Who’s poor in America? That’s a question hard to answer. Hard because there’s no conclusive definition of poverty. Low income ma

admin2017-07-09  45

问题     Who’s poor in America? That’s a question hard to answer. Hard because there’s no conclusive definition of poverty. Low income matters, though how low is unclear. Poverty is also a state of mind that fosters self-defeating behavior—bad work habits, family breakdowns, and addictions. Finally, poverty results from bad luck: accidents, job losses, disability.
    Despite poverty’s messiness, we’ve measured progress against it by a single statistic; the federal poverty line. By this measure, we haven’t made much progress. But the apparent lack of progress is misleading for two reasons.
    First, it ignores immigration. Many immigrants are poor and low-skilled. They add to the poor. From 1989 to 2007, about three quarters of the increase in the poverty population occurred among Hispanics(西班牙裔美国人) —mostly immigrants and their children.
    Second, the poor’s material well-being has improved. The official poverty measure obscures this by counting only pre-tax cash income and ignoring other sources of support, including food stamps and housing subsidies. Although many poor live from hand to mouth, they’ve participated in rising living standards. In 2005, 91% had microwaves, 79% air-conditioning, and 48% cell phones.
    The existing poverty line could be improved by adding some income sources and subtracting some expenses. Unfortunately, the administration’s proposal for a "supplemental poverty measure" in 2011 goes beyond that. The new poverty number would compound public confusion. It also raises questions about whether the statistic is tailored to favor a political agenda.
    The "supplemental measure" ties the poverty threshold to what the poorest third of Americans spend on food, housing, clothing, and utilities. The actual threshold will probably be higher than today’s poverty line. Many Americans would find this curious; people get richer, but "poverty" stays stuck.
    What produces this outcome is a different view of poverty. The present concept is an absolute one; the poverty threshold reflects the amount estimated to meet basic needs. By contrast, the new measure embraces a relative notion of poverty; people are automatically poor if they’re a given distance from the top, even if their incomes are increasing.
    The new indicator is a "propaganda device" to promote income redistribution by showing that poverty is stubborn or increasing. The Census Bureau has estimated statistics similar to the administration’s proposal. In 2008, the traditional poverty rate was 13.2% ; estimates of the new statistic range up to 17%. The new poverty statistic exceeds the old, and the gap grows larger over time.
    As senator Daniel Moynihan said, the administration is defining poverty up. It’s reasonable to debate how much we should aid the poor or reduce economic inequality. But the debate should not be swayed by misleading statistics that few Americans could possibly understand. Government statistics should strive for political neutrality. This one fails.
What does the author think of the administration’s proposal for a "supplemental poverty measure" ?

选项 A、It is intended to further help the poor.
B、It is made to serve political purposes.
C、It is a positive response to changed circumstances.
D、It is an attempt to combat the economic recession.

答案B

解析 细节题。根据题干关键词the administration’s proposal和supplemental poverty measure定位到第5段。本段中作者指出,当前的贫困线可以通过增加穷人收入来源和减少穷人支出的办法得到改善,但是政府提议的新标准做得过了头,不仅让公众更加困惑,也让人怀疑新标准中的数据是为一定的政治目的量身定制的。由此看出,作者认为政府提议的新标准有一定的政治目的,文章末段末句也暗示了这一点。所以B项为正确答案,其中serve political purpose是对原文favor a political agenda的同义转述。
转载请注明原文地址:https://jikaoti.com/ti/qAr7FFFM
0

最新回复(0)