Chart Of The Day: Americans At Or Below 125% Of The Poverty Level

Tyler Durden's picture

From AP: "the number of Americans with incomes at or below 125 percent of the federal poverty level - the income limit for qualifying for legal aid - is expected to reach an all-time high of 66 million this year. A family of four earning 125 percent of the federal poverty level makes about $28,800 a year, government figures show." And visually...

As usual, if anyone expects these 66 million Americans (over 20% of the US population) to vote for someone who dares to even think about taking away any of the entitlements said tens of millions of people are used to, then by all means buy Las Vegas real estate.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
sessinpo's picture

Quite frankly, I find this statistic not much help. However, the number of Americans dependent on government is much more enlightening as it shows how many people are bought. I beleive that statisistic to be just below 50% so I am not so sure Romney will win. But I think both are losers anyway. Its either a bullet train or a steam train to the same destination.

duo's picture

The bottom 85% of the US makes less than the average citizen of Slovakia.   For the proles, communism or corporate fascism has the same result.

sessinpo's picture

Interesting statistic. I doubt the bottom 65% of the US can even find Slovakia on a map, but I'm being to insensitive now. I will say, I find little distinction between corporate fascism and fascism of any other kind. As a serf, I care not, only that someone up there is pissing me off.

surferexx's picture

I think you mean "is pissing on me"

Trickle down economics

Uncle Remus's picture

I doubt the bottom 65% of the US can even find Slovakia on a map

Da druben...

sun tzu's picture

Interesting "fact" that you pull out of your ass. Show the numbers with data to prove it. Also, don't count those on welfare. We're only talking about people who work. Per Capital income of Slovakia is $17,000. We don't need lies to prove the economy is shitty

duo's picture

I believe it was pulled out of CHS's ass.

KowPie's picture

@ duo; WOW:

"The bottom 85% of the US makes less than the average citizen of Slovakia. For the proles, communism or corporate fascism has the same result."


Have to call pure bullshit on that one! The average wage (currently as of August 14, 2012- latest numbers available) is roughly $28k/yr for males and $19k/yr for females.


Show me where you come up with the bottom 85% of the US earning less than $23.5K/yr. I earn considerably more than that and I seriously doubt I'm in the top 15% (or even close to it). Try a new concept: use factual info rather than numbers made up to suit emotions at the time of posting.

jimod's picture

We're all dependent on the Government.  Except maybe Amish people.

If you shop at the grocery store, the government is feeding you. Period. USDA, DOT, DOE, FDA, FDR's dams, -All make sure you get fed. Poorly you may argue, but how it could be done better, by the government, is the right argument, not the dogma that government should get out of giving us guidance for our food production and dietary choices.

Whether with an EBT or a VISA or Mastercard,  contrast your dependence on the boxed foods from the nutrition industrial complex with growing and preserving your own food!

Most people don't realize what their true best interests are.  How they'll vote, or whether they will vote is going to follow from the super pac commercials.  It's a Ryan sound bite vs Obama sound bite battle now.


Totentänzerlied's picture

*Audible sigh* *Eyes roll back into head* I see MDB has a new alternate.

sun tzu's picture

I hope you're joking, otherwise, you're an idiot. The government does not feed anybody. It takes taxes from people, then creates programs to make people dependent. Then idiots claim that the world will end if not for the government. 

swissbene's picture

these jokes are not funny.  even mdb jokes are not funny (gasp).  even for the people who 'get' them. 

people should be responsible for their own food supply and the 'contained within government' dialectic is false.

next please.

I am Jobe's picture

Amerikans are too fucking stupid to vote.There fixed it

linrom's picture

'Voting is for old people'

That's so 2004, in 2012 the new motto is "Voting is for rich white guy."



billwilson's picture

Its because the rich have all the money. Time for a revolution folks. Tax the rich like back in the good old days (the 1950's) when times were actually good.

Time to bring the 1% a little closer to the rest of us ... cause what we have right now isn't working and is downright WRONG.

I am Jobe's picture

Ropes and tall trees will and can fix issues.

bob_dabolina's picture

The reason times were good in the 1950's  was because we had the strongest manufacturing base in the world. Scratch that, we had the only functioning manufacturing base in the world in the post WWII period due to the fact that our factories weren't bombed out like the rest of the developed world.

As for taxes, if we confiscated 100% of the wealth of the 1% it wouldn't even cover our deficit. So let's assume we take all of their wealth away and use it to fund all these welfare progams. How do we pay the 16 trillion in debt we are in and the future deficits? Don't forget, there are no more 1%ers to tax as we have already confiscated all of their wealth. I'm being nice, I haven't even brought up unfunded liabilities (future government 'promises') which is in the order of $120 TRILLION dollars, where is that money going to come from?

Problem isn't that the rich aren't taxed enough, it's that government spending and regulation is out of control.

