BCT Editorial – 3/30/05

This page was last updated on April 2, 2005.

A real challenge; Editorial; Beaver County Times; March 30, 2005.

A recurring theme for Times editorials. For a different view of the so-called “working poor,” I suggest you read the Heritage Foundation papers noted at the bottom of this critique.

Below is a detailed critique of the subject editorial.

“We sometimes lose sight of the daily challenges that the working poor in the United States face.

“Perhaps the biggest challenge they face is public perception. Many people don’t realize what a struggle it is to get by on a daily basis for many of the working poor and their families.

“For instance, the National Low Income Housing Coalition reports a Pennsylvania resident would have to have a job that paid $13.82 an hour to be able to afford a two-bedroom apartment at the state’s ‘fair market rent’ of $719 a month.

“That $13.82 translates into $552.80 a week or $28,745.60 a year.

“However, rent, which includes all utilities except telephone, would eat up 30 percent of that ($8,628). If the family of four spends about $125 a week on food ($6,500 a year), about 53 percent of its annual income goes toward food and shelter.

“Still, the family has $13,618 left. That’s $262 a week.

“Say it costs around $400 a month to keep a car on the road. Take out that $4,800 and the family is left with $8,818, or $170 a week.

“But look at what’s not on the list: personal items such as clothes, shoes, soap, detergent, shampoo, haircuts, etc.; payments for a new refrigerator, stove, washer or dryer; contributions toward pension plans or health-care benefits; expenses for going to the movies or eating out every so often or a telephone and cable TV.”

[RWC] Not to nitpick, but any apartment renting for $719/month includes a refrigerator and stove. Does the Times believe “going to the movies or eating out every so often … and cable TV” are necessities?

“One problem the working poor face is public perception. Many Americans think that a job at almost $14 an hour is a decent wage. Heck, many working poor would think that, too.”

[RWC] Except as an aside below, the editorial completely sidesteps individual responsibility. Not one mention is made of the irresponsibility of trying to raise a family of four when your pay can’t provide for necessities. If you can’t provide appropriate financial support for a family without taxpayer handouts, you have no business building a family. It is completely unfair to your children and to all the responsible families who live within their means.

The editorial doesn’t explain the effect of “public perception” on personal choices and responsibility. Citing “public perception” is no more than an attempt to lay the blame for individual poverty on someone else. To socialists, someone else is always to blame for your situation.

“This is not to ennoble the poor. Many have made bad personal decisions to compound their plight.”

[RWC] Nearly two years ago the Times profiled two poor families.¹ In both cases individual irresponsibility caused the alleged poverty. In one case, a single mother of four children headed the “family.” The children had three fathers and the mother had never been married to any of them. In the other case, the guy admitted he mostly screwed around until he was nearly 30 and by then felt it was too late to do anything about his situation. That didn’t stop him from getting married to a woman with a child, however. How were these persons presented? As people the economy “left behind.” These folks were not left behind. When the bus of opportunity stopped, these folks chose not to get on.

“However, the United States is fast becoming two nations, one rich and one poor, and poverty is becoming generational, not situational. How we as a people meet this challenge will determine the future of the nation.”

[RWC] The editorial’s conclusion explicitly demonstrates the Times socialist belief system. While there are always exceptions, history shows us poverty in the United States is an individual choice.

1. Left Behind; Beaver County Times; June 1, 2003.

2. Understanding Poverty in America (Backgrounder #1713); Robert E. Rector and Kirk A. Johnson, Ph.D.; The Heritage Foundation; January 5, 2004.

3. Poverty and Inequality; The Heritage Foundation; August 25, 2004.

4. The Data on Poverty and Health Insurance You’re Not Reading (WebMemo #556); Kirk A. Johnson, Ph.D.; The Heritage Foundation; August 27, 2004.