Home Class Politics So We Can All Ignore Bhaskar Sunkara Then

So We Can All Ignore Bhaskar Sunkara Then



Bhaskar Sunkara is the bubba behind The Jacobin, that magazine that wants to bring socialism back into modern life. This would be a good reason to denigrate him of course, desiring that another 100 million bourgeoisie get eliminated as a class.

We can do further though and point out that we can and should ignore him given that he spouts piffle. This from his recent Guardian column:

Forty million Americans are impoverished, according to the UN.

Well, no. That’s actually from the UN special rapporteur on poverty, Philip Alston, who is an idiot. Yes, I have had correspondence with Alston and he doesn’t understand the first thing about poverty statistics.

The actual report he made about the US being here – or at least his report about his report – which contains this:

IV. The current extent of poverty in the US
13. There is considerable debate over the extent of poverty in the US, but for the purposes of this report principal reliance is placed upon the official government statistics, drawn up primarily by the US Census Bureau.

14. In order to define and quantify poverty in America, the Census Bureau uses ‘poverty thresholds’ or Official Poverty Measures (OPM), updated each year. In September 2017, more than one in every eight Americans were living in poverty (40 million, equal to 12.7% of the population). And almost half of those (18.5 million) were living in deep poverty, with reported family income below one-half of the poverty threshold.

That’s simply wrong.

The Official Poverty Measure is a measure of who would be living in poverty if it weren’t for the things that government was doing to alleviate poverty. It does not include the effects of Medicaid, the EITC tax credits, Section 8 housing vouchers nor, in fact, near all the things done to alleviate American poverty. Because it does not include any poverty alleviation done either in kind (Medicaid, food stamps, Section 8) nor through the tax system (EITC and some others). It only include the transfer of actual cash to poor people and the US system is deliberately – and possibly even wrongly – very light on that as a method of poverty reduction.

The number below the OPM is not the number living in poverty. It is those who would be poor without government. Given that the US spends somewhere between half and a full trillion $ (depends what you want to count) on poverty reduction each year it does manage to reduce poverty quite a bit.

He’s either lying or ignorant that is – and thus should be ignored.



Comments are closed.


in British English
expunct (ɪkˈspʌŋkt)
VERB (transitive)
1. to delete or erase; blot out; obliterate
2. to wipe out or destroy

Support Us

Recent posts

Agatha has been published.

Aunt Agatha has been published (the money came from an anonymous donor). It was £2500+ If you'd like a copy, donate £10+ and you'll get...

American Hyperconsumerism Is Killing Fewer People!

This report does not say what the Guardian headline writers think it does: Three Americans create enough carbon emissions to kill one person, study finds The...

Contracts Often Lag New Revenue Streams

I've been - vaguely and not with any great interest - anticipating a story like this: Scarlett Johansson sues Walt Disney over Marvel’s Black Widow...

Richard Murphy Rediscovers Monetarism

We have a delightful example of how Richard Murphy simply doesn't understand the basic nuts and bolts of the economics he wants to impose...

Vox Is Missing The Point About Having A Constitution

Not that we should be all that surprised by this from the progressives at Vox. No government- well, no one not controlled by...

Recent comments