Think of this as the NYTimes carrying the Koch Bros funded Heritage Foundation water for them . . .
WASHINGTON — When the Census Bureau said in September that the number of poor Americans had soared by 10 million to rates rarely seen in four decades, commentators called the report “shocking” and “bleak.” Most poverty experts would add another description: “flawed.”
NYTimes
Yeah, you aren't nearly that poor, after all, you do get food-stamps and some Government aid, don't you? See, it's not all that bad, why are you peasants complaining?
Yes, as wealthy experts all agree, poverty isn't that bad of a problem. Because we all know that experts in financial reporting usually come from struggling households who have a first hand view of how hard it is to succeed in the face of crippling poverty, that and how hard it is to find a good chauffeur.
More below the fold . . .
On Monday, that may start to change when the Census Bureau releases a long-promised alternate measure meant to do a better job of counting the resources the needy have and the bills they have to pay. Similar measures, quietly published in the past, suggest among other things that safety-net programs have played a large and mostly overlooked role in restraining hardship: as much as half of the reported rise in poverty since 2006 disappears.
NYTimes
Bold text used by diarist to highlight idiocy.
Now, just in case you didn't think that the NYTimes was going to mistakenly carry water for the Heritage Foundation and their dubious claims that people with cheap technology and household appliances aren't that poor, the NYTimes did us all the service of directly quoting one of those Heritage Foundation hacks so you would know that The New York Times is 100% carrying water for the Oligarchy as they try to convince you that things aren't that bad and you aren't that poor, despite the feeling of crushing poverty you may have noticed.
While most scholars have called the fuller measure a step forward, Robert Rector, an analyst at the Heritage Foundation, argues that both census counts — old and new — sharply overstate the amount of deprivation in the United States. In a recent study, he cited government data showing many poor families had game systems like Xbox.
“When the American public hears the word poverty, they are thinking about material hardship — bad housing, homelessness and hunger,” he said. “Most of the people that are defined as poor by the government are not poor in that sense.”
NYTimes
Yes, and who wouldn't trust the Heritage Foundation? You know, the same Heritage Foundation that needs Koch Brother funding to exist?
And how dare parents buy their children toys like XBox! Those children should be out in the snow covered horse wagon filled streets selling matches and newspapers, hopefully newspapers like the NYTimes and matches for coal products made by Koch Industries!
For Fawkes sake!
I would advise one and all to read the entire piece from the NYTimes to get a good feel of how this claptrap gets momentum, because it is quite obvious that what these shills would like to do is to state 1) You aren't that poor anyway 2) since you're not that poor, you don't need any help and 3) that's why we should cut taxes again, especially for the rich and corporations so it will trickle down (golf clap)!
Because we all know that when it comes to defining poverty, why bother asking poor people when there is a wealthy expert for that?!?!
FAIL
You can follow me on Twitter @JesseLaGreca