America's New Needy
Published October 01, 2009 @ 06:00AM PT
Imagine this:
Six months ago you are standing in line at the grocery store, flipping through a trashy celebrity magazine while on your way to pick up your kids at soccer practice. Your new SUV is outside in the parking lot. You are the model of the American middle-class--a large and increasingly diverse group of self-reliant families and individuals.
Now, flash forward to the present. You're standing in line at the local food pantry, looking at everyone standing around you, wondering how in the world things got so bad.
For many of Americans, the scenario above is not a dream (or rather a nightmare). It is instead an unfortunate reality that is just starting to be dealt with by hunger activists and organizations dealing with what can only be called the nation's "new needy."
Earlier this week, the Washington Post helped document how families in and around the nation's capital are dealing with the free fall from their middle-class lifestyles. Most significantly to me, the article shows that even people living in the wealthiest county in the entire country (Louden County, VA) are starting to find their way to the local food pantry. No one is immune.
Food banks, and the pantries and kitchens they serve, are struggling to keep up with the exploding demand among middle-class families seeking emergency food assistance. The problem is compounded by the fact that many of the new clients were once donors of food themselves.
There also seems to be a unique challenge in helping to meet the needs of this new demographic. More than anything else, people seeking food assistance for the first time often feel ashamed of needing to ask for help. Hunger relief workers have noticed that the new needy, for example, will not stand in line to receive allotments of food out of fear that they will be recognized by one of their neighbors or co-workers.
Although this story is disheartening, there is room to learn and reflect on the lesson that we all should take from this. At any moment, we could find ourselves in a position where we require assistance feeding ourselves. For this reason alone, we should make an effort to help those that are currently less fortunate, because one day, they might be helping us.
(Photo credit: D'Arcy Norman on Flickr)
Share this Post
Facebook
Twitter
Digg
StumbleUpon
Delicious
EmailRelated Posts
-
Women and Children Most Hit By Hunger
-
90% of Black Children on Food Stamps
-
Food Pantry System Needs an Overhaul
Comments (6)
Comments on Change.org are meant for further exploration and evaluation of the ideas covered in the posts. To that end, we welcome constructive comments. However, we reserve the right to delete comments that are offensive, abusive, or off-topic; that contain ad hominem attacks; or that are designed to subvert or hijack comment threads rather than contribute to them. Repeat offenders may be permanently removed from the site at our discretion.
Author
-
Greg Plotkin is currently a grant-writer living in Washington, DC. As a two-year AmeriCorps member teaching in DC Public Schools, he saw families struggling with poverty on a daily basis and has become particularly interested in hunger, nutrition and food access issues. He has also viewed poverty through the lens of his work with Habitat for Humanity and Charlie's Place--a DC soup kitchen and homeless support center.
Featured Poverty in America Actions
-
-
-
Repeal the Hyde Amendment!
88 People
-
Repeal the Hyde Amendment!
I agree, completely, that we're seeing a new group of people deal with poverty issues, and I think the question that follows is... where does that lead? But I'd gently challenge some of the definitions of "middle class" that drive the WaPo article and this post... I think one casualty of our economic boom (and bust) has been our understanding, and definition, of "middle". Many, I think, don't realize that median income ($50,233 in 2007, I checked) in this country is generally lower than we think, and that many people - especially in a place like upscale Loudon county - consider themselves part of a "middle class" that largely doesn't exist. Most professional couples, for instance, whose combined income does (or did) push them into six figures, are really not in the "middle"; but if asked, they'd say they were. Why? Because, culturally, most of us think we belong, through identification, to the "average" and the "ordinary"... and "the middle"... even if, in actuality, these people fall into what used to be an "upper middle," and probably now should be considered simply upper, class.
The distinctions matter, if only to help us keep a perspective, and to be honest about, say why the Washington Post would, suddenly, find "poverty" in the "middle class" newsworthy; and perhaps it's because - just to challenge some preconceptions within the MSM - what they're actually noticing is that the fall into poverty is larger, and steeper, than it used to be, and people aren't, actually, falling out of the "middle", they're falling out of the "upper"... and the observation which follows is that, like the New York Times, which tends to "trend report" when things happen on the Upper East Side, the reason the WaPo finds this fascinating is because it's really about rich people... and what happens to rich people is fascinating... because they are - or were - rich.
Again, I think it's important to note that the "face of poverty" isn't what we might think it is; there's more poverty, it's more widespread, and more people are in need. But at the same time, I'd say there's a reason why a food bank - and a fairly tony one - in Loudon County gets such lavish coverage when other, less glam ones don't... and as so often happens in America, we perpetuate our class issues... while pretending we don't have them.
Posted by NYC Weboy on 10/01/2009 @ 07:54AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I'm in no way trying to dismiss the suffering of the truly poor, but I would argue that a couple making $100k combined and living in an upscale suburb could most certainly be considered middle-class.