And for the record, the evil rich people who own the corporations don't pay taxes. They either raise the price of the products they produce (and the consumer pays) or they lay off people (and outsource the jobs to other countries). Here is just one example

Who is John Galt?

nmewn's picture

Take the top 400's wealth...all of it...and run the whole shabang for 4-6 months tops...then maybe the OWS crowd will finally be happy and "feel good".

Thats how deep a fucking hole the government is deep, 200k is the "new rich"

I'm John Galt and I approve this message.

bob_dabolina's picture

Some people refuse to look reason in the face and Tyler hits the nail on the head:

As usual, if anyone expects these 66 million Americans (over 20% of the US population) to vote for someone who dares to even think about taking away any of the entitlements said tens of millions of people are used to, then by all means buy Las Vegas real estate.

A Scottish philospher Alexander Tytler hits the same point:

"A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a
permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until
the time that voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts from
the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for
the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury,
with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose
fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship."
"The average age of the worlds greatest civilizations from the beginning
of history, has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, these
nations always progressed through the following sequence:

1. From bondage to spiritual faith;
2. From spiritual faith to great courage;
3. From courage to liberty;
4. From liberty to abundance;
5. From abundance to complacency;
6. From complacency to apathy;
7. From apathy to dependence;
8. From dependence back into bondage "


francis_sawyer's picture

So they had DIEBOLD machines 200 years ago?

nmewn's picture

de Tocqueville said much the same thing.

The funny thing is many here weren't complacent, we have tried to warn the damned unicorn riders for decades. Now, they seem to prefer bondage and "free" condoms to liberty.

I'm almost to the point of saying good riddance, let their masters have them.

I am on to you's picture

Interesting view on the 50ths,agree Europe was bombed to pieces,and got, The Marshall help!

Greew up in the 50th,and remember how poor we were!

Why assume to take the wealth,are we not all a part of that wealth,i se it as ours?

They didnt get rich,without us?

We,all of us,are the Base they build thier fortune on,by not paying us enogh,goes for Us as for Europe!

And would it not be better for everyone,the planet in general,if noone were rich,but everyone had a dissent life:I for sure would advocate that!!

What good does it do,to ave a factory,if no one,want to work there.then i would say ike Obama:They didnt build?This Car,Ship House,Office,School,ect!

I dont care if Obama said, you didnt build that,cause i build it,due to who i am,The Bricklayer!

I build and i payed,not, in Us but where i was born ,Denmark and i dont sleep there, anymore,and i realy dont se any differense.

And they, outsourched without asking anybody,even though people builded thier wealth,what is that for a, Thank you,attitude!

I think i,ve said it before,i know that Us holds as many good people as anywhere else on this planet,but people dont weigh you for that,cause some thing else sticks out infront of The People,il just mension one:The A-Man,he is more know than the most other things,no i know that MI6 does the same,but they aint so known.

Karsten Hansen.Now a days located south of US.

I am on to you's picture

Did i forget to tell??

I liked Ted Nugents music,ever since The Amboy Dukes.Oh, and i loved The West Coast Popart Experimental Band to,namely,A child of a few Hours,chilly!

What he stands for Politicaly,i dont like!

nmewn's picture

"I liked Ted Nugents music...What he stands for Politicaly,i dont like!"

Yeah, I gathered that from your preceding...and I do appreciate someone with broken English trying to communicate their'll never get a cut from me for trying, I would expect the same if the roles were reversed.

The answer to you're broader question is an emphatic no.

Because someone invested their time, their saved capital (risked their labor savings & time is what it is) to start a business, in order for you to be hired, be employed, does not entitle you to anything but the wage paid. If he/she gives other benefits its all good.

Now you, as a brick layer, have the opportunity to save some of your own earnings (your capital, your savings) to place at risk to go into competition (requires time) against your former employer...if you wish.

Or you can stay where you're at...working for someone else...opportunity does not guarantee success but its better than a level playing field of mediocrity.

Or you could could hope to hit the government run lottery and have almost half taken away from you instantly because the state has decided thats fair ;-)

Totentänzerlied's picture

We had a manufacturing base and 5 even more important things:

1) Bretton Woods, world reserve currency BITCHEZ


3) Cheap oil and plenty of it, CRUDE BITCHEZ

4) Captive export markets, mercantilism BITCHEZ

5) The biggest or 2nd biggest military on earth, superpower BITCHEZ

While America's midcentury prosperity explosion was no accident, it was also not the result of American Exceptionalism or some other fairy-tale BS. It was good luck on a scale never before imagined combined with lots of nudges and prods by the Anglo-American "money power" going back at least 2 centuries.

I'm not saying businesses didn't produce valuable goods and services or people were not productive, I'm saying that they were able to was the result of factors totally beyond their control. It was a right place, right time kinda thing.

