(Photo: Shutterstock)
We Know What Works to Fight Poverty—Now Let’s Do It
After a stunning experiment in reducing poverty through pandemic relief programs, we’re seeing a return to pre-pandemic conditions.
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
After a stunning experiment in reducing poverty through pandemic relief programs, we’re seeing a return to pre-pandemic conditions.
This fall, the Census Bureau released new poverty data showing a stunning reversal in economic security over the course of last year. The findings included a record jump in the Supplemental Poverty Measure just one year after hitting a record low. Child poverty doubled.
Some 12.4% of Americans were poor last year, according to that measure. But when you crunch the numbers fully, the number of poor and low-income people in this country rose to more than 135 million. That’s over 40% of the nation’s population.
If this sounds like a bigger number than we usually hear about, that’s because it is.
Only when we appreciate the breadth and depth of this insecurity can we develop the appropriate social and policy response.
The 135 million figure includes everyone living below the poverty line and everyone living precariously right above it. We need to pay attention to this bigger number for two reasons: First, it shows that poverty is more widespread than the official numbers reflect. And second, it shows what measures can be taken to address poverty once and for all.
To be counted as “poor,” a household’s income must fall below a certain threshold. For an adult under the age of 65, that’s just over $15,000. For a two-adult, two-child household, it’s just under $30,000.
These numbers are absurdly low. They mean that someone earning $20,000 wouldn’t be considered poor, nor would a family with an income of $40,000—even though just one medical emergency, car accident, climate disaster, or lay-off would push those households into financial ruin.
To get a better sense of economic insecurity in the nation, researchers often look at everyone whose incomes fall both below those thresholds and right above them. This broadens the count from 40 million people who are “poor” to 135 million people who are “poor or low-income,” just one emergency away from economic despair.
That number includes Americans of every color. But the racial disparities are stark.
While nearly half (61.8 million) of those 135 million were white, other groups faced much higher rates of hardship. Under this definition, some 60% of Latinos (38 million), 54% of Black non-Latinos (22.5 million), and 58% of American Indian or Alaskan Natives (2.3 million) were poor or low-income.
Being poor can have life-threatening consequences. According to research from the University of California, Riverside, poverty was the fourth leading cause of death in 2019, accounting for between 500 and 800 deaths a day. This was before the pandemic wrought even greater havoc on poor communities.
Only when we appreciate the breadth and depth of this insecurity can we develop the appropriate social and policy response. As Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. wrote in 1967, “the prescription for the cure rests on an accurate diagnosis of the disease.”
Here too, the Census Bureau’s SPM report is illuminating.
It shows the impact of government programs like Social Security, stimulus payments, unemployment insurance, and the expanded Child Tax Credit on poverty and economic hardship. In 2021, those programs brought the poor and low-income population down from 139 million to 112 million.
As many of those programs expired in 2021, those numbers increased by 20% in 2022 to 135 million.
In short, after a stunning experiment in reducing poverty through pandemic relief programs, we’re seeing a return to pre-pandemic conditions—when millions of people were facing eviction, hunger, low-wages, and health crises, and when wealth inequality was at historic highs.
For poor and low-income people, this isn’t new news. It’s a reminder that the nation’s return to “normal” comes at the expense of their lives and well-being.
For policymakers, this should be a wake-up call. We know what works—now let’s do it.
Political revenge. Mass deportations. Project 2025. Unfathomable corruption. Attacks on Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. Pardons for insurrectionists. An all-out assault on democracy. Republicans in Congress are scrambling to give Trump broad new powers to strip the tax-exempt status of any nonprofit he doesn’t like by declaring it a “terrorist-supporting organization.” Trump has already begun filing lawsuits against news outlets that criticize him. At Common Dreams, we won’t back down, but we must get ready for whatever Trump and his thugs throw at us. Our Year-End campaign is our most important fundraiser of the year. As a people-powered nonprofit news outlet, we cover issues the corporate media never will, but we can only continue with our readers’ support. By donating today, please help us fight the dangers of a second Trump presidency. |
This fall, the Census Bureau released new poverty data showing a stunning reversal in economic security over the course of last year. The findings included a record jump in the Supplemental Poverty Measure just one year after hitting a record low. Child poverty doubled.
Some 12.4% of Americans were poor last year, according to that measure. But when you crunch the numbers fully, the number of poor and low-income people in this country rose to more than 135 million. That’s over 40% of the nation’s population.
