Comments on: Poverty On The Rise http://www.rollerfeet.com/backporchbeer/2005/09/07/2657/ How To Create a Sarcasm Mark in Textile: *~ยก~* Mon, 05 Apr 2010 01:25:54 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4 By: etrigan http://www.rollerfeet.com/backporchbeer/2005/09/07/2657/comment-page-1/#comment-6868 etrigan Thu, 08 Sep 2005 17:11:45 +0000 http://www.rollerfeet.com/bpb2/?p=2657#comment-6868 If the economy is booming (as we've been told) and "trickle-down" works, the gap wouldn't be this big. I find it hard to believe that the immigration rate increased under Bush that much more than Clinton. And to throw a cheap shot: considering the "recently displayed attitudes of the Bush family":http://www.suntimes.com/output/hurricane/cst-nws-hbarb08.html the "economic recovery" has never been about the real poor -- which it should be as equally as about the "poor" over-taxed corporations. If the economy is booming (as we’ve been told) and “trickle-down” works, the gap wouldn’t be this big. I find it hard to believe that the immigration rate increased under Bush that much more than Clinton.

And to throw a cheap shot: considering the recently displayed attitudes of the Bush family the “economic recovery” has never been about the real poor — which it should be as equally as about the “poor” over-taxed corporations.

]]> By: Christian http://www.rollerfeet.com/backporchbeer/2005/09/07/2657/comment-page-1/#comment-6867 Christian Thu, 08 Sep 2005 01:46:38 +0000 http://www.rollerfeet.com/bpb2/?p=2657#comment-6867 It also looks like the population growth was greater every year from <a href="http://www.census.gov/popest/datasets.html" rel="nofollow">2000-2004</a> than <a href="http://www.census.gov/popest/archives/1990s/nat_monthly.html" rel="nofollow">1990-2000</a>. About 2.9 million per which isn't much different from 2.8, but take out a 5 outlier in 1994 and it's 2.3. Of course, then there's that big gap between the 200 cenus and the 2000 estimate, but that's too much for me to analyze at this point. Damn, it's easy to spin with statistics. Illegal immigration, after all, is one of the reasons some people on the right get angry at the President. Any chance there is data available that shows the non-recent-immigrant poverty level? Of course, then people will just argue over a definition of "recent." It also looks like the population growth was greater every year from 2000-2004 than 1990-2000. About 2.9 million per which isn’t much different from 2.8, but take out a 5 outlier in 1994 and it’s 2.3. Of course, then there’s that big gap between the 200 cenus and the 2000 estimate, but that’s too much for me to analyze at this point. Damn, it’s easy to spin with statistics.

Illegal immigration, after all, is one of the reasons some people on the right get angry at the President.

Any chance there is data available that shows the non-recent-immigrant poverty level? Of course, then people will just argue over a definition of “recent.”

]]>