Poverty now comes with a color TV

Census data find an ever-growing material prosperity, with formerly high-dollar luxury items now commonplace in even poor households.

By The Christian Science Monitor

In case there was any doubt, a study has confirmed that Americans have a lot of what economists know, technically, as stuff.

The computer has surpassed the dishwasher as a standard household appliance. The poorest Americans have posted a sharp rise in access to air conditioning. The richest Americans still own the most cars, but they are choosing to own slightly fewer of them than they used to.

These Census findings, released in December, were true even before gifts piled up under trees.

These nuggets provide a glimpse of American lifestyles that isn't captured in the raw data of monthly economic reports. At a time of concern about the standard of living for future generations, the study offers hopeful signs of tangible progress, even as the pace of income growth has slowed in recent years.

It's only one piece of the overall picture of economic progress and doesn't resolve the question about future generations. But it confirms that what the Census Bureau calls "material well-being" abounds for regular folks today in ways that Louis XIV -- for all his palaces, silk stockings and ruffled finery -- could barely have imagined.

True, most of us don't have an entourage of fawning servants, and while U.S. homes have expanded in square footage, they hardly rival Versailles. But modern appliances, in many ways, are robotic servants who sometimes break down but have yet to stage an organized revolt.

Electronics aren’t closing the wealth gap
Wealth remains highly stratified. For example, the wealthiest 10% of Americans had 2.4 cars per "consumer unit" (essentially a household or an individual living on his or her own) in 2002, the most recent year in the Census study. That's down slightly from 1992, when they had 2.5 cars per household. The bottom 10% of the income ladder averaged just 0.6 cars per household in 2002, the same as 1992.

Still, by almost all measures, the data show rising well-being for all of society. And while the wealth gap may not be narrowing, the rich-poor gap in lifestyles has narrowed substantially since 1992 when measured in many of these tangible items.

"In terms of the items people have ... it amazes me the number of people who are at or near the poverty line that have color TVs, cable, washer, dryer, microwave," says Michael Cosgrove, an economist at the University of Dallas in Irving, Texas. That's not to ignore the hardships of poverty, he adds, "but the conveniences they have are in fact pretty good."

Poor, but more comfortable
The study doesn't explore the happiness factor -- whether the growing material prosperity is actually making people feel more satisfied with their lives. While economists tend to focus on things that can be measured in dollars and cents, the spiritual side of the economy has begun to garner more attention. That's partly because some research has found that once people gain a modest sufficiency in goods, further increases in income don't result in rising happiness.

Census researchers don't have a happiness index, but they are exploring aspects of well-being that go beyond physical goods. For example, nearly 13% of Americans have incomes that place them below the official poverty line. But what does that mean in terms of their daily lives? The fact that 95% of them may have a refrigerator tells only part of the story.

The Census report also compares, from 1992 through 1998, people's perceptions of whether basic needs were being met. More than 92% of Americans below the poverty line said they had enough food, as of 1998. Some 86% said they had no unmet need for a doctor, 89% had no roof leaks, and 87% said they had no unpaid rent or mortgage.

More computers than dishwashers
While some improvement was found in all those measures over that period, shortfalls obviously remain. But in many goods, the progress is significant for poor and rich alike.

Two-thirds of those in poverty had air conditioners in 1998, up from 50% in 1992. Personal computers have grown increasingly ubiquitous. Where fewer than 20% of homes had them in 1992, nearly 60% did in 2002 (more than own dishwashers).

That doesn't mean all have equal access to PC-enabled economic empowerment.

"What good is a computer without Internet access?" asks Paul Saffo, director of the Institute for the Future. In this networked age, he's only exaggerating a bit.

While high-speed Internet access is spreading, the potential rise of free wireless networks in cities could help many low-income Americans, he says.

Even with the rise interactive tools like computers and media players -- alas, Apple iPods aren't included in the Census survey yet -- the preferred appliance of couch potatoes is also spreading. There are now 2.1 TV sets per household, up from 1.6 in 1992.

The Census report doesn't measure environmental factors. The U.S. routinely consumes more resources per capita than most other nations.

http://moneycentral.msn.com/content/inv ... p?GT1=7621

DVD players are more common in poor households than "well-to-do" ones. After working with some of these families, I don't know how to chock this up to an individual's bad choices. Most that I saw got it from a cousin and never asked questions.

I think places like Rent-a-Center have something to do with it too. You never see those places in richer neighborhoods.

US poor ain't the same as Africa poor.

I wonder how many of these items are bought and paid for or are actually purchased with credit cards. Over the past few years people have been buying beyond there means at record rates, house, cars, electronics, ect. US Consumer debt is around 9 trillion dollars, short term(credit cards ect.) and long term debt(house loans etc).

I have to agree that most Americans make really stupid choices. If I drive through lower class sections of the city I'll see some of the most run-down houses with trash in the yard and dirty kids playing outside. But the one thing they all do have is that satellite dish hanging off the roof.

I'm not really sure how we can solve this. Having a president who doesn't equate patriotism to buying things at a mall would be a start.

When I worked at Blockbuster, we had people swear that they could use food stamps to rent movies.

yeah the projects around here look like shit, but you see the satelite dishes hangin from all..a friend of mine went to a party in the pj's not too long ago and said the people who lived there had a plasma tv and leather couches..fucking scumbags dont pay rent there, but can afford this..thanks to my mondays pay..assholes

Let's not also forget the paradox of the poor here actually having more trouble with obesity than starvation.

That sums up the problem quite nicely.

In a land where you can eat out for less than an hour's wages, you have to question why this food is so cheap. But you don't, because it's cheap and it's easy. Kids love Mickey D's etc. I also think that many people of a more conservative viewpoint tend to look at the things poor people have than what they don't have.

