Poverty in Canada?

[August1991]

Canadians live in poverty – in Ontario, 1.3 million people, of whom 345,000 are children – based on StatsCan's after-tax low-income cut-off (in 2004, $16,853 for a single person in Toronto and $31,865 for a family of four).

Household income has traditionally been used as an unofficial measure of poverty, but more countries are moving toward also defining poverty by what items or services poor people need and are unlikely to have.

Some anti-poverty activists are hoping the McGuinty government applies a so-called "deprivation index" when it comes up with its first official definition of poverty in Ontario later this year.

But as low-income households wind up with expensive products they borrow heavily to buy, it raises the question: Can someone be defined as poor if they can't afford to buy fresh fruit and vegetables every second day or go to a movie twice a year, but are making payments on a plasma TV, a stereo or a car? The Oxleys believe they aren't poor, but they do live in a constant state of dread. If Mary were to lose her job, they'd be on welfare, she says. "My job is the lifeline."

The Oxleys can't afford either to rent or go to the movies. But Mary's line of credit is maxed out at $19,000 because of a used vehicle she bought. To make things easier for Don, at home all day, and to give the family a source of entertainment two years ago, she bought a large-screen plasma TV and made payments on it for two years.

"You have to have some entertainment for him," she says.

The $3,800 TV is now paid for. But they still have their monthly cable bill of $176, which includes the Internet, cell and home phone.

Toronto Star

If supposedly poor people in Canada can afford a plasma screen and a monthly cable bill of $176, are they really poor? Should taxpayers (the rest of us) contribute to their well-being? At what point can we say that we have helped our fellow man to survive and now it is up to him to manage?

If Canadians really want to help others in dire straits, should we not devote our efforts (and money) abroad to people who will really benefit? I would rather that my tax dollars go to someone who needs food in Darfur rather than someone who needs to pay a cable bill in Mississauga.

[Fain]

Toronto Star

If supposedly poor people in Canada can afford a plasma screen and a monthly cable bill of $176, are they really poor? Should taxpayers (the rest of us) contribute to their well-being? At what point can we say that we have helped our fellow man to survive and now it is up to him to manage?

If Canadians really want to help others in dire straits, should we not devote our efforts (and money) abroad to people who will really benefit? I would rather that my tax dollars go to someone who needs food in Darfur rather than someone who needs to pay a cable bill in Mississauga.

Oh we have it good for sure. There's no doubt, but that doesn't mean we should use the tax dollars to send to Darfur. More encouragement for voluntary contributions is needed.

[White Doors]

My taxes shouldn't increase because of someone else's stupidity.

$3800?? wow.

[WarBicycle]

Toronto Star

If supposedly poor people in Canada can afford a plasma screen and a monthly cable bill of $176, are they really poor? Should taxpayers (the rest of us) contribute to their well-being? At what point can we say that we have helped our fellow man to survive and now it is up to him to manage?

If Canadians really want to help others in dire straits, should we not devote our efforts (and money) abroad to people who will really benefit? I would rather that my tax dollars go to someone who needs food in Darfur rather than someone who needs to pay a cable bill in Mississauga.

The vast majority of people I've experienced living on welfare in Ontario are single mothers and they get barely enough to survive. I've inspected several hundred low end rental properties and have yet to see a Plasma screen TV. If they do have cable TV or a telephone it is often paid for by a parent or sibling.

[margrace]

The vast majority of people I've experienced living on welfare in Ontario are single mothers and they get barely enough to survive. I've inspected several hundred low end rental properties and have yet to see a Plasma screen TV. If they do have cable TV or a telephone it is often paid for by a parent or sibling.

Yes I agree, if you are using our Food Bank you can only use it 4 times a year. If you use it more than that you have to have an interview and cable tv is certainly out, a plasma tv no chance.

[madmax]

My taxes shouldn't increase because of someone else's stupidity.

$3800?? wow.

