Raising the Issue: Poverty as ?Relative?; Poverty as a ?Choice?

You and I have agreed that our ?blogs? tend to go on a little too long, so I?ll try and keep this relatively brief.

Your first main point seems to be that because poverty is a relative term, it has lost its meaning and usefulness. I read you to say two main things here: 1) It?s inaccurate and unhelpful to describe someone as living ?in poverty? unless they are essentially hungry and homeless or close to it; and 2) The definition of poverty has become dramatically inflated so that tons of people leading comfortable middle class lives are being classified as poor.

To this, I would offer two responses: 1) Definitions of poverty must, of course, evolve over time. Seventy years ago, a huge percentage of North Carolinians used outdoor privies and never saw a doctor. Nonetheless, in their time they were quite likely of middle or average income. I can?t believe that you would consider such a state of affairs to amount to anything but poverty today. 2) Having said this, it is also inaccurate to imply ? as you have ? that vast numbers of poor North Carolinians are out there living ?la vita loca.? Any honest look at the actual income levels we?re talking about here ($10,000, $12,000, $15,000 per year) make clear that folks in poverty are not buying homes and cars.

As to your second point about unfortunate personal choices being the big cause of poverty, here are two more thoughts: 1) As you admit, the issue of personal choice as the cause of poverty is of no relevance to the 13 million American children living in poverty. Whether it?s their parents? fault or the economy?s makes no difference to a poor kid without access to basic health care or a safe and decent place to live. Also, as long as we?re on the subject of choice, I?d love to know your position on comprehensive sex education in the schools. 2) If choice is the big cause of poverty, is it your contention that recent growth in the numbers of poor people is a result of an increase in poor decision making by individuals? If this is so, how does this jive with shrinking teen pregnancy rates and improved education outputs? Isn?t the declining economy a much more logical and obvious culprit? And if this is the case, isn?t it also logical and obvious to use the most powerful tool at our common disposal, the government, to try and do something about the situation?