Perplexing

I am perplexed by this as well.

Every time I read how the United States is cruel, without compassion, and destroying the poor, I wonder if the aggrieved DC-NY blogger or columnist has ever left his cocoon. Poor? It is now a relative term that means no Yellowstone or Yosemite or Disneyland with the family, no office at home, no big-screen TV in two rooms, no camp for the kids, and no new car every 4-5 years. No cultural opportunities or much travel. No daily Starbucks hit. But as far as clothing, housing, basic transportation, and appurtenances go, our poor are the 1960s rich. For about $2,000 one can buy new clothes at Wal-Mart, get into a Selma subsidized apartment, and buy enough food and furniture to experience what the once wealthy thought was their own monopoly.

To suggest all this is seen as either lunatic or reactionary, but it is true.

We have Dickensian statistics, but we are not London of the 1850s — or even Fresno of 1965.

I definitely can't tell at times whether we are rich or poor. How does a "rich" country have so much debt? At the same time, the poor here eat steaks, own cell phones, cars, and dvd players. It is all confusing, frankly.