去年美国350万人脱贫，但并非政府扶贫结果

无论身处什么年代，穷困都不是好事，但一项衡量贫穷的指标显示，2015年对穷人来说是最好的一年。

美国劳工部人口普查局本月稍早发布的数据显示，2015美国的贫困率下降1.2个百分点至13.5%，贫困人口数为4310万，较2014年减少350万。这是2009年以来贫困率最大降幅。

贫困率下降的主要原因为失业率降低，最贫穷的美国劳动者薪资随之上涨。此外，许多州和地方政府近来上调了最低工资，不少大型私人企业也自发提高了工资下限，贫困人群因此受益。

最近，美国联邦和地方政府对国内贫困问题的严重性格外关注。因为自林登·约翰逊总统呼吁消除贫困以来已半个世纪，然而官方数据显示贫困率水平没什么变化。

而人口普查局计入残障社会保障和医疗补助等政府项目影响的附加贫困指标显示，美国不仅去年贫困率下降，而且由于国家福利举措更得力贫困率呈稳步下滑趋势。

可是，讨论两种贫困的衡量指标时人们往往忽略了一点，无论采用哪种指标，贫困的定义都是随时代发展不断变化的。人口普查局计算附加贫困线的方法是，衡量美国家庭通常的消费总合，包括“衣、食、住、水电以及小部分满足其他需求（例如家居用品、个人护理、工作以外交通）的额外”支出。假如家庭消费水平低于美国家庭消费中位值的33%，就会被认定贫困。

对战胜贫困抱有希望的人来说，这种统计方法是令人失望的。假设明天所有美国人都比今天富有50%，支出水平随之调整，人口普查局统计出的贫困率并不会变化，因为贫困线只参看家庭消费中位值。

所以，一定程度上也要看相对统计数据。贫困并没有绝对确定的定义，美国人对贫困的定义就是不断改变。拥护小政府的人感到沮丧很正常，因为这种衡量贫困的方法可能意味着，人类永远无法彻底消除贫困，而且政府总能利用统计结果证明增加支出是合理的。（财富中文网）

翻译：Pessy

审校：夏林

It’s never a good time to be poor, but 2015 was one of the best in recent memory according to one measure.

According to data released by the Census Department earlier this month, the official poverty rate in America declined by 1.2% to 13.5%, with 43.1 million people in poverty, 3.5 million fewer than in 2014. That’s the largest decrease in the poverty rate since 2009.

The main driver of this phenomenon was the falling unemployment rate, which helped push up wages for the poorest working Americans. That segment of the population was also helped by the fact that many state and local governments have increased their minimum wages of late, while many large private employers voluntarily lifted wage floors as well.

The extent of the poverty problem in the United States has received particular scrutiny of late both because it’s been just over 50 years since President Lyndon Johnson launched the war on poverty, and because during that time the official poverty rate has remained relatively flat.

But the Census Bureau’s supplemental measure of poverty, which takes into account the effect of government transfer programs, like Social Security Disability and Medicaid, shows that not only did poverty fall in the United States last year, it’s been on the steady decline as the welfare state has been strengthened over time.

But what is lost when discussing both these measures of poverty, is that the definition of poverty changes over time, regardless of which you use. The Census Bureau calculates the supplemental poverty threshold by measuring the typical American family’s bundle of consumption on “food, clothing, shelter, and utilities, and a small additional amount to allow for other needs (e.g., household supplies, personal care, nonwork-related transportation). Families that cannot afford the consumption bundle that is at 33% of the median American’s consumption bundle are considered impoverished.

This is a frustrating for those hope the war on poverty can at some point be won. Take for instance a scenario where everyone in the United States got 50% richer tomorrow, and adjusted their spending accordingly. The Census’ measure of poverty would not change, since it’s poverty threshold is relative to the median family’s consumption

It’s understandable why we have to in part rely on relative statistics. There is no absolute definition of poverty—Americans definition of it is bound to change over time. But for devotees of small government, it is understandably frustrating that this strategy for measuring poverty likely means that poverty will never be conquered, and that these measurements can always be used to justify more government expenditure.