people learn to break the pathologies of persistent poverty.  We should be working as individuals, churches, and diocese to bring direct person to person aid to people in poverty.  We should reduce federal government dependence and work to create personal bonds that break a cycle of poverty.  We should work to spread traditional morality such that we don’t have children having children to be raised by one parent only and that encourage and enable boys/men to stay with the women they have children with.

YBIC,
Phil Snyder

Phil,
***  It is the rich who create jobs and companies and who get richer doing it.  ***

The myth that the rich create jobs is an artifact of the last 50 years of Western politics.  In capitalism, we believe that the free market affords the opportunity for job creation.  Depending on where you live in the world, you may think that free markets are a foundation of personal & political freedom.

***  One of the problems that I have with our tax system is that it keeps middle class people from becoming rich and poor people from becoming middle class. ***

So much of Western Churchianity has “bought” in to the consumerism and prosperity myth - that people should get richer, that poor people yearn to be the middle class.

The story in the Gospel of Mark tells a very different story:
Jesus said, “Do you have any idea how difficult it is for people who ‘have it all’ to enter God’s kingdom?” The disciples couldn’t believe what they were hearing, but Jesus kept on: “You can’t imagine how difficult. I’d say it’s easier for a camel to go through a needle’s eye than for the rich to get into God’s kingdom.”

Bob - Capitalism is built on capital - wealth.  Entrepenuerism is a form of capitalism and one of the reasons that I dislike our current tax system is that it punishes and produces barriers to starting your own business - and that is the engine of wealth in a capitalist society. 

I also agree that we have bought into the consumerist lie, but that doesn’t speak to the tax code.  One of the reasons that our economy is perceived to be doing worse is that people are overextending themselves with easy credit - easy credit for homes, easy credit for consumer good, easy credit for everything.  The awareness of heavy debt eats away at a sense of peace about economic well being.

I don’t think poor people yearn to be middle class.  I think they yearn to not be poor. 

I have given some ideas on fighting poverty.  How would you solve the problem of poverty in our society?

YBIC,
Phil Snyder

Hey, Bob.
Show me proof, not hyperbole, that shows rich persons or companies DON’T create jobs.  IF they don’t then who do?

How many people on welfare in the last 20 years had the opportunity to pull themselves out by simply relying on the governmental programs? It seems to me that it was by turning their back on governmental programs (designed to create an endless cycle of dependency) that they found the will to better themselves.

libraryjim,
in capitalism, market demand creates wealth, pure & simple

phil,
tax code reform is likely part of supporting folks as they deal with poverty, but the last 6 years of tax cuts have only made income inequality worse - even GWB admits to this

my ideas for addressing poverty:
on a personal & community level:
* pray for those in need
* tithe time & treasure to those in need
* buying from companies that support fair work
* encourage charity, rather than faith-based programs
* encourage and reward responsibility from fathers
* focus on birth control, rather than abstinence
* engaging faith-based organizations to provide support to inmates and their families
* engage disengaged and disadvantaged young people in energy efficiency and environmental service opportunities

in terms of policy changes:
* A health care plan that would cover every American
* Expansion of the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC)
* Qualified math and science teachers for struggling schools
* Increasing the Pell Grant program
* Prosecution of predatory lenders
* increasing the minimum wage to $7.50
* home visits by registered nurses to new mothers and mothers-to-be through the Nurse-Family Partnership
* A more robust program to support worforce development and training.
* rural small business centers to build rural economies around homegrown businesses

Bob,
1.  Bush’s tax cuts have taken more people off of the income tax roles than any previous administration.  However, the regressive nature of the Social Security (FICA) tax is the bigger problem.
2.  I believe that faith based charities are the best way to help “cure” the pathologies of poverty.
3.  How would health insurance for everyone decrease poverty or stope the cycle of proverty?  The poor and elderly are already covered by government run insurance and believe me, I would rather be under private insurance than government insurance.  Government run health care has all the efficiency of the Post Office with all the compassion of the IRS. 
4.  The minimum wage increases unemployement.  If 7.50 is a good wage, why not $10 or $20 or $50/hr.  Business hire people only to the extent that their skills add more value (or the same value) as they are paid in wage, taxes, and administration.  Increasing the wage means that less people are hired.

I agree with a lot of what you propose, but some of it will cause more problems than they solve. 

YBIC,
Phil Snyder

Phil, one of the things I appreciate about your comments on T1:9 is that you engage.

In terms of #1, job growth during the Bush Regime has be comparatively weak, based on their own stats
In terms of # 2, there is a two way relationship between poverty and ill health, with disease often further impoverishing the poor.  The costs of obtaining health care can also be substantial, both in terms of time off from work and in terms of money spent on services: it is estimated that in the last 10 years, 12% of previously non-poor households slipped into poverty as a result of health-related causes.
In terms of #4, the data is actually mixed, with about 40% of studies saying it decreases employment, 30% saying its has no impact and the rest quite mixed.