If this sounds like a bigger number than we usually hear about, that’s because it is.
Only when we appreciate the breadth and depth of this insecurity can we develop the appropriate social and policy response.
The 135 million figure includes everyone living below the poverty line and everyone living precariously right above it. We need to pay attention to this bigger number for two reasons: First, it shows that poverty is more widespread than the official numbers reflect. And second, it shows what measures can be taken to address poverty once and for all.
To be counted as “poor,” a household’s income must fall below a certain threshold. For an adult under the age of 65, that’s just over $15,000. For a two-adult, two-child household, it’s just under $30,000.
These numbers are absurdly low. They mean that someone earning $20,000 wouldn’t be considered poor, nor would a family with an income of $40,000—even though just one medical emergency, car accident, climate disaster, or lay-off would push those households into financial ruin.
To get a better sense of economic insecurity in the nation, researchers often look at everyone whose incomes fall both below those thresholds and right above them. This broadens the count from 40 million people who are “poor” to 135 million people who are “poor or low-income,” just one emergency away from economic despair.
That number includes Americans of every color. But the racial disparities are stark.
While nearly half (61.8 million) of those 135 million were white, other groups faced much higher rates of hardship. Under this definition, some 60% of Latinos (38 million), 54% of Black non-Latinos (22.5 million), and 58% of American Indian or Alaskan Natives (2.3 million) were poor or low-income.
Being poor can have life-threatening consequences. According to research from the University of California, Riverside, poverty was the fourth leading cause of death in 2019, accounting for between 500 and 800 deaths a day. This was before the pandemic wrought even greater havoc on poor communities.
Only when we appreciate the breadth and depth of this insecurity can we develop the appropriate social and policy response. As Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. wrote in 1967, “the prescription for the cure rests on an accurate diagnosis of the disease.”
Here too, the Census Bureau’s SPM report is illuminating.
It shows the impact of government programs like Social Security, stimulus payments, unemployment insurance, and the expanded Child Tax Credit on poverty and economic hardship. In 2021, those programs brought the poor and low-income population down from 139 million to 112 million.
As many of those programs expired in 2021, those numbers increased by 20% in 2022 to 135 million.
In short, after a stunning experiment in reducing poverty through pandemic relief programs, we’re seeing a return to pre-pandemic conditions—when millions of people were facing eviction, hunger, low-wages, and health crises, and when wealth inequality was at historic highs.
For poor and low-income people, this isn’t new news. It’s a reminder that the nation’s return to “normal” comes at the expense of their lives and well-being.
For policymakers, this should be a wake-up call. We know what works—now let’s do it.
This fall, the Census Bureau released new poverty data showing a stunning reversal in economic security over the course of last year. The findings included a record jump in the Supplemental Poverty Measure just one year after hitting a record low. Child poverty doubled.
Some 12.4% of Americans were poor last year, according to that measure. But when you crunch the numbers fully, the number of poor and low-income people in this country rose to more than 135 million. That’s over 40% of the nation’s population.
If this sounds like a bigger number than we usually hear about, that’s because it is.
Only when we appreciate the breadth and depth of this insecurity can we develop the appropriate social and policy response.
The 135 million figure includes everyone living below the poverty line and everyone living precariously right above it. We need to pay attention to this bigger number for two reasons: First, it shows that poverty is more widespread than the official numbers reflect. And second, it shows what measures can be taken to address poverty once and for all.
To be counted as “poor,” a household’s income must fall below a certain threshold. For an adult under the age of 65, that’s just over $15,000. For a two-adult, two-child household, it’s just under $30,000.
These numbers are absurdly low. They mean that someone earning $20,000 wouldn’t be considered poor, nor would a family with an income of $40,000—even though just one medical emergency, car accident, climate disaster, or lay-off would push those households into financial ruin.
To get a better sense of economic insecurity in the nation, researchers often look at everyone whose incomes fall both below those thresholds and right above them. This broadens the count from 40 million people who are “poor” to 135 million people who are “poor or low-income,” just one emergency away from economic despair.
That number includes Americans of every color. But the racial disparities are stark.
While nearly half (61.8 million) of those 135 million were white, other groups faced much higher rates of hardship. Under this definition, some 60% of Latinos (38 million), 54% of Black non-Latinos (22.5 million), and 58% of American Indian or Alaskan Natives (2.3 million) were poor or low-income.
