Centerfield

Yes, I've always thought poverty is relative. Lacking things that most people around you have, or you see on TV is humiliating, and causes people do to stupid things to get it, when they really don't need it in material terms. Their problems are more spiritual.

I would certainly agree that poverty is relative. But... so is pretty much everything else. And even within the generalized category of "poverty" there are striations or degrees of poverty.

It's interesting to me that the author used the Congo as one comparison between Americans living in poverty and those in the third world. My parents actually lived in what was then eastern Ziare for several years. In terms of material possessions the overwhelming majority in the Congo (Ziare) certainly live in poverty. But many of them don't lack enough food to eat. The same can't be said of more than a handful of Americans living in poverty.

What good does an old color TV with access to half a dozen TV stations do an American family which can't afford to properly feed it's children on a consistent basis? Are they somehow better off because of the TV than the Congolese family which doesn't have a TV but which does have enough food for it's children?

Interesting how the definition of poverty moves around.
I received the book “One Man's Wilderness” for Christmas. It's the story of Richard Proenneke's life in the Alaskan wilderness.

Technically he probably lived below the poverty level, but for him it was paradise.

However, Kevin, a much higher percentage of Congolese are unable to feed their families on a regular basis. And they're much likelier to be killed or deprived of shelter than the poor guy here.

I sense the idea of "oh stop whining, it could be worse." Well, we could look at everything that way as soon as anyone complains about anything.

You big corporations are pushing for more subsidies? Oh, look at the average business in the Congo. Consider yourself lucky that you're not in their predicament.

That family of 5 in NJ, NY Conn or CA with a household income is complaining that high property taxes are giving them discomfort and leaving them unable to pay BOTH $550 car leases, afford that second home AND by buy Kylie a new car for her 16th birthday? Stop whining. Look at the Congo.

How about young William with an IQ of 138 taking the same class as some other kid who needs a remedial class: William gets a B and tells me to stop complaining because that other kid got a C so he did just fine.

I could go on and on. Let me be clear, I'm not sincerley telling every American to look at the Congo and to stop whining. I'm just showing how that line of thinking can theorically apply to everyone in this country for one reason or another. And though looking at the Congo helps put certain things in perpsective, lowering the bar to the "the Congo" to applogize for our shortcomings is a lazy way out dealing with what we can improve on.

That's true to some extent, Jon. It largely depends on which part of the Congo you're talking about. But, I was more thinking of the pre-war Congo that my parents lived in. Much of the instability we see today, in terms of food, shelter and loss of life, can be directly attributed to the civil wars and/or refugees from Rwanda and other problem areas. Back when the pro-American Mobuto was running Ziare, things were pretty peaceful and many of the problems to which you refer were absent for the most part.

My parents lived in a rural village in eastern Ziare which had grass huts and a witch doctor much like the stereotype we all grew up with as kids. But the locals also had access to limited supplies of electricity, cars and all of them wore western style cloths. More to the point, they ate regularly but didn't have much use for a TV other than as a giant paperweight. Oh, and the tempurature was 70 - 75 F year-round.

Compare that to a family living in abject poverty here in America somewhere north of the 45th parallel. Does the local availability of TV and cheap electricity 24-7 make up for an unstable food supply and freezing tempuratures in the winter months?

I don't think we can reliably do direct comparisons of Americans living in poverty and third world citizens without taking into consideration many, many variables. And even then we're filtering it all thru the lens of our own life experiences.

What if the US social safety net was refined to only basic health care, rent vouchers, Food Stamps, child care and reduced community college tuition.
Does that reconcile the Conservative aim to minimize entitlements with the Liberal aim to give the disadvantaged a helping hand?

What do other Centrists suggest we aim for?

All I'm saying is that the U.S. is not the Congo. And while understand that the notion of poverty is quite different from one part of the world to another, we, as Americans, should judge what we do against a bar of our own standards and ideals, and not by that of an unfortunate African country or any other.

Rather excuse our own problems by comparing them to the Congo, we should aim to do better and support policies that truly help the 3rd world reach some semblance to our own standards. The world would be a much better place as would our place in it.

I know that sounds a bit trite and idealistic but we lose sight of that fact that we do little to help to these countries and frankly, not enough in our back yard when one considers how we allocate our resources, money and effort.

Talk is cheap. And our budget nakedly shows our priorites in spite of what "we say". Few people know what our budget truly looks like and many don't believe it when they see it.

I'm of the opinion that doing the morally right thing COSTS LESS than what we actually do. The problem is that those who have the most influence on the nation's purse haven't figured out how to enrich themsleves by doing it so it gets done on the cheap or poorly or both. The poor results then become our perfect excuse for not doing more. Instead, more of the wrong things get more funding and we become enablers of it thru our cynicism and bitterness towards politics and government.

"if poor Americans were to compare their standard of living with what is normal elsewhere in the world, let alone in Congo, they would see they have little cause for discontent."

gawd what utter crap. That's probably why there is no author's name attached to the article. I also checked to make sure the date didn't say April 1.
I'd like to see him/her with 2 kids making minimum wage on 2 jobs and trying to keep her kids in school and out of trouble in East Oakland. Let him/her try it for a year. I just spent a whole day last week waiting in court because some 18 yr old kid broke into my car. Her mom isn't well to do but you can see she tries hard.

Or let him interview some poor guy in Michigan who is losing his middle class job and the only thing within miles for him is a 9/hr job which means no little or no private health insurance and not much in the way of retirement. OR interview some of the 34000 workers for Delphi who are going to see there average wages cut in half, if they get to keep their jobs. Or interview those urban poor who can't feed their children 3 meals a day.

IMHO the only idiot who could write such drivel is an upper class brit. They're about as disconnected from the world as one can get. Whoever wrote this is definitely a lazy thinker who wants the reader to be lazy as well. Hello?!?!? There are MANY kinds of poverty in this country and throughout the world. Mr. Banksis not typiclal of those in real poverty in this country. You want real poverty I will bet dollars to donuts that most readers in this forum are within a few miles of a much deeper and bleaker American poverty. And comparing him to a doctor who has education, community stature and 3 squares a day?
apples and oranges

What really kills me is that normally the Economist is an excellent source of information. One of the best. I can only conclude that this drivel ran through a misplaced sphincter.

man it's Jan 1 and I'm already getting PO'd.

not boding well for this year.

I'm channelling my aunt here who also read the article...

"No one addresses poverty beyond cliches."

Just a side note. Anyone who is not able to feed thier kids in this country is not taking advanatage of the federaly funded Women, Infants and Childrens program (my wife used to work for them). There are ALOT of safety net programs available in this country....especialy for children. No child needs to suffer from malnutrition in the U.S. if people are taking advanatage of the programs that are available to them.

I'm not trying to pooh-pooh the issue, but I really think the "starving children" rhetoric is more about creating drama then it is accurately describing the facts.

cengel is right about the WIC and that therer are federal and state funds to feed kids at school whose families qualify. the sad thing is that in some communities up to 3/4 of the kids qualify.