I suspect that any substantive attempt at working to ease the apin of poverty would have far-reaching effects on the US gov’t - that seems like part of our calling as people who follow Jesus.

I should add that so much of the Clinton (& Gingrich) approach to incremental change on the domestic front has tended to lessen our hope for real reform. 

I had hope for that when GWB came to office - he had certainly stretched for that in TX, when he was my gov. & Bullock was Lt. Gov.

Sadly, he resorted to the low expectations, fear & trickle down II, wasting a chance to call for real sacrifice.  How could the war on terrorism be a generational battle & at the same time, we have tax cuts for the rich which my daughter’s generation will be paying off.

Phil,
Ill health thrusts people into poverty—fast. I struggled with Lupus for several years before becoming fully disabled. I’ve been so ill that when I applied for Social Security Disability, I was approved in 10 weeks, which is almost unheard of. My condition is serious.

Guess what? Congress passed a law a while back that says anyone who is awarded SSD must wait 2 1/2 years to receive Medicare. I exhausted my savings paying for COBRA insurance premiums, deductibles and copays for the 18 months I had it. After 18 months passed, COBRA ended and now I am stuck with a wretched disease and no insurance. Even if I was able to afford my own private insurance on my $1,100 disability check, none will cover a pre-existing condition.

Phil, to make ends meet, I had to move from my lovely but modest home to a mobile home in a rural area. I paid cash for my mobile home. I am grateful to have somewhere decent to live that fits my new economic reality but I also had to leave behind my friends and support system which has been difficult.

I don’t qualify for Medicaid. Somehow, the government thinks that it is possible for someone to pay for basic needs AND insurance that won’t even cover one’s disabling diseases out of $1,100 per month. I signed up for the free drug programs so I have my medications, and I save a bit of money out of each check so I can pay to go once every three or four months to the rheumatologist who manages my disease. Labwork and tests are out of the question. I’m praying that my condition doesn’t crash before Medicare starts next March.

Please don’t think I am whining; I am simply trying to show how someone who is well-educated, always worked, had some savings and didn’t live extravagantly can see her life change completely. One serious illness in this country will do it. I don’t care how much savings or insurance one has, when insurance is tied to employment and suddenly you can’t work, the medical bills will bankrupt you.

There are millions of people in this country in my situation. I’ve called every state and federal agency I could find for help with insurance and they sadly said, “You fall through the cracks, as do tens of thousands of other people.” It is cruel and no one can fully understand until it happens to them.

(Sorry, hit enter by mistake!)

You say you think that faith-based charities should handle all poverty. When poverty comes from an unexpected, serious illness that strikes in the prime of one’s life, how can charities help? Find doctors who will treat millions of people for free? Find hospitals that will provide tests, surgeries and treatments for free? Even the not-for-profit, church-based hospitals cannot offer free care to the many who need it. I’ve had to go to the emergency room recently to have a bad flare-up stabilized but I can’t afford the specialized follow-up care I require.

We are one of the few (perhaps the only) industrialized country that does not provide health care to all of its citizens. My best friend in England said she used to complain about the NHS until she came here for an extended visit and saw what happens here. Now she thanks God every day for her system.

Teatime

We are one of the few (perhaps the only) industrialized country that does not provide health care to all of its citizens.

If that is true, why is it that unbelievable numbers of Canadian’s purchase health insurance in the U.S. and constitute a very large number of the patients receiving treatment in hospitals along the border?

By example, a good friend of mine, who is an Anglican priest in Canada, had to wait 21 months for knee replacement surgery.  His knee was locked up leaving him totally debilitated for that whole period of time. To my understanding, his situation was anything but unique.

Personally, I rather like Mitt Romney’s approach to health care as Governor, which, incidentally, is being adopted in similar form by more and more States.  This seems to be a worthy balance between corporate and government involvement.

There was a study released recently (I am looking for the source, as I only heard it in passing) that stated that critical care patients in the U.S. have a 45% better chance of survival than similar patients in countries with socialized medical care (most notably U.K. and Canada).
When I find the link, I’ll post it!

Under the Canadian system, they are permitted to come to the U.S. for critical surgery (and Canada will pay for it) if they would have to wait too long there. A friend of mine just did that for orthopedic surgery.

Regardless, our government has ruled that if you are seriously ill and disabled, you have to fend for yourself for 30 months before you are entitled to ANY health care coverage. I have had government employees tell me how cruel this policy is to the most vulnerable citizens, and it is immoral. Comparing it to any other system still does not make it right or lessen its impact on the people who are affected. I pray that no one here will also face this serious problem.

Jim, I think you need to look at this report:
http://www.upi.com/Health_Business/Briefing/2007/05/15/study_us_care_lags_industrial_countries/5297/

Hey, you show me your studies, I’ll show you mine.  Stalemate?

I’m still trying to track down the article in a web site format.  But the author was economist James Bartholomew and it appeared in the London Spectator, Feb. 2005 (kind of dated). 

