Robert Rector highlights Obama’s New “Poverty” Measurement in today’s NRO post; as you may guess it has nothing to do with actual poverty.
“The current poverty measure counts absolute purchasing power— how much steak and potatoes you can buy. The new measure will count comparative purchasing power — how much steak and potatoes you can buy relative to other people. As the nation becomes wealthier, the poverty standards will increase in proportion. In other words, Obama will employ a statistical trick to ensure that “the poor will always be with you,” no matter how much better off they get in absolute terms.”
“The weird new poverty measure will produce very odd results. For example, if the real income of every single American were to magically triple over night, the new poverty measure would show there had been no drop in “poverty,” because the poverty income threshold would also triple. Under the Obama system, poverty can be reduced only if the incomes of the “poor” are rising faster than the incomes of everyone else.”
“The government’s own data show that the typical American defined as poor (according to the traditional, pre-Obama poverty measure) has two color televisions, cable or satellite service, a VCR or DVD player, and a stereo. He also has a car, air conditioning, a refrig erator, a stove, a clothes washer and dryer, and a microwave. He is able to obtain medical care. His home is in good repair and is not overcrowded. By his own report, his family is not hungry, and he had suf ficient funds in the past year to meet his family’s essential needs. While this individual’s life is not opulent, it is far from the stark images conveyed by the mainstream media and liberal politicians.”
So the “poor” will always be with us no matter how rich they become. Why do this you may ask? Obama’s stated objective is to exercise what he would call a primary function of government: redistribution of wealth. Doing this creates dependency on government and dependency creates voters for the re-distributor.
Of course, there’s a downside. Redistribution by definition removes capital from reinvestment opportunities. As a direct consequence the wealth of society is lowered. The standard of living goes down proportionately. Ultimately, there will be no more wealth to re-distribute. What’s left is a permanent underclass, dependent only upon other dependents!
I fear Obama is the ultimate Communist. Tzars. Government control of major industries. Promotion of public employee unionism. Create major new welfare programs when existing programs are near bankruptcy. And now, a redefinition of “poverty” from absolute terms to relative terms.
I’m reminded of Orwell’s Animal Farm, “while all of us are equal, some are more equal than others!”
Tom Motherway