Cost of living is just such a huge factor. $100k in Loudon is much different than $100k in rural or suburban Mississippi.
And if you have a child in college, for example, or multiple car payments, these expenses tend to add up when coupled with a family's mortgage. If one person loses their job unexpectedly, that could really throw a financial wrench in a family's ability to feed itself.
Are these people the neediest in all of America? No, of course not. But I don't think we should really be distinguishing between how deserving people are of assistance.
At the same time, I completely agree with you that the reason this story got such high-profile coverage is because it deals with people who are perceived to be privileged. It's a shame that poverty, in all its forms, is not deemed to be newsworthy on a more regular basis.
The face of poverty is certainly changing, and because of that, I think it's even more important to document the newly needy like I tried to do in my post. When you can show that poverty affects everyone--black, white, rich, poor, urban, rural--it becomes less of a "them" issue and more of an "us" issue. And I think that's incredibly valuable.
Posted by Greg Plotkin on 10/01/2009 @ 10:55AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
The "new poor", are just realizing they are among those of us without enough income to pay all the bills, we humanly cannot avoid. As light electric and heat, food clothes etc.. They are newly discovered as being poor.
The electric companies do not go you make minimum wage only pay us 4 cents a killowatt hour instead of the 17 cents we normally get.
There is a huge gap between $17,000 and $50,303 the start of the real middle income. Where do people making say $29,700 a year fall? Are they the lower middle income or just the uncounted poor? It depends can $29,700 cover all of the basic bottom row of life needs ?
If the the basics of life are not covered by income, they are the uncounted poor. The TV Program said 70% consider themselves the middle-classes, and they are not. But its a fine delusion our government lets us inflict upon ourselves.
They are newly discovered as the poor, they are not middleclass, but the uncounted poor.
Posted by jan Lightfootlane on 10/01/2009 @ 12:49PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I am disabled, unable to work or drive poor, and I would be dead/ homeless without my parents, as my husband left me and sends me no support. I applied for Food Stamps 3mo ago, and my eligibility phone interview is Not till Oct. 22nd. Today is my 29th Birthday, but because of all my medical problems, many untreated due to lack of health insurance/care, I fell much older.
Posted by Rachel Russell on 10/01/2009 @ 01:33PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I think we have two problems here - at least. One is a false sense of security provided by intentionally bad definitions. Stuff like got a car you can sleep in? Then you're not homeless. Been unemployed "too long", "not looking hard enough" or any of several other "disqualifiers" and you're magically "not unemployed". The most important one though is how we've allowed the government to provide us with a "poverty measure" that assesses "poverty" in a way that violates human rights and completely leaves out at least tens of thousands of those TRULY in poverty and doesn't provide proper warnings to anyone about those NEAR being in TRUE poverty.
Our current "poverty measure" doesn't count you until you're - as my Southern family members say - "dirt poor". If they're willing to count you, you're only *maybe* able to get your area's entry level housing (and even that by spending quite a lot more than the commonly advised - and allowed by the poverty formula and assistance program guidelines - 1/3 of your income), you almost certainly won't be able to afford to save (and if you can figure a way to do so, assistance program guidelines will penalize you for doing so), and at some point your budget will force you - even with assistance (should you have managed to get it) - to make decisions and answer questions like "utilities or food", "food or medical", "utilities or medical", "will I *ever* be able to see a doctor?", "can I afford to fix my car AND buy car insurance?", etc. Clearly our nation doesn't understand the concept of ECONOMIC justice and human rights.
What many don't understand is that it's been easy for many in this group to slip from middle class to poverty for a long time. All it's taken is for them to find the cracks in our nation's safety net. A lot of them health care related and a lot of them the discriminatory bits. Like the "help" programs that narrowly define who gets specific cancers and if you're not "old enough" then they won't help you - even if you really do have the cancer. Or the many disabled adults who need medical assistance - only to find out that many states close off parts or all of "Public Health" to anyone who doesn't have Medicaid or other insurance which leaves them to then find out a determination of disabled in the sense of "unable to work" is required to get Medicaid (if your state even offers it for disabled adults). Or that you can be as little as $5 for the YEAR over a guideline and that disqualifies you from all help - for at least a year. Our safety net doesn't look much like a net, folks. It's way past due for repair. What we're finding now, sadly, is just a LOT of people finding these problems that have been there for a long time.
Posted by Danetta Amschler on 10/01/2009 @ 05:30PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I fear things will only get worse. Even with no reduction in income it gets harder. With money being printed with no restraint, millions of acres of rich farm land put out of business with water cut off to save a minnow, with all forms of energy about to be regulated to prices unheard of so far, middle class and poor alike will find themselves in a whole new mess.
Posted by Charlie Reed on 10/03/2009 @ 03:05PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.