How poor are those below the poverty line really? About 81% own a cell phone...

Here are percentages of different items that people below the poverty line own in 2011:

Refrigerator: 97.8%

Stove: 96.6%

Television: 96.1%

Microwave: 93.2%

Air Conditioner: 83.4%

DVD Player: 83.2%

Cell Phone: 80.9%

Computer: 58.2%

Dish Washer: 44.9%

For context, compare that to the average of all Americans in 1992... about 20 years ago:

Refrigerator: 99.1%

Stove: 99.0%

Television: 96.6%

Microwave: 82.2%

Air Conditioner: 68.8%

VCR: 73.8%

Cell Phone: N/A

Computer: 20.7%

Dish Washer: 49.3%

Source: http://www.census.gov/hhes/well-being/publications/extended-11.html

So?

Besides the TV and DVD player, all those things seem quite necessary to not make life needlessly more difficult.

I don't get the point of this thread other than you feel like shitting on poor people as if there's not already enough of that on this forum.

So?

Storm_Marine

Governmnet programs give them cell phones.

Cellphones are cheaper than most home phones now.foxhound_fox

I'm not sure of the point of this thread. Cell phones can be bought cheap and many people can only afford pre-paid phones and buy minutes when they can. Plus many people don't even have landlines, poor or not if you want to connect with people a cell might be the cheapest way to go. I work in a county hospital with a lot of patients below poverty level. Many have cell phones, but no car, or cable, or internet service, or many other things others take for granted.

jesus h christ, have you ever heard of context?

that literally means nothing.

Yeah, f*ck the impoverished! That's what's wrong with the country, poor people being able to call their kids.

inb4 BDM004 realizes the point he was trying to make is getting demolished and tries to play it off by pretending to be a neutral party only posting an article for discussion.

Yeah, f*ck the impoverished! That's what's wrong with the country, poor people being able to call their kids.

PatchMaster

jesus h christ, have you ever heard of context?

that literally means nothing.

mrbojangles25

I dug up the numbers. Draw your own conclusions.

[QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]

jesus h christ, have you ever heard of context?

that literally means nothing.

BMD004

I dug up the numbers. Draw your own conclusions.

And my prediction comes true...

Most of those are not expensive items anymore. DVD player? Really? Those things are like twenty bucks now.monkeytoes61

Extremely wealthy people in the 1800's didn't live nearly as good as the average American today, even though they were a lot richer and could afford anything.

I was making 10 bucks an hour at my first job, that is well below the poverty line...

...my boss got me a cell phone

...the house I moved into had a fridge, range, microwave, washer, and dryer (pretty much every house I have moved into since this first house has had the same setup as well).

...handwashing dishes aint bad, who needs a dishwasher.  After all, I was doing that as my job prior.

...I took my parents old TV that had been sitting in the basement for a couple years

...DVD players cost like 40 bucks

...I build my own PCs, and upgrade them over time for small amounts of money, so that is no big expense.

Is this something exclusive to California or something? Does the rest of the country suck?  Don't the houses you rent come with these things?  I Thought this was commonplace and, thus, this was another pointless BMD thread

[QUOTE="BMD004"]

[QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]

jesus h christ, have you ever heard of context?

that literally means nothing.

GreySeal9

I dug up the numbers. Draw your own conclusions.

And my prediction comes true...

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="BMD004"]I know. I did that on purporse.

 

I dug up the numbers. Draw your own conclusions.

BMD004

And my prediction comes true...

Your thread title clearly implies what you were arguing: that poor people in the US are not really that poor because they can afford items like cellphones and DVD players.

[QUOTE="PatchMaster"]

Yeah, f*ck the impoverished! That's what's wrong with the country, poor people being able to call their kids.

AdamPA1006

Judging by the thread title to me looks like the TC is questioning how poor people really are.

Goddamn, this is dumb even by TC's usual standards....

100% of the poor have clothing. WTF is wrong with them? If they can afford clothes, why should I help them get food? I have to pre-order a PS4 and have no time for this sh!t. Don't even get me started on those extra kidneys. God damn it, poor people.

[QUOTE="BMD004"]

[QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]

jesus h christ, have you ever heard of context?

that literally means nothing.

GreySeal9

I dug up the numbers. Draw your own conclusions.

And my prediction comes true...

seriously.  Every.  Damn.  Time.

[QUOTE="BMD004"]

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

And my prediction comes true...

GreySeal9

Your thread title clearly implies what you were arguing: that poor people in the US are not really that poor because they can afford items like cellphones and DVD players.

