U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
 
 
Old 06-30-2012, 11:44 AM
 
Location: NJ and Florida
9,840 posts, read 3,104,359 times
Reputation: 2997

Advertisements

The new poverty level is 133%

http://coverageforall.org/pdf/FHCE_FedPovertyLevel.pdf


Federal Poverty Guidelines
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-30-2012, 11:48 AM
 
57,972 posts, read 29,540,917 times
Reputation: 7341
Pregnant women count as two people for the purpose of this chart.

WHY? I thought unborn babies werent people? What additional costs does one have for who is pregnant?
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-30-2012, 11:53 AM
 
47,585 posts, read 35,961,238 times
Reputation: 21593
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
Pregnant women count as two people for the purpose of this chart.

WHY? I thought unborn babies werent people? What additional costs does one have for who is pregnant?
Whoa!!! Now the unborn do count as people? Wow -- what hypocrisy the left has.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-30-2012, 11:58 AM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
75,344 posts, read 36,523,712 times
Reputation: 18332
Abortion is an exception.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-30-2012, 12:00 PM
 
Location: Arizona
7,555 posts, read 3,007,657 times
Reputation: 3301
More scare tactics. If one wants to be truly educated as to how the federal government calculated the poverty line, here is a link. It should be noted that the current poverty line was adopted in 1965. This is why most state and government agencies use a higher percentage than the official line. The current line is absolutely useless for determining who is actually poor in america.

Beyond the Poverty Line | Stanford Social Innovation Review
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-30-2012, 12:03 PM
 
Location: Arizona
7,555 posts, read 3,007,657 times
Reputation: 3301
Quote:
Originally Posted by malamute View Post
Whoa!!! Now the unborn do count as people? Wow -- what hypocrisy the left has.
I thought that it was a basic tenent of republicans? You know anti-abortion, when is a fetus a child? and all that. You guys want to claim that a fetus is a child when talking about abortion but is not a child when calculating heath care. Such bald-faced hypocracy.

Edit to add:
But you do make a good point. If the progressives want to say the fetus is not a child for abortion purposes and then say they are a child for health care reasons then you are right. It is blatent hypocracy. They will have to fess up and acknowledge that every abortion is the killing of a baby to maintain their credibility.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-30-2012, 12:04 PM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
75,344 posts, read 36,523,712 times
Reputation: 18332
Quote:
Originally Posted by mohawkx View Post
More scare tactics. If one wants to be truly educated as to how the federal government calculated the poverty line, here is a link. It should be noted that the current poverty line was adopted in 1965. This is why most state and government agencies use a higher percentage than the official line. The current line is absolutely useless for determining who is actually poor in america.

Beyond the Poverty Line | Stanford Social Innovation Review
So the government declares a poverty line and never changes it ?
Think about that one.

The current line, which the government came up, with is useless to government agencies that use it so they have to fudge it ?

FWIW the government also moved the poverty line to 400% for subsidizing premiums.
So they can't even keep their percentage numbers the same.
And they can stick to that number for other qualifying programs ?

Last edited by HappyTexan; 06-30-2012 at 12:36 PM..
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-30-2012, 12:14 PM
 
47,585 posts, read 35,961,238 times
Reputation: 21593
Quote:
Originally Posted by mohawkx View Post
I thought that it was a basic tenent of republicans? You know anti-abortion, when is a fetus a child? and all that. You guys want to claim that a fetus is a child when talking about abortion but is not a child when calculating heath care. Such bald-faced hypocracy.

Edit to add:
But you do make a good point. If the progressives want to say the fetus is not a child for abortion purposes and then say they are a child for health care reasons then you are right. It is blatent hypocracy. They will have to fess up and acknowledge that every abortion is the killing of a baby to maintain their credibility.
I'm all for declaring the baby is a human being, a person. Also for health care reasons. The baby is a person, it has a separate body that might have separate health conditions from the mother.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-30-2012, 12:14 PM
 
Location: Arizona
7,555 posts, read 3,007,657 times
Reputation: 3301
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan View Post
So the government declares a poverty line and never changes it ?
Think about that one.

The current line, which the government came up, with is useless to government agencies that use it so they have to fudge it ?

FWIW the government also moved the poverty line to 144% for subsidizing premiums.
So they can't even keep their percentage numbers the same.
And they can stick to that number for other qualifying programs ?
Yes, this is true. The current poverty line was set in 1965. It is adjusted annually for inflation but only based on the cost of food. No other expenses are factored in. Since there are so many factors in calculating family overhead these days, "(healthcare being one of them) the federal guidelines for calculating who's poor and who's not is adjusted upwards depending on which economic tier they want to have the most impact on whichever program they are flogging at the time. Most are at 133% some state agencies go as high as 200% and some do 150%. None use the current yearly calculated base poverty line.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-30-2012, 12:16 PM
 
Location: Arizona
7,555 posts, read 3,007,657 times
Reputation: 3301
Quote:
Originally Posted by malamute View Post
I'm all for declaring the baby is a human being, a person. Also for health care reasons. The baby is a person, it has a separate body that might have separate health conditions from the mother.
On this point I agree with you. Seems the progressives may have painted themselves into a corner with this issue.
Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


 
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:
Over $84,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top