Talk:Working poor

message: I have added a Globalize tag to the Definition and Causes sections.  I'm not even going to get into the discussion about neutrality, but the article mostly deals with the United States, with a cursory treatment of Europe.  The single sentence under Causes for Europe adds nothing to the article, and seems to be there more for the form of the thing than to add to the article. - Kleio08  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.138.186.139 (talk) 06:03, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: -This article could benefit from some updating and reorganization/expansion.  
:-Updating:  Need to update the Bureau of Labor Statistics figures.  
:-Proposed reorganization/expansion:  Intro  /  History of the term "working poor"  /  Working Poor in the US (subsections: overview, history, jobs typically held by the working poor, explanations for why these jobs are poorly paid, consequences of low pay on government aid programs)  / Working Poor from a Cross-national perspective (see Brady, Fullerton, and Cross (2010) for data)  /  Policy responses  (subsections: US, Canada, Europe, etc.)
--Amcook (talk) 00:54, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Suggestions for reorganization

message: I certain parts heavily related only to the UNIted States, a proper approach woukd be to create a separate section, even a separate article, but no way the deletion of massive, well-referenced chunk of text. Staszek Lem (talk) 01:12, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  US-centric? 

message: This article flouts neutrality guidelines to a degree that is, frankly, astonishing.
Presenting information from a political perspective is one thing (especially when related to sociological studies) but offering one-lined and poor representations of contrary opinions (I won't call them dissenting; clearly, the idea of increasing welfare is not a majority opinion), when any are given at all, is ludicrous. This article desperately needs a rewrite in order to achieve an encyclopedic, disinterested tone and presentation.
A good place to start would be removing the arguments unsupported by citations. And also presenting the 'conservative' side of the argument: for example, if there are less working poor in nations with greater welfare expenditure, despite the fact that demographics and economic productivity are controlled for, it behooves us to mention that conservatives consider demographics and economic productivity to be a direct result of the amount of regulation and government benefits! Citing a study that is tailored to display proof for a certain argument by 'controlling' the outcomes that the position's opponents uphold as the reasoning against said argument is disingenuous when this criticism is not even presented.
Someone, please, take initiative and fix this. Or green-light me and I'll do my best to cull the unsupported generalizations and balance the equation.
Regards,
James  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Babyinthebarn (talk • contribs) 07:11, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality 

message: Second paragraph states:
:While poverty is often associated with joblessness, a significant proportion of the poor in the US and Canada, but also Italy, Spain, and Ireland are actually employed.
While citation [1] http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpswp2009.pdf estimates 10.4 million (of 43.6 million in poverty), or 24 percent, are part of the working poor in US. Can this really be classified as a "significant portion"?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.185.69.178 (talk) 16:16, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Significant Proportion" of Working Poor 

message: I marked this with the Essay tag and then proceeded to remove some of the unsourced material. There is even more that I don't have time to excise. Thank you. GeorgeLouis (talk) 18:38, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reads like an essay. 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Working poor. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120404065006/http://www.soc.duke.edu/~brady/web/Bradyetal2010.pdf to http://www.soc.duke.edu/~brady/web/Bradyetal2010.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:39, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello, I am a college student and I have decided to "adopt" this article to edit and improve as part of a semester long project. Any feedback would be greatly appreciated!Yellowduckinc (talk) 00:59, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Student Editor 

message: I feel like this article could use a pretty big update. The statics listed are all a decade old or more, and I feel like it would be beneficial to provide current information about the estimated size of the working poor, what the poverty limit is, ect, ect. It would make this article a lot relevant to current events. Yellowduckinc (talk) 01:03, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Updating Article 

message: A discussion is taking place to address the redirect :Paycheck to paycheck. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 July 9#Paycheck to paycheck until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  Interstellarity (talk) 15:11, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Paycheck to paycheck" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]