Conservatives Say The Poors Have It Easy (Poll)
The 184-page report covers so much ground that pundits have been able to craft just about whatever message they’d like to out of the data. All across the right, everyone from Rush Limbaugh to–well–a bunch of others parroting Rush Limbaugh, have used the results to bemoan how awful liberals are because only 40% of “solid liberals” in the poll described themselves as “often feeling proud to be an American.” Because we all know how jingoistic cheer-leading is really what makes this country great.
So, forgive me if it seems I’m about to indulge in a bit of the same, but I think that, far from simply showing how awful conservatives are, this result tells us a lot about the state of our politics today:
Pew surveyed dozens of questions, but one stands out in particular: When asked if they agree more with the statement that “poor people have hard lives because government benefits don’t go far enough to help them live decently” or “poor people have it easy because they can get government benefits without doing anything,” conservatives overwhelmingly side with the latter.
86% of “steadfast conservatives” (think: Tea Party types) and 77% of “business conservatives” say that the poor in the U.S. have it easy. Which sorta makes you wonder why we don’t all just strive to be poor, since it’s such an easy life of debauchery and leisure.
Most of these conservatives justify their anger at this impoverished life of ease by telling themselves that people are mostly poor due to a lack of effort on their own parts. (I’m not sure what the more than one-quarter of conservatives who acknowledge that it’s actually circumstances beyond the poor person’s control can possibly tell themselves so they can sleep at night. But there you have it.)
The question now becomes one of the chicken and the egg. Do Republican politicians rail against programs to support the poor because that’s what their base clearly believes? Or does the Republican base believe this because politicians and conservative media have sold them a bill of goods? In the end, it doesn’t much matter. This is where these people are, and as long as they continue to wield out-size influence, our politics and public policy will continue to tend towards the cruel.
Click here for reuse options!Copyright 2014 Liberaland
By: Sandi Behrns
Sandi Behrns is a noted policy nerd, new media & web developer, and consultant to progressive organizations and campaigns. She is a senior contributor to Liberaland, and the Executive Editor of Progressive Congress News.
35 responses to Conservatives Say The Poors Have It Easy (Poll)
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
fancypants June 27th, 2014 at 21:38
very well said
fancypants June 27th, 2014 at 21:38
very well said
Eric Trommater June 27th, 2014 at 21:52
I am shocked beyonds words that a majority conservitives who still answer pollsters on a land line phone would scapegoat the underprivledged in society to make themselves feel better in their own lives! What a stunning result huh? What kind of world do we live? Next you are going to tell me that the majority of “people” who watch The Weather Channel are actually shut in pets!
Eric Trommater June 27th, 2014 at 21:52
I am shocked beyonds words that a majority conservitives who still answer pollsters on a land line phone would scapegoat the underprivledged in society to make themselves feel better in their own lives! What a stunning result huh? What kind of world do we live? Next you are going to tell me that the majority of “people” who watch The Weather Channel are actually shut in pets!
Spirit of America June 28th, 2014 at 00:22
I think the conservatives have it wrong. I think the liberals have it wrong. And what’s worse, I don’t think either will ever get it right. At least not until ‘poor’ and ‘easy’ is truly and definitively defined.
What is poor?
According to Merriam-Webster, ‘poverty’ is ‘the state of being poor’. HHS defines poverty via income to persons in household. Now if you’re single, the amount is $11,670 per year. So, if you make $11,675 you’re no longer poor? Or if you live in Cincinnati(one of the lowest cost of living cities) and you make $11,670 are you in the same boat as if you live in Honolulu (one of the highest cost of living cities)?
Now HHS says 1 adult & 2 children the poverty line = $19,790. If that household lives in Michigan they will receive $28,872. They will have shelter, running hot/cold water, 3 squares a day, electricity… actually, data from the Department of Energy and other agencies show that the average ‘poor family’, as defined by Census officials:
1. Lives in a home that is in good repair, not crowded, and equipped with air conditioning, clothes washer and dryer, and cable or satellite TV service.
2.Prepares meals in a kitchen with a refrigerator, coffee maker and microwave as well as oven and stove.
3.Two color TVs, a DVD player or VCR and — if children are there — an Xbox, PlayStation, or other video game system and a cell phone.
4.Had enough money in the past year to meet essential needs, including adequate food and medical care.
Is someone who has that life style/possessions/conditions poor?
And then one must define ‘easy’. Is ‘easy’ just about not having to work? Is easy just about ‘I have a $50,000k job so am safe from worries’? What is easy?
If someone is on welfare w/the above situation, why couldn’t that be called easy? Well, maybe because they have their own built in worries and difficulties such as will my kids be safe in this neighborhood, will they get caught up in gangs, am I physically safe moving about, will the political whims change welfare benefits/rules, will I have to move if a development comes through, etc etc.