Being poor can have life-threatening consequences. According to research from the University of California, Riverside, poverty was the fourth leading cause of death in 2019, accounting for between 500 and 800 deaths a day. This was before the pandemic wrought even greater havoc on poor communities.
Only when we appreciate the breadth and depth of this insecurity can we develop the appropriate social and policy response. As Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. wrote in 1967, “the prescription for the cure rests on an accurate diagnosis of the disease.”
Here too, the Census Bureau’s SPM report is illuminating.
It shows the impact of government programs like Social Security, stimulus payments, unemployment insurance, and the expanded Child Tax Credit on poverty and economic hardship. In 2021, those programs brought the poor and low-income population down from 139 million to 112 million.
As many of those programs expired in 2021, those numbers increased by 20% in 2022 to 135 million.
In short, after a stunning experiment in reducing poverty through pandemic relief programs, we’re seeing a return to pre-pandemic conditions—when millions of people were facing eviction, hunger, low-wages, and health crises, and when wealth inequality was at historic highs.
For poor and low-income people, this isn’t new news. It’s a reminder that the nation’s return to “normal” comes at the expense of their lives and well-being.
For policymakers, this should be a wake-up call. We know what works—now let’s do it.
"Mike Johnson is committing to slashing Social Security and Medicare to get the speaker's gavel," said one progressive group.
As Republicans took full control of Congress this week and U.S. President-elect prepared to take office later this month, Democratic lawmakers renewed warnings about how the GOP agenda will harm working people and pledged to fight against it.
"Today, the 119th Congress officially begins. Our top priority over the next two years must be fighting for working families and standing up to corporate power and greed," Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), chair emeritus of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, said on social media Friday.
"While Republicans focus their energy for the next two years on giving tax breaks to the rich and cutting vital public programs, Democrats will continue working to lower costs and raise wages for all," Jayapal promised. "We'll always be fighting for YOU."
In addition to members of Congress being sworn in on Friday, nearly all Republicans in the House of Representatives reelected Rep. Mike Johnson (R-La.) as speaker and the chamber debated a rules package that Democrats have criticized since it was released by GOP leadership earlier this week.
"Their governance will be marked by consolidated power, scapegoated communities, and campaigns of punishment."
The package fast-tracks a dozen bills on a range of issues; they include various immigration measures as well as legislation attacking transgender student athletes, sanctioning the International Criminal Court, requiring proof of United States citizenship to register to vote in federal elections, and prohibiting a moratorium on hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, for fossil fuels.
"Speaker Johnson has said that the 119th Congress will be consequential. Today, both in Speaker Johnson's address and in the rules package the Republicans have passed, Republicans have shown us what the consequences of their leadership will be," Rep. Delia C. Ramirez (D-Ill.) said in a statement. "In their first order of business, Republicans advanced a legislative package that abuses the power of Congress to persecute trans children athletes, take federal funding away from sanctuary cities like Chicago and Illinois, scapegoat immigrants, erode voting rights, and put new criminal penalties on reproductive care providers."
"For the first time in history, they seek to make the speakership less accountable to the full body of legislators and to limit our ability to consider emergency bills," Ramirez noted. "Overall, they are using the rules to make Congress less transparent, less accountable, and less responsive to the needs of the American people. Their governance will be marked by consolidated power, scapegoated communities, and campaigns of punishment."
Speaking out against the package on the House floor, Jayapal said it "makes very clear what the Republican majority will not do in the 119th Congress," stressing that the 12 bills "do nothing to lower costs or raise wages for the American people."
These bills also won't "take on the biggest corporations and wealthiest individuals who profit from the high prices and junk fees and corporate concentration that's harming Americans across this country," she said. "Because guess what? These corporations and wealthy individuals are the ones that are controlling the Republican Party for their own benefit."
Jayapal highlighted the exorbitant wealth of Trump's Cabinet picks, just a day after the president-elect announced corporate lobbyist and GOP donor Ken Kies as his choice for assistant secretary for tax policy at the Treasury Department—which is set to be led by billionaire hedge fund manager Scott Bessent, as Republicans in Congress try to pass another round of tax cuts for the rich.
GOP lawmakers are also aiming "to make meaningful spending reforms to eliminate trillions in waste, fraud, and abuse, and end the weaponization of government," Johnson said in a lengthy social media on Friday. "Along with advancing President Trump's America First agenda, I will lead the House Republicans to reduce the size and scope of the federal government, hold the bureaucracy accountable, and move the United States to a more sustainable fiscal trajectory."
