“I love the dollar store,” she said.

As do most dollar store shoppers, according to at least one Morning Consult Brand Intelligence poll that recorded favorability ratings around 60 percent. Even as retail sales decline, the major dollar store brands — Dollar General, Dollar Tree, and Family Dollar (which was bought out by Dollar Tree in 2015 for $8.5 billion) — are experiencing rapid growth, with Dollar General and Dollar Tree adding upwards of 10,000 locations over the past decade and continued plans for expansion. The key to their success is a strategic focus on poverty: Deep discount retailers are uber-accessible to low-income consumers even when there’s a net negative economic benefit to shoppers and the community.

“The core of what dollar stores have done and really capitalized on is recognizing that there are people who really don’t have other options,” said Dr. Sriya Shrestha, who teaches at California State University Monterey Bay. Her work on the dollar store phenomenon, “Dollars to dimes: Disparity, uncertainty, and marketing to the poor at US dollar stores,” chronicles the dueling tensions of a capitalist entity that both aids and exploits the poor. “We know what dollar stores ultimately are: an attempt for a way for very wealthy people to capitalize on poverty.”

Get TalkPoverty In Your Inbox

Women with families who earn under $40,000 per year dominate the dollar store model. They purchase only what they can afford to buy now, in smaller packages that often cost more per unit than they would at big box retailers. “Our customer doesn’t buy until she absolutely has to — she’s that stretched,” noted one Dollar General executive, according to Dr. Shrestha’s research.

Clearly, the dollar store fills a need. Stagnant wages have kept purchasing power flat over the past 40 years, wage inequality has grown to levels not seen since the Great Depression, and the richest five percent of Americans own two-thirds of the country’s wealth. As the New York Times reported a few years ago, retail is now split into factions: luxury items and deep discounts, with nothing in between. Where dollar stores succeed — Dollar General, Dollar Tree, Family Dollar, the 99 Cent Store, and local mom and pop shops that follow the same model — is in giving low-income consumers the American Dream for a dollar a day.

Dollar stores attempt to create a sense of abundance, filling their stores with thousands of products placed on shelves that are below eye level. According to Dr. Shrestha’s research, companies will also engage in “downward brand extensions,” developing less expensive brand-name products specifically for dollar stores. When a consumer can walk out of a store having purchased a multitude of brand-name products, it presents them with a positive shopping experience and adds to their self-worth.

“I used to be embarrassed about the dollar store,” said Loretta Brown, “especially when I first became disabled and lost my job and was unemployed for a minute.”

Brown is a 53-year-old  with an ongoing affinity for her childhood home in South Philadelphia, which she calls “that diverse part of the city that we love.” She’s married with three grown step-children, and while her husband works, she no longer does, and has relied on Social Security Disability for the past 10 years.

“My attitude has changed over the years,” she continued. “I’m not embarrassed. I don’t care… I’m making a smarter financial decision when I shop at the dollar store for whatever I get there.”

Feeding America, one of the nation’s largest hunger-relief organizations, co-authored a report with Proctor & Gamble showing more than one-third of families struggled to afford essential household goods. According to the findings, many families will skip out on personal care rituals or substitute products when possible, such as using hand soap as dish detergent. School supplies have become more costly, too, with the Huntington Backpack Index noting that parents can now expect to spend anywhere from $1,000 to $1,600 per child per year depending on their grade level.

“I used to shop sales and just use store discount cards, but as time has gone on, I’ve learned how to clip coupons,” said Kristine, a former social worker who owns her home with her husband. “I will buy hygiene products since they have full-size name-brand items… toothpaste, body wash, shampoo, some medicine,” she continued, “also, cleaning supplies and some food items.”

Though individual consumers can find shopping at dollar stores rewarding, the impact on communities can be more complex. The Institute for Local Self-Reliance, a nonprofit that works for sustainable community development, found that dollar stores contribute to the economic distress found in urban and rural communities. In 2018, the group put out a report finding dollar stores target low-income neighborhoods, especially Black neighborhoods, and drive out grocers and other healthy eating options. As a byproduct of these moves, local jobs have been eliminated as well.

Criticisms of the dollar store model have pushed local communities to fight back. Tulsa, Oklahoma, placed restrictions on the distance between dollar stores following a brief moratorium on new retail locations in 2017. Small towns in Kansas and Texas passed ordinances limiting the number of stores allowed within their limits.

But efforts to ban dollar stores and replace them with community-centric retailers have, at times, failed to gain traction. In Cleveland, for example, a local grocer received a $1 million subsidy to open up shop but, according to The Progressive, it struggled to find a customer base. Much of the nuance on this issue is lost in translation between reformers and the monied interests who stand to gain from tilting the conversation.

Moreover, as Dr. Shrestha said, in some ways, banning dollar stores misses the point.

“We need to make it so that people have the income so that they don’t have to rely on the dollar store for meeting their basic needs,” said Dr. Shrestha, explaining that wealth distribution, not market-based solutions, could help to eliminate poverty itself. “Eradicating the dollar store isn’t going to really solve that problem.”

Neither will a Whole Foods, Walmart, or local grocer that doesn’t meet the needs of low-income consumers in the here and now. Women-headed households are the primary consumers of deep discount retailers, according to Dr. Shrestha, and those households are disproportionately in poverty.