Well if you did, you would be poor

[myata]

One shouldn't confuse a quantitive measure, low income cuttoff, with a broadly and loosely interpreted word like "poverty". Low income is a comparative relative measure; not a statement of a quality of life per se. In a well managed family, 30K will go a long way to keep members sheltered, fed, dressed and even reasonably entertained; in a lavishly spending household with twice as much income one could be struggling to have kids fed.

The challenge for low income population is to make right choices. In a society with so many distractions, alternatives, and choices it could be a significant challenge; the issue is, in many cases (would be interesting to find out, exactly how many, i.e the ratio of reasonably managed households in the low income bracket) is not with insufficient income, but with improper management of income that could otherwise be sufficient.

[M.Dancer]

Toronto Star

If supposedly poor people in Canada can afford a plasma screen and a monthly cable bill of $176, are they really poor?

I can tell you, with cable and internet, a cell phone and a land line, I don't pay even close to that a month....

No...when someone can afford to spend over $2000 a year on home entertainment, not including the 3,800 TV....no they aren't impoverished....just palinly stupid and in need of harsh reality lessons.

[White Doors]

Well if you did, you would be poor

eh?

[eyeball]

What a typically sick thread. Pick a story about a family in a jam and twist it into a sneering complaint about poor people. Perhaps after the fellow in this story sells his TV he can sell his crutches and I bet the dog in the picture would provide at least a couple of weeks worth of meat for the table.

These people haven't asked for a single dime as near as I can tell from the story. They're not completely down yet but people are already lining up to kick them when they are.

As for the government teaching people about the pitfalls of credit...creditors could probably stand a few lectures on the pitfalls of lending too. But why should creditors worry? When their house of cards starts to collapse the Nanny-state will be there to catch them, just like it did with Bear Sterns.

[M.Dancer]

These people haven't asked for a single dime as near as I can tell from the story.....

They haven't? But how.....

They quickly racked up credit-card debt, taking out cash advances to make their monthly mortgage payments. At one point the debt on their cards reached $30,000. A couple of times they refinanced their mortgage, which ballooned to $180,000

...hence the real reason for the poverty. Instead of making a new plan when adversity struck, they behaved foolishly.

[Drea]

Household financing needs to be taught in schools. Not just one course in grade 12, but ongoing throughout school starting in the primary grades. Money management is fundamental to our society, yet it is not taught...

No one is "out there" teaching people how to be financially responsible. Usually one learns it from their parents and if their parents were lousy with money management, chances are they will be too.

[eyeball]

And their creditors behaved wisely? In any case these folks will probably have to sell their house.

Perhaps if this was a story about a drug addict and his dealer it would be easier to see how it takes two to Tango.

I suspect this story is just a tiny tip of a vast iceberg. When that ice-berg finally rolls over it'll be interesting to see how much resistance there is to bailing out floundering creditors or holding them responsible for their poor investment choices.

[sharkman]

Good thoughts Drea, the way you handle your finances will affect your life like nothing else. We live in a greedy instant gratification society.

Edited April 21, 2008 by sharkman

[White Doors]

Our society teaches us that no one wins and loses. There are no bad choices. There is no personal responsibility.

Should we be surprised when this philosophy carries over into how people manage their money?

[eyeball]

Our society teaches us that no one wins and loses. There are no bad choices. There is no personal responsibility.

Should we be surprised when this philosophy carries over into how people manage their money?

Or how countries manage their economy?

[Drea]

Our society teaches us that no one wins and loses. There are no bad choices. There is no personal responsibility.

Should we be surprised when this philosophy carries over into how people manage their money?

Isn't that the truth!

Without healthy competition in life people don't learn how to go after the brass ring -- they think they are "owed" it.

When I was a college student they were handing out Visa cards ($500 limit) so I got one... took me about six months to use it the first time, but no time at all to rack it up to $500. It took me a long time to pay it off, but it was a good learning experience. I am just thankful it didn't have a higher limit or who knows how far in debt I would've gotten.

Still, I had no one to blame but myself... the bank didn't force me to get the credit card after all.

[madmax]

I don't know who should get the most of our money. Right now the government and gas companies are getting mine.

But as for who gets the most of our AID should be those in need.

Give it while you can give it.