Owning a cellphone proves not one iota of a shit, since a pre-paid will run about $10-15 a month.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="BMD004"]I know. I did that on purporse.

 

I dug up the numbers. Draw your own conclusions.

mrbojangles25

And my prediction comes true...

seriously.  Every.  Damn.  Time.

[QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

And my prediction comes true...

BMD004

seriously.  Every.  Damn.  Time.

no, i came here for an enlightening discussion or a rowdy debate, but as usual you throw in the towel and go passive aggressive like some jaded 60 year old wife.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="BMD004"]What point was I trying to make? I'd like to hear your thoughts.

BMD004

Your thread title clearly implies what you were arguing: that poor people in the US are not really that poor because they can afford items like cellphones and DVD players.

lol. Dat damage control.

[QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

And my prediction comes true...

BMD004

seriously.  Every.  Damn.  Time.

In fairness, you could also make good threads. Now, of course, you are not obligated to since this is a free country, and it is your decision, but it might be something to consider.

[QUOTE="BMD004"]

[QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]

seriously.  Every.  Damn.  Time.

mrbojangles25

no, i came here for an enlightening discussion or a rowdy debate, but as usual you throw in the towel and go passive aggressive like some jaded 60 year old wife.

I don't particularly have an opinion one way or another at the start, but I will read what other say and jump in when I see something I want to respond to.

Goddamn, this is dumb even by TC's usual standards....

worlock77

I shudder to think of how stupid things will get when Nibroc finds this thread.

[QUOTE="PatchMaster"]

Yeah, f*ck the impoverished! That's what's wrong with the country, poor people being able to call their kids.

AdamPA1006

Sorry, but I'm gonna attribute that to the advancement (and arguable necessity) of technology in modern times, not the goodness in the hearts of corporate officers. Nice try though.

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

Goddamn, this is dumb even by TC's usual standards....

GreySeal9

I shudder to think of how stupid things will get when Nibroc finds this thread.

Like a punch to the brainstem...

[QUOTE="AdamPA1006"][QUOTE="PatchMaster"]

Yeah, f*ck the impoverished! That's what's wrong with the country, poor people being able to call their kids.

PatchMaster

Sorry, but I'm gonna attribute that to the advancement (and arguable necessity) of technology in modern times, not the goodness in the hearts of corporate officers. Nice try though.

I heard something interesting before... who helped more people: Mother Teresa or Steve Jobs?

People would generally say Mother Teresa. But if you think about it, Steve Jobs created millions of jobs, and enriched the lives of millions with inventions like the IPhone. They find ways to make things cheaper and cheaper because it means more money for the company which means more money for them. So by pursuing their own self-interest, they invent things, create jobs, and give people what they want.

Refrigerator: Who the F doesn't have a fridge? Rentals come with them included. I don't know anyone who doesn't own a fridge if they aren't homeless. Stove: Ditto. Television: Pretty easy to get a TV today, people give away tube TVs all the time, some people will even pay you to take it away. Microwave: They go for as little as $20 and are faster and more energy efficient than an oven in some cases. Poor people eat a lot of food that isn't worse for wear having been microwaved. Air Conditioner: This one might be a luxury, but people below the poverty line probably rent, and technically the landlord owns it. DVD Player: You can buy these for $5. Cheaper than a McDonalds meal. Cell Phone: US cellphone rates are honestly really good compared to what we have here in Canada. Sometimes it would make more sense having a cellphone line or two as opposed to actually having a landline. Computer: Another luxury, but computers aren't luxury items, if that makes sense. You can get computers secondhand, refurbished, or on clearout for fairly cheap. They won't be powerhouses but they'll work. Dish Washer: Again, probably came with wherever they're living. 1992 was a different time. The two can't really be compared.XilePrincess

You are looking at it by how much things cost, and not the quality of life that poor people have now compared to 1992.

Most of those things could not be had by poor people 20 years ago.

[QUOTE="PatchMaster"]

[QUOTE="AdamPA1006"] The point of this thread, as I see it, is to show how capitalism as a whole can improve everyones lives, even if its not so apparent. People rag on the US all day long and say how evil capitalism is, how these rich greedy people just want to exploit the "poor", when these "rich evil heartless men" are often times providing great products at such a cheap price that even the poorest in our country can have them. BMD004

Sorry, but I'm gonna attribute that to the advancement (and arguable necessity) of technology in modern times, not the goodness in the hearts of corporate officers. Nice try though.

I heard something interesting before... who helped more people: Mother Teresa or Steve Jobs?