The manufacturing base thrived in this environment, but then again I'd venture that nothing short of Stalinism or Maoism could have prevented the market from fully exploiting such auspicious circumstances.

Ignorance is bliss's picture

If we had taxed the 1% before compounded interest became rampant we would not have been in this hole to begin with. Now it is too late. We should have implemented the necessary taxation back in 1980.

sessinpo's picture

The problem with this line of thinking is this "Would you be upset if you became suddenly rich by whatever legal means?" Then all of the sudden you'd become the enemy. The fact is the rich isn't the enemy.

To make my point, how many of you would turn down a winning multi million dollar lottery ticket?

Blaming the rich is buying the MSM crap. Individual freedom and the right to pursue a life that improves or betters oneself has always been the answer.


Now if you tell me that the rich are impeding that right, then I am on your side. That is something the rich shouldn't do and that may be the case these days, sadly. The government and big business in bed together and hampering your right to have a better life and that is wrong. By the way, the disparaty between the top wealthiest to the rest of the nation was greater in 1929.

sun tzu's picture

I'm Barack 0bama and I approve of this message.


Why not tax the rich like back in the good old days of the 1920's? It was around 2% and the economy was booming and there was no deficit.

maximin thrax's picture

Do the rich have all the money? Or just paper promises from debtors whose ability to pay is questionable, huge debt themselves, intangible assets that need constant inflation to maintain value, that if sold off en mass would completely collapse markets, etc.? The real wealth pyramid has land and agriculture at its base, then manufacturing, then technology and innovation, energy, and lastly a bit of finance at the top to keep the economy lubed. What we have now is an inverted pyramid, when scored by Dollars, the most value being in finance and among the least valuable is agriculture. It is a debt-perpetuating, inflation-ravaged illusion incapable of ballance, and if the whole banking system came crashing down would right itself overnight.

lolmao500's picture

Bottom is in, therefore, bullish!

Walt D.'s picture

In 1980 $28,000 was a good salary. Whose fault is it that this salary has lost its purchasing power? Nixon and the FED.

SockPuppetMan's picture

But FDR removed the "real" link to gold by making it illegal to own, Nixon just destroyed the mirage....

MiltonFriedmansNightmare's picture

Whose fault is it? Woodrow Wilson (and pretty much every president and congressman who followed) and the Fed, or if you prefer, the Fed.
There, fixed it for ya!

bugs_'s picture

Americans or "residents"?

Pseudolus's picture

Not nice reading. But its income poverty only - a single measure

If you looked over mulitiple dimensions of deprivation -  well, i dread to think

US has likely reached that advanced stage of capitalism Lenin/Marx were banking on...


(pun intended)

Totentänzerlied's picture

How can we reach a stage of something we never had? Good ol' Marxists tilting at windmills (and strawmen) again.

sun tzu's picture

Lenin/Marxism socialist economies didn't fare too well either. Take a looksie at Cuba and North Korea and the failed USSR and Warsaw Pact countries. 

Let The Wurlitzer Play's picture

Now how can I make money off this trend?


RockyRacoon's picture

The best way to double your money is to fold it over once and put it back in your pocket.

Hype Alert's picture

If you did that in 1913, you would have 7 cents now.


Edit: make that 3.5 cents.

francis_sawyer's picture

Same goes for politicians except that they fold [themselves] over & [take it] in their back pocket...

malikai's picture

I think I'd say they bend us over so we can take it in the "back pocket".

francis_sawyer's picture

everybody takes it in the back pocket from somebody else... Only difference is which part of the food chain you exist...

Yen Cross's picture

 Bring on the Qe for SNAPS program! /sarc

  Helicopter Ben has got himself in a bit of " twist" right now. How could I have forgotten the "drought"?  " How ,"high fructose" of me<>!

bobert's picture

Remember Yen, some farmers in locations outside OK etc., are doing very well with their corn harvests. Very well indeed.

Ben need not feel too compelled as far as I am concerned to come running with his form of assistance.

Nothing like free markets eh?

Yen Cross's picture

 I wish you all the best! I respect your hard work!  

 You did it yourselves!   Keep a "keen eye" open for the DRONES! ;-)

spooz's picture

How dare they expect any sort of safety net.  Too bad if they aren't the lucky 44% who have insurance through their employers, because $12,000 of that $28,800 will go towards health insurance.  Forget about housing.  Even a double wide will cost you most of the rest of your earnings, and better start saving for food, since the next budget may be taking away your food stamps.  You don't need a cell phone or internet, you really can't afford it.  Just visit the library if you need to go online.  Hopefully, you'll live close to one, since you obviously can't afford a car or insurance.  Its a wonderful life.'s picture

Why should I be forced to pay for your charities at the expense of my charities?