General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: In the U.S. 49.7 Million Are Now Poor, and 80% of the Total Population Is Near Poverty [View all]hfojvt
(37,573 posts)that depends on the value of the stock options, which we are never told http://www.thewire.com/politics/2012/08/fact-checking-ann-and-mitt-romneys-hardknock-early-years/56321/
Rent for the year was only $744, what about utilities, tuition, and food? Medical care? There were quickly two babies, who paid those medical costs?
Suppose they were living on $3,000 a year, which would be $18,000 a year in today's money. Today's poverty rate for a family of 3 is $20,000, and "near poor" is defined as 150% of the poverty line OR (as in the 80%) including one year of unemployment.
And that's another part of the thing, a person is part of that 80% if they are unemployed for a year. It doesn't matter if they are collecting $300 a week in unemployment, or if their spouse has a $40,000 a year job. Nope, they fall into that 80% simply by not having a job for a year.
That's part of what makes it a ridiculous measure.
As for the Romneys. Well, were they living on $3,000 a year or $5,000 a year? In order to be living higher than 150% of the poverty rate, they would have to be living on more that $5,000 a year. Were they? Could they? How much were the stocks worth? $10,000? $25,000? $100,000?
Well, Romney later borrowed $42,000 from his dad, so apparently he did not have $10,000 to make a down payment on a house.
Point is that even somebody like Romney, as a college student just starting out, COULD be part of that 80% who are near poor at some point in their life. That doesn't necessarily put those people in the same boat as others who are in the bottom 20% not just at ONE point in their lives, but for the vast majority of their lives.