Ridiculous
I can't believe that "acting poor" has become a hobby for so many upper middle class people. "Poverty" is not a lifestyle; it is a fact of life. Many Americans move in an out of poverty throughout their lives, with most people remaining below the poverty line for a year or two at a time. Most people in poverty do not STAY in poverty, as some try to purport, but it is still a major problem.
However, the book Broke is Beautiful has a disgusting, misleading title. Broke is not beautiful. Broke is painful, sorrowful, and detrimental. A family that makes $20,000 a year is twice as likely to divorce as a family that makes $50,000 a year. Why? Because money puts an enormous strain on relationships. People in low-paying blue collar jobs suffer more chronic fatigue and pain than those in white collar jobs. Why? Because they are under constant strain at work, have to deal with decisions like paying for electricity or paying for food, and cannot adequately afford health care. While Medicaid is great, some people are just above the poverty line and can neither receive help nor afford care on their own. (I'll have to write a post about the poverty line sometime.)
The author claims that half the people in the world live on $2 a day, and that's a really pretty number until you consider some other facts. America's standard of living would not allow for that, just like other industrialized nations. If you live on $2 a day, that means that you only make $730 a year (or $732 during leap years). This is impossible. Even if you get a bed at a shelter, you might have to pay rent at the shelter if you have a job because funding is running low to provide homeless shelters, a service which can be more expensive than just providing permanent housing for families. Not much incentive to job hunt, is it?
At any rate, okay, you have a bed. The poverty line in the United States is $10,830 a year for a single person and is determined by the cost of food for one year X 3 (which is another hot spot for me, but I digress). So, at $10,380, the cost of food is $3,460 a year. That breaks down to about $9 for food alone. Granted, one couple decided to eat for a dollar a day, but the crux of this idea is to buy in bulk. To buy in bulk, you must have a decent bit of money up front, and people in poverty cannot spare the money to put aside for savings. We know that it's cheaper to buy a 24 pack of Ramen noodles for $10 than to buy a 6 pack for $3, but what if you only have $5? You can't save the $5 for your next paycheck if you're starving.
So, you might have a bed, and you might have food, but you will still be under constant stress to make ends meet. I realize that the author's message is that living frugally is better than living extravagantly--particularly in a downward economy--but her title makes it seems as though people who live in poverty should actually be quite happy in their situations and "make the most of it," which is honestly a ridiculous phrase to tell a person who might not be eating that night.
Perhaps the author should have read Nickel and Dimed or watched 30 Days: On Minimum Wage before adding to the common myth that poor people are happier than rich people, and you can read stories from people who truly believe this preposterous idea here, and here, and here. "Common knowledge" tells society that poor people are happier in their situations because they don't have to be "tempted" with buying all sorts of neat things, like homes or cars, and can focus on the family. In truth, this is a fairytale to make middle and upper class people feel better about not providing for the poor. At least one blogger got it right.
Let me put it another way: if being broke (in the sense of poverty) really were beautiful, more people would be going after low-paying blue collar jobs, fewer people would be attending college, and no one would ever try to keep up with the Joneses. That's not the way things work in my reality.
However, the book Broke is Beautiful has a disgusting, misleading title. Broke is not beautiful. Broke is painful, sorrowful, and detrimental. A family that makes $20,000 a year is twice as likely to divorce as a family that makes $50,000 a year. Why? Because money puts an enormous strain on relationships. People in low-paying blue collar jobs suffer more chronic fatigue and pain than those in white collar jobs. Why? Because they are under constant strain at work, have to deal with decisions like paying for electricity or paying for food, and cannot adequately afford health care. While Medicaid is great, some people are just above the poverty line and can neither receive help nor afford care on their own. (I'll have to write a post about the poverty line sometime.)
The author claims that half the people in the world live on $2 a day, and that's a really pretty number until you consider some other facts. America's standard of living would not allow for that, just like other industrialized nations. If you live on $2 a day, that means that you only make $730 a year (or $732 during leap years). This is impossible. Even if you get a bed at a shelter, you might have to pay rent at the shelter if you have a job because funding is running low to provide homeless shelters, a service which can be more expensive than just providing permanent housing for families. Not much incentive to job hunt, is it?
At any rate, okay, you have a bed. The poverty line in the United States is $10,830 a year for a single person and is determined by the cost of food for one year X 3 (which is another hot spot for me, but I digress). So, at $10,380, the cost of food is $3,460 a year. That breaks down to about $9 for food alone. Granted, one couple decided to eat for a dollar a day, but the crux of this idea is to buy in bulk. To buy in bulk, you must have a decent bit of money up front, and people in poverty cannot spare the money to put aside for savings. We know that it's cheaper to buy a 24 pack of Ramen noodles for $10 than to buy a 6 pack for $3, but what if you only have $5? You can't save the $5 for your next paycheck if you're starving.
So, you might have a bed, and you might have food, but you will still be under constant stress to make ends meet. I realize that the author's message is that living frugally is better than living extravagantly--particularly in a downward economy--but her title makes it seems as though people who live in poverty should actually be quite happy in their situations and "make the most of it," which is honestly a ridiculous phrase to tell a person who might not be eating that night.
Perhaps the author should have read Nickel and Dimed or watched 30 Days: On Minimum Wage before adding to the common myth that poor people are happier than rich people, and you can read stories from people who truly believe this preposterous idea here, and here, and here. "Common knowledge" tells society that poor people are happier in their situations because they don't have to be "tempted" with buying all sorts of neat things, like homes or cars, and can focus on the family. In truth, this is a fairytale to make middle and upper class people feel better about not providing for the poor. At least one blogger got it right.
Let me put it another way: if being broke (in the sense of poverty) really were beautiful, more people would be going after low-paying blue collar jobs, fewer people would be attending college, and no one would ever try to keep up with the Joneses. That's not the way things work in my reality.