It's really easy to criticise someone for having cable TV, but think of how many of these households have families. Raising a child with less money than their classmates etc is difficult; cable TV is a (fairly) affordable status symbol, McDonald's is cheaper, quicker and easier than buying in, and so forth.

Basically the point I want to make is that people don't do these apparently silly and lazy things just for the craic; most people aren't stupid or nasty, they just don't have the resources to fulfill their own wishes, never mind those of their children, and I honestly believe that most people just want what's best for the kids, even if they don't know what that is. Having said that, I've seen first hand a bunch of parents spending their dole money on cigarettes and booze and neglecting their children as well, so I'm not trying to be naieve and saying everyone's like that.

Obviously they weren't skilled enough in using their food stamps yet or they could have easily bartered them for cash. I spent two years working in welfare, food stamps, medicaid, etc and you quickly realize the paradox they're talking about here. A lot of these people can't hold down jobs, haven't got decent transportation, a reasonable place to live and certainly aren't self-sustaining in fulfilling their needs but they will almost invariably have the following items: cell phone, cable or satelite tv, video game console, cigarettes and alcohol. I'm probably forgeting something but those are the staples. Oh, and I don't know how many people would get pissed that their cable bill (digital cable with premium channels and high speed internet no less) wasn't a deducion off of their living expenses when it came time to calculate their food stamp alotment. So yeah, no big surprises here.

i love the "satelite dishes" arguement...

$30 a month for an entire entertainment budget is not bad- if it makes you stay in one night a month, it pays for itself- its not like these are 1980's style expensive systems... you can get the system for free as long as you agree to pay the $30 a month.

Bad choices are soooo commonplace in this city, that this study doesn't surprise me a bit. It's like, it's not about what you have, it's about what it LOOKS like you have.
I live in a good neighborhood in Philly. Mostly middle or upper-middle class. But I've got plenty of open access to people from all over.
There's an outlet mall less than a mile from me. On the weekends, they run day-trip busses up from the ghettos. Hundreds of them. 90% of the stores are geared not towards the demographic of people in the mall's neighborhood - but instead to the demographic of people who are bussed in.

Why? Because they spend more. I'll walk into the Polo outlet (HA! Right. like I can get passed the front doorway with the rap music assaulting my ears) take a look at a pair of jeans that are $60 DISCOUNTED, sneer, and walk the other way. But the ghetto folk - the same ones on Welfare, foodstams and the like - WILL buy them. In piles. It's more important to them to have a pair of $300 sneakers than to use that same money to feed or heat their home.
They'll whine about being 'kept down' with the same mouth full of $500 gold 'fronts'.

It's all fucking rediculous. So, yeah, of course they're going to have a TV. But don't assume that because they have it that they used 'extra' income to buy it. Or legal means to obtain it, for that matter.

Honestly, this is why I think that people who speak of "evil capitalism" and Bush's "war on the poor" so friggin' ridiculous.
There are, literally, billions of people around the world who wish they were poor like "poor" Americans.
Help is available here to anyone who needs it and anyone with a modicum of sef-motivation can be successful ( there are, of course, many definitions of success).

Tough to disagree with this.

It's totally out of charater for me to disagree with any of this, but I do believ that there are people who start so low on the totem poll (drug addicted parents, whatever) that they cannot achieve what most of us would consider "failure".

It's not Bush's fault, and certainly not captialisms fault, but I have never really figured out who to fix it.*

*with the exception of intellegence testing people before they can have children.

People should have to obtain their reproductive rights like you would a driver's license (except the test would be harder).

Even if the test were no harder than a driving test ... it would eliminate millions of births per year.

Damn tough. Poor Americans are better off than many in this world.

To play devil's advocate though, when my family came to this country in '61, they lived in low income housing. It wasn't the ghetto, but it was close. It was inner-city and the projects were just around the corner. I wonder how many people (in general, not at RM) really understand what it's like there. For about 10 years, my mother worked for the public school system in Meriden, CT, a small city with a very large minority population. It's a much different mindset in places like this. The quality of education goes way down in poor places. Schools are understaffed, and the percentage of children with behavior problems is very high. Teachers spend half their day minimizing distractions. Then these kids reach high school and realize that you can make more money than God (to them anyway) selling guns or drugs. This is a problem that's gone on for a long time. It's not as easy as saying 'anyone can succeed here'. People have to believe it.

Where as the average American views success as owning a home in a nice neighborhood, driving a late model car, going to college, etc...., many people who live in poverty do not.

For some people living in the projects of an inner-city, the idea of going to college and owning a home one day is not reality. It's going to cost you around $40k to go to a state school here for 4 years. A modest home outside a city will cost you $200k easily. These are big numbers to most people, nevermind poor people. I'm not saying it isn't possible, and people do it, but to the average person living in these places, these dreams are just a waste of time. They measure their success with this "stuff" talked about in the article. A home with a nice car is gonna run you $200-300k. A used car with 4 chrome rims, a system, and designer clothing costs much less, and makes you look important-- which is one way I believe they measure success. These are bad choices to you and I, but it's their way of life for right now.

Who's fault is it? I'm not sure exactly. It isn't mine, or GW's, or the republicans or democrats. I believe things in the ghetto will change only when the people there want it. Maybe when hip hop stars start playing a larger part in the communities they came from instead of showing their gold-plated bathrooms on TV, things will change. Maybe if the people who leave the ghetto and become successful go back and show them that it's possible, things will improve there.

As for the color TV thing, come on. It's a TV. Even the poorest American can get a tv from the pawn shop for $50.

Good point .

While there isn't really a "ghetto" where I live, the whole region is pretty economically depressed compared to the rest of the country, and the amount of suped up late model Civics and Cavaliers is jaw dropping.