A summary can be found here which says in part:

In “Die in Britain, survive in U.S.,” the cover article of the February 2005 issue of The Spectator, a British magazine, James Bartholomew details the downside of Britain’s universal health care system.
Among women with breast cancer, for example, there’s a 46 percent chance of dying from it in Britain, versus a 25 percent chance in the United States. “Britain has one of worst survival rates in the advanced world,” writes Bartholomew, “and America has the best.”

If you’re a man diagnosed with prostate cancer, you have a 57 percent chance of it killing you in Britain. In the United States, the chance of dying drops to 19 percent. Again, reports Bartholomew, “Britain is at the bottom of the class and America is at the top.”

Explains Bartolomew: “That is why those who are rich enough often go to America, leaving behind even private British health care.” The reason isn’t that we sue more in America and scare doctors into efficiency, or that our medical schools are better. It’s more simple than that. “In America, you are more likely to be treated,” writes Bartholomew, “and going back a stage further, you are more likely to get the diagnostic tests which lead to better treatment.”

and

Taken as a whole, Britain’s universal health care system has evolved into a ramshackle structure where tests are underperformed, equipment is undersupplied, operations are underdone, and medical personnel are overworked, underpaid and overly tied down in red tape. In other words, your chances of coming out of the American medical system alive are dramatically better than in Britain.

“Having a diagnosis test beyond an X-ray in Britain tends to be regarded as a rare, extravagant event, only done in cases of obvious, if not desperate, need,” writes Bartholomew. “In Britain, 36 percent of patients have to wait more than four months for non-emergency surgery. In the U.S., 5 percent do. In Britain, 40 percent of cancer patients do not see a cancer specialist.”

So that’s one view.

And I’m not even sure if this is the article mentioned on the news cast! They never repeat it when I’m at a place I can take notes!

Jim,
The millions in my situation risk dying every day. We would gladly accept a “ramshackle” system rather than nothing at all. Sorry, but when you’re critically ill, have drained your savings to pay for care as long as you could, and desperately need health coverage, it’s depressing when those not affected by the problem trot out everything they can find to scare people into keeping the status quo. That’s been happening for the past 15 years and it’s wrong.

I am well aware that nothing can change in time to help me but I pray for reform to help all those who will find themselves in a similar situation. And I wish people could understand—without it happening to them—that poverty is just one serious, chronic disease away. As a state ombudsman told me, when one is stricken and can’t work, even a millionaire can be sent into bankruptcy fast.

Teatime,
I will add you to my prayer list, but I’m not addressing situations like yours, but health care in general, to whit: private vs socialized.
From what I read about socialized health care in Britian and Canada, you would be in even a worse position than you are here.  And that is truly sad.

Yes, we need reform. And need it desperately.  But why should we turn to a failing system as an example of what WE should try?  Aren’t we smart enough to put our heads together and improve on what we have in place?

Turning from health care, when my wife and I had our first baby, we were in a very difficult position financially, so we went on the WIC program.  I must tell you that we were treated like dirt, and put through an inquisition everytime we went in for our well-baby checkups, etc.  (I think it was because we were not the usual racial type that was represented at that office, but I can’t prove it. So the thought was, “They must be trying to take advantage of the system!” At least that’s how we were treated.)  Because of this treatment, we chose not to continue after six months and cope the best we could.  It was difficult, but we made it.

From: “Your Guide to U.S. Gov Info / Resources”, written by Robert Longley

Census Overestimates Number of Uninsured Americans
The Census Bureau has acknowledged that it overestimated the number of Americans without any form of health insurance by 1.8 million people. In August 2006, the Census Bureau reported that 46.6 million, or about 15.9 percent of the population, went without health insurance in 2005. Now the Bureau says, their revised estimates (2007) show 44.8 million uninsured people, 15.3 percent of the population.

The number is much less than most people assume. What is not mentioned in these particular stats are the various government sponsored programs, such as “The Well Child Program” in my State, which assures that virtually every single child is covered. 

Then there is “MediCare”, which is available to the elderly and S.S. eligible disabled. Virtually anyone in the U.S. who has “End Stage Renal Desease” qualifies for “MediCare.”  Medicaid (for those who are living in poverty) is already the most costly part of my county’s annual budget and quickly raising local taxes to unaffordable levels (Some of the highest in the nation.)

Obviously, immediate attention needs to be directed toward meeting the needs of that 15.2 percent of the population not covered. However, I’m not certain a complete overhaul to a new National Health System for everyone is the answer.

# 24. bob carlton wrote:

deja vu,
i am just speechless.  your statement reflects a pov i can not even imagine
prayers for you

I don’t know where you live bob,  but where I live, we have a lot of child poverty due to children born to single mothers and children born to illegal immigrant families.
Please pray to God for those children.
Please do not pray to God for me to be blinded or to lie about what I see.

FYI:  When I went to public high school in Los Angeles, our schools were the envy of the nation. Now there is a 40% high school drop out rate. Maybe you can’t imagine my point of view because you have not lived through such a rapid cultural change in your region.