To me, life isn’t easy for anyone so no, the ‘poor’ don’t have it easy. Even the ‘rich’ have it easier for a time maybe, but not easy. I just watched on the news a bit ago about a very expensive house falling down a cliff. Does that owner have an ‘easy’ life? lol, not at that moment at least. Rich and poor get cancer, heart problems, strokes, fires, car crashes, etc.
If you have a roof over your head, food in your belly and clothes on your back, you’re not poor.
And your life will never be easy all the time, regardless of status.
My view
Obewon June 28th, 2014 at 00:46
Any $15/hr Seattle-Tacoma minimum wage paid worker who is single raising one child is poor, but no longer requires government subsidies of their “Employers wages.” And your supposed ‘Census view of the poor’ has just “5 results” via Google & none are reputable, or Census related.
Spirit of America June 28th, 2014 at 00:58
http://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty/14poverty.cfm
Obewon June 28th, 2014 at 01:12
HHS linked has 0 in common with your supposed 1., 2. & 3. definitions you say are “average ‘poor family’, as defined by Census officials.”
Spirit of America June 28th, 2014 at 01:14
dig a little deeper, go through reports….
Obewon June 28th, 2014 at 02:27
Nobody’s interested in your unattributed plagiarizing.
Spirit of America June 28th, 2014 at 06:35
I linked directly to an HHS site.
BTW, you never answered why you didn’t take the wager. I noticed you ‘conveniently'(?) avoid certain questions.
http://www.alan.com/2014/06/25/lois-lerners-timeline-exonerates-her/
Obewon June 28th, 2014 at 10:52
Your poor comprehension is your best feature: “( Edit: Obvious answer -No wager LOL)”-5+ Hours (3 days ago) ago. You’ve got zip to offer”<- http://disq.us/8j17gj
Spirit of America June 29th, 2014 at 15:10
You never took the wager, and since bringing it up when your only response is to avoid the question by trying to be insulting, I recon that ends the topic & any other future exchange between us. I’m not much for one-sided stacked rules & conduct.
mea_mark June 28th, 2014 at 12:08
If you continue to badger(troll) a regular reader about a silly wager you will be banned. Contribute to the discussion in a meaningful way or go away.
Spirit of America June 29th, 2014 at 15:04
How is asking a ‘why’ question badgering? He responds to the posts, insults me, but won’t give an honest answer and I’m badgering?
But, you’re the mod, your rules, he can insult and I can’t repeat an unanswered question, so to avoid any possible future problems, I simply won’t engage w/him, no problem.
Spirit of America June 28th, 2014 at 00:22
I think the conservatives have it wrong. I think the liberals have it wrong. And what’s worse, I don’t think either will ever get it right. At least not until ‘poor’ and ‘easy’ is truly and definitively defined.
What is poor?
According to Merriam-Webster, ‘poverty’ is ‘the state of being poor’. HHS defines poverty via income to persons in household. Now if you’re single, the amount is $11,670 per year. So, if you make $11,675 you’re no longer poor? Or if you live in Cincinnati(one of the lowest cost of living cities) and you make $11,670 are you in the same boat as if you live in Honolulu (one of the highest cost of living cities)?
Now HHS says 1 adult & 2 children the poverty line = $19,790. If that household lives in Michigan they will receive $28,872. They will have shelter, running hot/cold water, 3 squares a day, electricity… actually, data from the Department of Energy and other agencies show that the average ‘poor family’, as defined by Census officials:
1. Lives in a home that is in good repair, not crowded, and equipped with air conditioning, clothes washer and dryer, and cable or satellite TV service.
2.Prepares meals in a kitchen with a refrigerator, coffee maker and microwave as well as oven and stove.
3.Two color TVs, a DVD player or VCR and — if children are there — an Xbox, PlayStation, or other video game system and a cell phone.
4.Had enough money in the past year to meet essential needs, including adequate food and medical care.
Is someone who has that life style/possessions/conditions poor?
And then one must define ‘easy’. Is ‘easy’ just about not having to work? Is easy just about ‘I have a $50,000k job so am safe from worries’? What is easy?
If someone is on welfare w/the above situation, why couldn’t that be called easy? Well, maybe because they have their own built in worries and difficulties such as will my kids be safe in this neighborhood, will they get caught up in gangs, am I physically safe moving about, will the political whims change welfare benefits/rules, will I have to move if a development comes through, etc etc.
To me, life isn’t easy for anyone so no, the ‘poor’ don’t have it easy. Even the ‘rich’ have it easier for a time maybe, but not easy. I just watched on the news a bit ago about a very expensive house falling down a cliff. Does that owner have an ‘easy’ life? lol, not at that moment at least. Rich and poor get cancer, heart problems, strokes, fires, car crashes, etc.