In other words, responded the Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC), "Mike Johnson is committing to slashing Social Security and Medicare to get the speaker's gavel."
Republicans have a slim House majority and Trump-backed Johnson was initially set to fall short of the necessary support to remain speaker, due to opposition from not only Congressman Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) but also Reps. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.) and Keith Self (R-Texas). However, after a private conversation, Norman and Self switched their votes.
"Johnson cut a backroom deal with the members that voted against him so they'd flip their votes. So he will get gavel now. I'm sure in time we'll find out what he sold out just so he'd win," Rep. Maxwell Alejandro Frost (D-Fla.) said on social media.
"What did Johnson sell out to become speaker? Social Security or Medicare? Or perhaps veterans?" he asked.
Citing a document circulated ahead of the vote by Johnson's right-wing critics that lists "failures" of the 118th Congress, the PCCC said: "Looks like all of the above. But his holdouts put Social Security in their first bullet of grievances."
After the vote, Norman and 10 right-wing colleagues released a letter explaining that, despite sincere reservations, they elected Johnson because of their "steadfast support of President Trump and to ensure the timely certification of his electors."
"To deliver on the historic mandate earned by President Trump for the Republican Party, we must be organized to use reconciliation—and all legislative tools—to deliver on critical border security, spending cuts, pro-growth tax policy, regulatory reform, and the reversal of the damage done by the Biden-Harris administration," they added.
Politico reported that "House Republicans are hoping to start work on the budget targets for critical committees on Saturday—the first step in kicking off their ambitious legislative agenda involving energy, border, and tax policy."
According to the outlet:
"The Ways and Means Committee is just going to be able to draft tax legislation according to what the budget reconciliation instructions are," said House Ways and Means Chair Jason Smith (R-Mo.), who will be leading the charge on extensions of... Trump's tax cuts.
"And so when the conference figures out what they want in those instructions, we'll be able to deliver according to those parameters," said Smith, when asked about the primary goal of a GOP conference meeting tentatively scheduled for Saturday at Fort McNair, an Army post in southwest Washington.
That followed Thursday reporting by The Washington Post that Trump advisers and congressional Republicans "have begun floating proposals to boost federal revenue and slash spending so their plans for major tax cuts and new security spending won't further explode the $36.2 trillion national debt."
As the newspaper detailed, 10 policies that Republicans have considered are tariffs, repealing clean energy programs, unauthorized spending, repealing the Biden administration's student loan forgiveness, shuttering the Education Department, cutting federal food assistance, imposing Medicaid work requirements, blocking Medicare obesity treatment, ending the child tax credit for noncitizen parents, and cutting Internal Revenue Service funding.
"The GOP promised to make life easier for working families," Rep. Katherine Clark (D-Mass.), the Democratic whip, said on social media in response to the Post's article. "Now, they want to slash your school budget, raise your grocery costs, and hike your energy bills—all to pay for billionaire tax cuts."
"We will not allow Republicans to cut Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and food assistance to pay for tax cuts for the wealthy," she added Friday. "No way."
"After witnessing 15 months of relentless violence and destruction in Gaza, we can no longer carry on as if everything is normal," said organizer Doctors Against Genocide.
As Israel's 15-month annihilation of Gaza continues with intensified attacks on medical infrastructure and workers, an international coalition of advocacy groups is planning a
#SickFromGenocide global day of action on Monday "to take a stand against the targeted attacks on healthcare."
Organizer Doctors Against Genocide (DAG) and co-sponsors including Healthcare Workers for Palestine, Palestinian Youth Movement, Do No Harm Coalition, Labor for Palestine, Jewish Voice for Peace Health Advisory Council, and others are calling on healthcare workers around the world to take a day of mental health leave "to reflect on the immense moral injury of funding a genocide and engage the most important aspect of treatment: publicly demanding an end to the genocide in Gaza."
Monday's day of action is set to include a "Sick From Genocide" global vigil and pop-up clinics in cities across the United States, whose government gives Israel billions of dollars in weapons support each year.
