this post was submitted on 09 Dec 2025
257 points (93.9% liked)

News

33617 readers
1802 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] InvalidName2@lemmy.zip -3 points 5 days ago (3 children)

The answer is NO, it's not. However, to be completely fair, I've bookmarked the "supporting materials" to give it a review later when I have a little more time.

As someone who grew up in a family actually straggling the poverty line, there's simply 0% chance that any family anywhere in this country is living in poverty with that kind of income. It's well above what most households are bringing in, and while there may be a limited subset of circumstances where that money isn't sufficient, that's not what poverty is.

And I read through some of the comments in this thread -- Assuming they've come from real humans not pushing an agenda, it makes me ashamed to be associated with those people.

[–] NewNewAugustEast@lemmy.zip 7 points 5 days ago

You really should read the article before commenting. I know you are not alone in this thread don't feel singled out, but they make a very good point.

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 11 points 5 days ago (2 children)

there's simply 0% chance that any family anywhere in this country is living in poverty with that kind of income.

The original Substack addresses this point, but the short of it is: Most income gains from 35k to 100k are cancelled out by a loss of government benefits, so there's a lot less difference between these than you'd expect. You only start making real gains starting from 100k. Now a family making 100k will have expendable income that's true, but the vast majority of its income will still go towards essentials so it's still one emergency away from insolvency.

Edit: This means that a family with two incomes and two young children making 50k is getting a market price equivalent of 50k in government benefits, so we can crudely approximate families straddling the poverty line as making 100k net. In that case the difference between the effective official poverty line and the proposed poverty line is a large but realistic 40%.

[–] QuarterSwede@lemmy.world 3 points 5 days ago

This makes way more sense. Thanks for the explanation.

[–] InvalidName2@lemmy.zip 1 points 5 days ago (2 children)

Unfortunately, no it doesn't address that point. It's basically, if you pervert the definition from a century ago and interpret it in one specific way for a way of life that's hardly anywhere close to the standard/average, then you can maybe make a clickbait case for a super high income that drives engagement. Think of the click through and comments!

[–] OneWomanCreamTeam@sh.itjust.works 6 points 5 days ago (3 children)

So what you're saying is, if you're not on the brink of starvation and/or homelessness you're not poor?

Like, someone who hasn't been able to afford vacations or any other luxury, is one medical issue or car issue away from homelessness, and doesn't go to the doctor for routine/preventative stuff because it's too expensive, isn't poor. So long as they pay rent on time and eat three meals a day.

[–] TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world 1 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

dude, everyone is one medical issue away from bankrupcy. if i got cancer i'd go bankrupt.

yes, as long as you pay rent, have heat, and other necessities you're not poor in in poverty.

i don't know what your standard is, but i grew up with a roof over my head, food in my belly, and zero luxuries. we were considered middle class. not poor. our houses were old and crappy, and our cars were used based models. the only 'luxury' we had was cable tv.

the issue is now 'middle class' seems to mean 'upper middle class' as if if you can't lve in the best towns, with teh best schools, and travel to europe with your family every year, you are 'poor'. where i live people lve in posh expensive years, have the $5000 in electronics or more, are leasing new model cars, and traveling abroad 2-3x a year and claim they are 'in poverty'. because their salary is 'only' 100K.

[–] InvalidName2@lemmy.zip 1 points 5 days ago

No, what I'm saying is $140,000 is not the new poverty line for Americans.

[–] CmdrShepard49@sh.itjust.works 0 points 5 days ago

It's not the line between being poor or not, it's the poverty line and what you're describing would be considered poverty.

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io -2 points 5 days ago

What? You're not making any sense.

[–] TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world -2 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

and while there may be a limited subset of circumstances where that money isn’t sufficient, that’s not what poverty is.

bingo. where i live everyone thinks they are in 'poverty' because they can't afford luxuries like expensive cars, expensive vacations, and luxury housing. they are not anywhere near true poverty. but since most grew up wealthy/middle class, they think they are.

as someone who grew up lower-class, it blows my mind how poor most people are with money, and how they blame society rather than their own budgeting skills. i know people who make 40K a year who spend 10K a year traveling, and then cry poor.