If you have a roof over your head, food in your belly and clothes on your back, you’re not poor.
And your life will never be easy all the time, regardless of status.
My view
Obewon June 28th, 2014 at 00:46
Any $15/hr Seattle-Tacoma minimum wage paid worker who is single raising one child is poor, but no longer requires government subsidies of their “Employers wages.” And your supposed “average ‘poor family’, as defined by Census officials” has just “5 results” via Google & none are reputable, or Census related.
Here are the actual poverty definitions and thresholds. http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/methods/definitions.html https://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/data/threshld/ http://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty/contacts.cfm
Spirit of America June 28th, 2014 at 00:58
http://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty/14poverty.cfm
Obewon June 28th, 2014 at 01:12
HHS & Census.Gov linked have 0 in common with your supposed 1., 2. & 3. definitions you posted claiming an “average ‘poor family’, as defined by Census officials.” Your post is copied from NationalReview racists scooping from their outhouse on July 18, 2011. These NR Limbaughtomies cite a Koch funded clown at “Heritage Foundation.” http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/272081/modern-poverty-includes-ac-and-xbox-ken-mcintyre
Spirit of America June 28th, 2014 at 01:14
dig a little deeper, go through reports….
Obewon June 28th, 2014 at 02:27
Nobody is interested in your unattributed Koch bros plagiarizing. And the only thing you unknowingly linked actually from Department of Energy: is “Weatherization Assistance for Low-Income Persons.” As always SoA=DoA. Thanks again for proving why “TP support” sunk to all time record low 15% polled 5/14/2014. You could learn a lot from the working poor’s actual endeavors and their great successes at bettering themselves.
Spirit of America June 28th, 2014 at 06:35
I linked directly to an HHS site.
BTW, you never answered why you didn’t take the wager. I noticed you ‘conveniently'(?) avoid certain questions.
http://www.alan.com/2014/06/25/lois-lerners-timeline-exonerates-her/
Obewon June 28th, 2014 at 10:52
Your poor comprehension is your best feature: “( Edit: Obvious answer -No wager LOL)”-5+ Hours (now 3 days) ago. You’ve got zip to offer”<- http://disq.us/8j17gj
Spirit of America June 29th, 2014 at 15:10
You never took the wager, and since bringing it up when your only response is to avoid the question by trying to be insulting, I recon that ends the topic & any other future exchange between us. I’m not much for one-sided stacked rules & conduct.
mea_mark June 28th, 2014 at 12:08
If you continue to badger(troll) a regular reader about a silly wager you will be banned. Contribute to the discussion in a meaningful way or go away.
Spirit of America June 29th, 2014 at 15:04
How is asking a ‘why’ question badgering? He responds to the posts, insults me, but won’t give an honest answer and I’m badgering?
But, you’re the mod, your rules, he can insult and I can’t repeat an unanswered question, so to avoid any possible future problems, I simply won’t engage w/him, no problem.
Shades June 28th, 2014 at 07:49
I’m guessing these very same conservatives who think the poor have it so easy, should life’s circumstances put them in the same position, would take gov. assistance in a heartbeat, believing themselves to be the exception that deserves it. I believe Joe/Plummer voiced this very sentiment.
Shades June 28th, 2014 at 07:49
I’m guessing these very same conservatives who think the poor have it so easy, should life’s circumstances put them in the same position, would take gov. assistance in a heartbeat, believing themselves to be the exception that deserves it. I believe Joe/Plummer voiced this very sentiment.
labman57 June 28th, 2014 at 11:53
These conservative folks need to spend a day in the shoes of those living in poverty while working multiple minimum wage jobs in an effort to make ends meet.
labman57 June 28th, 2014 at 11:53
These conservative folks need to spend a day in the shoes of those living in poverty while working multiple minimum wage jobs in an effort to make ends meet.
labman57 June 28th, 2014 at 11:53
These conservative folks need to spend a day in the shoes of those living in poverty while working multiple minimum wage jobs in an effort to make ends meet.
Abby Normal June 28th, 2014 at 17:05
These kind-hearted conservatives should try existing on $112 of food stamps per month. That works out to $3.60 per day or $1.20 per meal if they eat three times per day. Contrary to the stories on Fox News, I doubt few if any of them are eating lobster.
Abby Normal June 28th, 2014 at 17:05
These kind-hearted conservatives should try existing on $112 of food stamps per month. That works out to $3.60 per day or $1.20 per meal if they eat three times per day. Contrary to the stories on Fox News, I doubt few if any of them are eating lobster.
fancypants June 28th, 2014 at 18:56
the poor had stossel worried he wasn’t making enough on his show
fancypants June 28th, 2014 at 18:56
the poor had stossel worried he wasn’t making enough on his show