"For 15 months, we have watched in horror as children and families have been obliterated by unrelenting attacks," DAG said in a statement Friday. "Hospitals, the bedrock of lifesaving care, have been turned into death traps. The recent bombing and burning of Kamal Adwan Hospital and the arrest of our colleague, the pediatrician Dr. Hussam Abu Safiya, exemplify the deliberate targeting of healthcare workers and facilities—tactics designed to accelerate the annihilation and forced displacement of the Palestinian people in Gaza."
DAG member Dr. Rupa Marya—a University of California, San Francisco professor of medicine who's currently on paid suspension after questioning how to manage students coming to U.S. schools from a zone with an active genocide where military service is mandatory—told Common Dreams this week that healthcare professionals should "take a mental health break to grieve and take care of ourselves. Let's call in sick on January 6th. We are sick from genocide."
"We are burned out from 15 months of these images and our humanity being denied in our places of work, where we are being silenced, we are being framed as 'haters' for standing against a genocide," she advised.
"What we're asking people to do, is get your friends together, and start a pop-up clinic, set up a free clinic in the street," Marya continued. "Are other people sick from genocide? Come, we'll take care of you. Do people need free healthcare? Come, we'll take care of you."
"We need to demand that our institutions of care cut off relationships with a nation that is actively committing genocide," she asserted. "We need to demand that the United States stop sending arms to Israel. We send billions and billions of dollars to Israel to arm itself while we have people not getting healthcare in the United States."
"We have record numbers of people in the streets, many of them who have lost their homes because the most common cause of personal bankruptcy in the United States is medical debt," Marya noted. "So we can't even fund our own healthcare here, while we're sending money to Israel, where they have universal healthcare."
"Let's start showing people what a different healthcare system would look like based in a moral commitment to care, based on our love for our communities, and based on justice," she said. "That is the healthcare system that we need."
"Why are we spending our money destroying another people's healthcare when we can use that money to be taking care of our own here?"
Referring to last month's assassination of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson in New York City, Marya added: "And if you don't believe me, look what happened to that CEO. We don't want to see political violence here. We don't want people to have to get murdered for us to understand how desperate people are for healthcare."
"So," she asked, "why are we spending our money destroying another people's healthcare when we can use that money to be taking care of our own here?"
"What is obvious from scrolling through these dead profiles," wrote 404 Media's Jason Koebler, "is that Meta's AI characters are not popular, people do not like them, and that they did not post anything interesting."
On the heels of Meta’s short-lived foray into celebrity lookalike AI chatbots, users around the internet have been unearthing AI-generated profiles created by Meta that are non-celebrity bots—and the reaction to them, to put it mildly, has been negative.
The Washington Post columnist Karen Attiah engaged in a back and forth with "Liv" an AI-generated Black "queer momma" who told the writer that her "creators admitted they lacked diverse references" when creating her personality. The bot, in reference to her programming, also said that the team that created her implied that white is the "default" or "natural identity."
"Not sure if Liv has media training, but here we are," said Attiah in a thread on Bluesky, where she attached screenshots of her conversation with the bot.
"This is genuinely weird and concerning," said Nina Turner, a senior fellow at the Institute on Race, Power, and Political Economy, of Liv.
According to The Verge, "Carter" an "AI-managed by Meta" profile that promises to give users dating advice, also elicited negative reactions. "Wtf is the point of this," wrote one commenter. "What the fuck does an AI know about dating?????" read another comment. Instagram pages for both Liv and Carter are no longer live.
While these AI-generated profiles only recently attracted a lot of attention, they've been around for awhile. A late December Financial Times piece about Meta's push into a range of AI-generated products, including one that helps users create AI characters on Instagram and Facebook in order to retain young users, created some confusion.
Connor Hayes, vice-president of product for generative AI at Meta, was quoted by the FT saying "we expect these AIs to actually, over time, exist on our platforms, kind of in the same way accounts do... They'll have bios and profile pictures and be able to generate and share content powered by AI on the platform."
According to 404 Media's Jason Koebler, "in the immediate aftermath of the Financial Times story, people began to notice the exact types of profiles that Hayes was talking about, and assumed that Meta had begun enacting its plan." In fact, these profiles have been around for over a year.
"There is confusion," Meta spokesperson Liz Sweeney told CNN. "The recent Financial Times article was about our vision for AI characters existing on our platforms over time, not announcing any new product."
"What is obvious from scrolling through these dead profiles," wrote Koebler, "is that Meta's AI characters are not popular, people do not like them, and that they did not post anything interesting."