People would generally say Mother Teresa. But if you think about it, Steve Jobs created millions of jobs, and enriched the lives of millions with inventions like the IPhone. They find ways to make things cheaper and cheaper because it means more money for the company which means more money for them. So by pursuing their own self-interest, they invent things, create jobs, and give people what they want.

[QUOTE="BMD004"]

[QUOTE="PatchMaster"]

 

Sorry, but I'm gonna attribute that to the advancement (and arguable necessity) of technology in modern times, not the goodness in the hearts of corporate officers. Nice try though.

AdamPA1006

I heard something interesting before... who helped more people: Mother Teresa or Steve Jobs?

People would generally say Mother Teresa. But if you think about it, Steve Jobs created millions of jobs, and enriched the lives of millions with inventions like the IPhone. They find ways to make things cheaper and cheaper because it means more money for the company which means more money for them. So by pursuing their own self-interest, they invent things, create jobs, and give people what they want.

you make it look like your thread tries to create a conversation by implying stupidity and ingnorance when in fact you're probably just an idiot. 

[QUOTE="XilePrincess"]Refrigerator: Who the F doesn't have a fridge? Rentals come with them included. I don't know anyone who doesn't own a fridge if they aren't homeless. Stove: Ditto. Television: Pretty easy to get a TV today, people give away tube TVs all the time, some people will even pay you to take it away. Microwave: They go for as little as $20 and are faster and more energy efficient than an oven in some cases. Poor people eat a lot of food that isn't worse for wear having been microwaved. Air Conditioner: This one might be a luxury, but people below the poverty line probably rent, and technically the landlord owns it. DVD Player: You can buy these for $5. Cheaper than a McDonalds meal. Cell Phone: US cellphone rates are honestly really good compared to what we have here in Canada. Sometimes it would make more sense having a cellphone line or two as opposed to actually having a landline. Computer: Another luxury, but computers aren't luxury items, if that makes sense. You can get computers secondhand, refurbished, or on clearout for fairly cheap. They won't be powerhouses but they'll work. Dish Washer: Again, probably came with wherever they're living. 1992 was a different time. The two can't really be compared.BMD004

You are looking at it by how much things cost, and not the quality of life that poor people have now compared to 1992.

Most of those things could not be had by poor people 20 years ago.

Yup, almost no poor people had fridges, microwaves or televisions in the early 90s. Until the 2000s most poor folks lived in tin shacks with no running water ether.

[QUOTE="PatchMaster"]

[QUOTE="AdamPA1006"] The point of this thread, as I see it, is to show how capitalism as a whole can improve everyones lives, even if its not so apparent. People rag on the US all day long and say how evil capitalism is, how these rich greedy people just want to exploit the "poor", when these "rich evil heartless men" are often times providing great products at such a cheap price that even the poorest in our country can have them. BMD004

Sorry, but I'm gonna attribute that to the advancement (and arguable necessity) of technology in modern times, not the goodness in the hearts of corporate officers. Nice try though.

I heard something interesting before... who helped more people: Mother Teresa or Steve Jobs?

People would generally say Mother Teresa. But if you think about it, Steve Jobs created millions of jobs, and enriched the lives of millions with inventions like the IPhone. They find ways to make things cheaper and cheaper because it means more money for the company which means more money for them. So by pursuing their own self-interest, they invent things, create jobs, and give people what they want.

funny you bring her up, because as a missionary, she also did not give out condoms (general policy).  You could easily argue this promoted and created a new generation of unemplyoyed.

On the bright side, the impoverished do not post pointless threads.

Erm, I was going to make a silly post like usual...but I don't think I can compete with TC's level of silly.

Erm, I was going to make a silly post like usual...but I don't think I can compete with TC's level of silly.

THE_DRUGGIE

[QUOTE="BMD004"]

[QUOTE="PatchMaster"]

 

Sorry, but I'm gonna attribute that to the advancement (and arguable necessity) of technology in modern times, not the goodness in the hearts of corporate officers. Nice try though.

mrbojangles25

I heard something interesting before... who helped more people: Mother Teresa or Steve Jobs?

People would generally say Mother Teresa. But if you think about it, Steve Jobs created millions of jobs, and enriched the lives of millions with inventions like the IPhone. They find ways to make things cheaper and cheaper because it means more money for the company which means more money for them. So by pursuing their own self-interest, they invent things, create jobs, and give people what they want.

funny you bring her up, because as a missionary, she also did not give out condoms (general policy).  You could easily argue this promoted and created a new generation of unemplyoyed.