That seems like a simple question - yes, they are poor. It would be miserable and horrific, and they'd be happy every day they were healthy because it would be a pleasant surprise.
And there is nothing romantic about being poor and ignorant at the same time. Even if hot running water is now considered a colonial luxury.
Heating is not a major problem for the poor. Only 12% of the poor were uncomfortably cold for at least 24 hours last winter. (For comparison, 8% of the nation as a whole suffered this problem.)
How many are paying for unnecessary electric bills? Or cars? Or water when they could be digging wells like our forefathers did. Poor people should maintain a 16th century lifestyle.
Seems like the ol' "poor people aren't really poor because they almost all have refrigerators and not even kings had refrigerators two hundred years ago!" argument.
Poor people aren't really poor because they almost all have a refrigerator and an iPhone is not as compelling an argument as you may think. There are very real and very extreme examples* of poverty in this country that are inexcusable.
They're not poor but I think there are few enough people voluntarily consuming less than $12,140 a year when they could live better that I'm comfortable ignoring them in the relevant statistics.
No one said they were poor in that sense. However, there are still poor, even if they are not starving. Economic stress of living on small paycheck to small paycheck is poverty.
Sure if you took their several dollars to another poorer country they would be considered well off, but they can't get there and spend it. They are here, paying for food and lodgings that take almost their entire income.
And there is nothing romantic about being poor and ignorant at the same time. Even if hot running water is now considered a colonial luxury.
reply