The real question she said is, “Are we okay with that?”

We sought refuge in bankruptcy’s lore of the American Dream, believing in the rhetoric of fresh starts and new beginnings. However, for millions of families, debt forgiveness isn’t enough. Without a sustainable income or other necessities such as adequate health care, a bankruptcy discharge can perpetuate the cycle of debt, opening the door to unique yet systemic forms of predatory lending.

Get Talk Poverty In Your Inbox

Bankruptcy can be a powerful tool for families seeking relief from dire financial straits. Sherry Hoban, executive director for the Consumer Bankruptcy Assistance Project in Philadelphia, explained that discharging consumer debts works to the benefit of everyone. “The more people are able to take advantage of this benefit and able to discharge some of their back steps, be financially stable going forward, they will then be able to participate in the economy again to the benefit of the community,” she said.

Dr. Deborah Thorne, an associate professor of sociology at the University of Idaho, worked with Elizabeth Warren as part of the Consumer Bankruptcy Project and has studied bankruptcies for the past 25 years.

“I do think more people should file, and they should file sooner,” Thorne told me. “What happens is when they wait, they extract their wealth in ways that they shouldn’t. People are taking out from their 401(k)’s. They might be borrowing money from family members.”

Thorne, along with her colleague Dr. Katherine Porter (now Congresswoman Katherine Porter of California’s 45th District), sought to discover what happens to families like mine after they file. It’s a critical area of research that’s often ignored.

The results were startling.

According to their research, a full 25 percent of debtors continue to find themselves in a financially unstable situation post-bankruptcy. New bills plague these families even as old debts disappear. Contrary to the stigma, credit misuse does not fuel the cycle of debt in the post-discharge landscape. Mortgages, rent, utilities, and car payments keep most families underwater.

Thorne’s research found that almost one-third of filers consider their financial situations to be unchanged or worse off since their bankruptcy discharge. Declining household income triggered by illness, job loss, or advanced age could nullify the new beginnings associated with bankruptcy. And as Thorne told me, any combination of the three would most likely make the process a waste of time.

“It stops the debt collectors from harassing you,” Thorne said. “You can get a little bit of sleep for a while, and then it starts over again.”

Her research is echoed in the work of the late Dr. Song Han and Dr. Geng Li of the Federal Reserve Board. They found that not only do bankruptcy filers continue to suffer from financial distress in the short and long term, but these households tend to accumulate less wealth over time than comparable nonfilers.

And contrary to conventional wisdom, Han and Li found that the lending industry is eager to extend credit to recent bankruptcy filers, often with predatory loans that continue the cycle of debt. On average, my wife and I receive 10 credit card offers per month, not including solicitations for auto loans, payday loans, and mortgage refinances.

They’re all low-limit, high-fee cards with interest rates that would be illegal in a more fair society. Even with the caveat of those terms and conditions, I found it curious that lenders would want our business, considering we recently chose to forego paying our debts.

“[Bankruptcy filers] depend on it to make it day-to-day,” Thorne said in reference to post-discharge credit. She stressed that people were using it for necessities and not frivolous luxury goods. “And so, if you know that those people are vulnerable, heck yeah, that’s who you’re going to offer credit to.”

Dr. Benjamin Keys of the Wharton School of Business at the University of Pennsylvania, along with Han and Li, reviewed more than 200,000 credit card solicitations and linked them to borrower credit histories. He and his colleagues found that dependent on the boom-bust cycle of the economy, lenders are using bankruptcy records, not only credit scores, to tailor offers to consumers.

In hindsight, the reasoning is logical. Following the 2005 bankruptcy bill, which added cumbersome paperwork and financial costs to bankruptcy proceedings, the time allowed between chapter 7 filings was extended from six to eight years, though after a few ups and downs, filings returned to their 1990 levels by 2016. Recent filers are more likely to receive credit because they’re barred from filing for bankruptcy again for almost a decade.

“There are elements in which getting some access to credit can help to rebuild the credit score,” said Keys cautioning me not to apply a sinister motive to the practice. “That said, these cards can have very high fees and are very high cost for what they are, which is usually a low credit limit, and in many cases, they’re secured,” which means they require a security deposit from the customer.

Keys had the opportunity to inspect these mailings through a dataset provided by the company Mintel, a process he compared to participating in the Neilsen Television rating program. Mail offers for recent bankruptcy filers, he found, were quite different than typical credit card solicitations sent to the general population.

“It acknowledges that you’ve gone through bankruptcy right away and says we still want to make you a credit offer even though you’ve gone through bankruptcy,” he told me. “We were sort of struck by how specific that was and how finely tailored it was to this population.”

A mailing I received while writing this story came from The Bankruptcy Information and Re-Establishment Center, a Better Business Bureau accredited company, promising “you’re not getting the credit you deserve” and offering to pre-qualify me for a loan right now. “Re-establishing credit after bankruptcy is the only way to save money on future financing,” read the letter before noting in bold print, “you must make a new purchase after a bankruptcy in order to re-establish credit.”

“That’s capitalism,” as Thorne explained to me quite matter-of-factly at one point in our conversation.