According to official figures of Census Bureau, 32.9 million people in US were living in poverty in 2001, an increase of 1.3 million on previous year. means that almost 12% of population was subsisting below income thresholds deemed minimal according to family size and composition-just over $14,000 per year for a family of three. Such official measures of poverty draw criticism for their outdated and inflexible ways of evaluating need, yet few social analysts would deny that significant numbers of people in US lack sufficient material resources for a theoretically adequate or normal standard of living.' The problems associated with poverty--illness, illiteracy, and homelessness, for example-become more alarming still in context of tremendous and widening economic inequality, what Paul Krugman has described as a tectonic shift in wealth and income distribution over last three decades, away from middle and lower classes toward wealthiest fraction. This association of poverty with progress is great enigma of our times, wrote American social reformer Henry George in 1879, the central fact from which spring industrial, social, and political difficulties that perplex world (10). For George, these difficulties seemed especially pronounced in an American context, where political institutions of theoretical equality were based on a state of glaring social inequality. Recognition of unacceptably low living standards among US persons has always unsettled beliefs in nation's special conditions of class mobility, its absence of social stratification. Yet two centuries of legislative, moral, and social debates over persistence of material need have registered enduring power of ideological assumptions about fluidity of American social structure, and opportunities for individuals within it, against which detection of poverty could become a subversive act, spinning observers into fear, disbelief, and existential shock, into explanations based on race or culture, into desires to yank welfare from spreaders of moral failure.