...and the "poverty line" is higher than we're led to believe. The official poverty line isn't accurate. Far more of us are poor, through no fault of our own, than we're led to believe.
I read the diary of One Brave Kossack (OBK) here (I'm sorry, I haven't mastered the art of inserting links in my diary), and it has haunted me since. He wrote about being penniless and homeless and facing a medical crisis in Iowa.
Kossacks commenting on his diary offered to help, which speaks so very well of Kossacks as a community. OBK replied to the offers by saying he didn't want financial help only for himself, while he was dwelling among so many other people who needed that help as much as he did. He urged Kossacks to "change the system" instead.
That plea was noble of OBK, and he is right, we do need to change the system. But that isn't enough. Changing the system doesn't change the attitudes of the American people--well-off Americans--toward the poor; it doesn't endow them with the will to take measures as individuals to ease the suffering of poor individuals they're acquainted with.
And the will to ease poverty is as important as changing the system; in fact, the system won't change until that sea change in values and priorities occurs. We have to confront the dirty secret: poverty is deepening and growing because well-off Americans want it that way. If they wanted that to change, they'd make it change. This is the American character in action.
American "haves" turn their backs on this reality: the poor are denied full citizenship; we exist outside of American life, we contribute little to the economy, we don't patronize merchants, and we occupy an underground, hand-to-mouth economy. Too many of the haves find it unthinkable to lend a financial helping hand to someone they know is struggling. They think of it as a "handout."
Sadly, many of the poor internalize this belief. Recently my closest friend, who is doing well and lives in Europe, sent me $150 to help me with my financial troubles. She included a letter with the gift saying she hoped I didn't feel "belittled" by her gesture. She feared that I would see this as a "handout," as pity, I guess, as an insult. I didn't. My misfortune isn't happening through any fault of mine. It's the result of a lot of bad medicine, mainly. But I've known of low-income Americans who would turn down an offer of financial help out of wanting to avoid taking a "handout." I was grateful for the badly needed help.
We need to change our perspective. The wealthy deny the poor the earnings they need to survive. They control what the poor earn to clean the houses of the wealthy, to mow their lawns, do their laundry, shovel snow from their driveways, wash their cars. They accumulate and monopolize far more wealth than they need. We don't denounce this behavior as antisocial, pathological, unprincipled greed. But we denounce the poor accepting some of their fair share--fair share--as taking a "handout."
Recently I listened to an interview on my local NPR affiliate, WHYY, with a guest who offered his opinion of why the wealthy don't show more compassion for the poor. He said he thinks it's because they don't know many poor people. He said it's because we segregate the poor, they live in poor communities far from wealthy communities, and that we need to change that.
We do, but I've been poor and living among the wealthy for years, and from where I've been, I haven't seen the wealthy showing compassion when they've known me to be struggling, frightened, and suffering. I'm emerging from a medical situation of almost six years that has left me broke and struggling to earn money again. The wealthy whose home I occupy know this. From what I see, it hasn't made them more compassionate.
I occupy a small wing of the house in exchange for overseeing and caretaking of the property and their personal affairs while they are away at their farm in Europe, or at their home in a ski resort. When they have house guests, they require me to leave my small place, and they house their guests in my space. I have no say in the matter. The family never has shown concern about where I go or how I cope with this. So far I haven't ended up in a shelter or on the streets, but it wouldn't matter to them if I did. I will not plead with them not to do this. I am not going to give them that power over me. And I know it wouldn't do any good.
Enduring this traumatizes me, and I'm not being melodramatic. It's a physical violation that stops just short of the skin on my body. I must endure being barred from occupying my space, which is full of my personal, most private belongings and effects. I must endure strangers, sometimes unsupervised children, occupying that space. They pick up and examine my belongings, my books and mementoes. I don't consent to this. It gives me a visceral sense of being pinned down and forcibly penetrated.
The wealthy, in this case, do know someone who is poor. A low-income person occupies their home. But they treat me as I just described. It hasn't led them to show compassion for me.
I would remind the radio guest I mentioned that the wealthy have been hiring the poor--at suppressed pay--to do their menial work for them, so they do know poor people and they know it. Most of them choose not to pay us dignified wages. The radio guest means well, but he gives the wealthy, as a group, too much credit. We're seeing the consequences of greed in front of us every day.
Many of the diaries here deal with the election campaign and how they might or might not change the system. That's important, but we need the souls of the wealthy to change. And I don't know how we bring about that change.