The War on Poverty: Stalemate
Pat Sajak ·
Sep 13, 2010 at 5:13pm
Current TV reports on its website that the number of people in the U.S. living in poverty is rising under the current administration and is approaching levels of the 60s that led to the War on Poverty. So, after a 45-year war and trillions of dollars spent, we’re back where we started. That’s what you get for entering a conflict without an exit strategy.
- Comment (36)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (1)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments :
Jul '10
Re: The War on Poverty: Stalemate
Pat Sajak
Rob Long
This was, essentially, Milton Friedman's point -- that if you want to give people money, give them money. His idea of a guaranteed minimum income still strikes me as a zany, but intellectually honest (and maybe even effective) way to give people at the bottom rung a hand. · Sep 13 at 6:21pm
I've always thought of Friedman more as wacky than zany. · Sep 13 at 6:25pm
That's an interesting insight, Pat.
You're such a nuanced guy.
Jul '10
Re: The War on Poverty: Stalemate
I worry that we are enabling the liberal vocabulary here. Yes, the "poverty rate" is about the same as it was 40 years ago. But most of the "poor" aren't materially poor in any historical use of the term. Many of these these poor people have Flat Screen TVs and PCs and even I-Phones. They do not starve, they do not beg, they live fairly comfortable lives. The categorical definition is just plain wrong.
Most of us have been broke (money poor) in our lives. The difference between being poor and being broke is that a poor man has no confidence that he will ever be prosperous. Liberalism has sought to "solve" the problem of material poverty by stifling hope, by stifling the urge to be productive. That is the crime of the War on Poverty.
Focus on that, not on ridiculous statistics.
Jun '10
Re: The War on Poverty: Stalemate
A long time ago, I had the chance to walk through the favellas north of Sao Paulo, Brazil, and have also spent some time deep in the hollows of the Appalachians. The one thing impressed upon me was that the only sure way out of those areas of deep poverty was to somehow maximize earning potential. Charity and handouts might get you through a rough patch, but to truly escape meant the ability to work and to earn.
Some manage to break the cycle. But not everyone gets that chance. To the extent that government has made it worse, that's to its shame and ours. I can only consider myself fortunate to be so blessed, because the distance between "middle class" and the poverty line can be as short as the length of a pink slip.
Aug '10
Re: The War on Poverty: Stalemate
I wonder if, in the year 2065, it will be commonly imagined that the War on Poverty was a government plot to destroy black people. I myself do not believe that - I am certain all the programs were well-intentioned - but hey, this theory fits the facts. Or, as is always the case with ugly ideas, fits enough facts.
Aug '10
Re: The War on Poverty: Stalemate
Kenneth: The War on Poverty is probably the biggest jobs program ever devised.
We have social workers, administrators, housing bureaucrats, squadrons of academics and on and on.
I would bet that for each ten people "living in poverty" there is at least one government worker or academic living quite nicely off of poverty.
And they all vote. As do their hapless wards.
Too true.
I've tutored inner-city kids, very bright (my program cherry-picked the bright ones), and charming in their way, but many surely doomed to a life of failure because of simple inability to behave. And why should they know how to behave, given the utterly twisted incentives surrounding them, where the worst actors usually get the kindest treatment? If I'd been raised that way, I probably would have turned out no better myself.
These kids already start life with fewer options because of poverty, and then on top of that, the compassionate classes so contort their social world that only the bravest and luckiest manage to escape that twisted jungle.
If anyone profits by keeping the poor man down, it's the vampires of the compassion racket.
Now excuse me while I kick something.
Edited on Sep 13, 2010 at 7:24pmMay '10
Re: The War on Poverty: Stalemate
I've passed through the wards and ghettos of many cities. I often didn't realize I was in one until later, because most of them could only be called poor by American standards. In America, poverty cannot be detected so easily by clothing or size of residence as by litter and loitering.
And they are not the only ones who are mislabeled. Americans making over $100,000 per year will say they're not rich because they worry about their bills. So what? I've lived around rich and poor alike -- they all live up to their means. If you only have to worry about paying for food and shelter because you bought a spacious house and stuffed it full with furniture and HD-TVs and what not, that's luxury, my friends. Financial security is a luxury.
I don't say this to criticize lifestyles. I just think most Americans don't realize how good we have it. Real poverty does exist in this nation, but it's as rare as Steyn having a speechless moment.
Aug '10
Re: The War on Poverty: Stalemate
K judging from the subtle clues we are wagering five civil servants for each poor person @ $165,000 per
Sep '10
Re: The War on Poverty: Stalemate
Sure, the poverty level has increased slightly. But can you imagine how much higher it would have been if President Obama and the Democratic Congress did not sign into law the stimulus, son-of-stimulus, porkulus, grandson-of-stimulus, cash-for-clunkers, cash-for-unions, cash-for-teachers, and all of the other wonderful programs, bills, laws, and regulations that would have otherwise moved the poverty level to 50%.
May '10
Re: The War on Poverty: Stalemate
My definition: If you live in a building with glass windows, running water, water flush toilets, heat in the winter, and electricity you are not poor.
By that standard the USA is doing pretty good.
May '10
Re: The War on Poverty: Stalemate
I haven't read every comment here, but has it been pointed out that the "poverty line" is actually a relative concept that allows for people to be in "poverty" while still having more wealth than someone at said "line" had in the past?
Jul '10
Re: The War on Poverty: Stalemate
I just want to know the ROE in this war. Can we shoot 'em or not?
Re: The War on Poverty: Stalemate
Midget Faded Rattlesnake
If anyone profits by keeping the poor man down, it's the vampires of the compassion racket.
When do you think that's going to be clear to the people on the receiving end of all of this...help? Will it ever?
May '10
Re: The War on Poverty: Stalemate
Rob, it will only be clear when Republicans with some experience in poor areas make a determined effort to convince those people face-to-face. It will only be clear when candidates skip the philosophical treaties to get people thinking about concrete examples. And Republicans must realize that "dependency and responsibility" is not the issue that will get the poor thinking.
Media often reported about Mother Theresa by talking about how she provided food, shelter and medicine. But the greatest thing Mother Theresa provided was love for the Untouchables. She gave them smiles, laughter and the knowledge that someone cared deeply for them. She did what President Bush did in Bill's 9/11 story.
The key to winning the poor vote is to skip the platitudes and simply spend some time with them. Make some friends there and keep in touch. Poor people are taught from childhood that Republicans don't care about them. We have to bridge that gap before we can convince them that welfare is degrading.
Aug '10
Re: The War on Poverty: Stalemate
Rob Long
Midget Faded Rattlesnake
If anyone profits by keeping the poor man down, it's the vampires of the compassion racket.
When do you think that's going to be clear to the people on the receiving end of all of this...help? Will it ever?
Well, it's going to take a while... At this point, poverty is a nearly self-sealing subculture, so much social capital has been lost. To bring up Uncle Milty again, I believe real hope for the poor can come out of the school choice movement. But restoring lost social capital still won't be easy.
An institution that could offer hope to the poor more effectively if it didn't flirt so shamelessly with bad economics is the Church. Out of mercy, sin and virtue are understood more by intention than result, but this very outlook tends to muddle clear economic thinking. Too many churches -- and it's a growing trend even among Evangelicals -- fail to see how the prosperity of free markets has done more to ameliorate the material suffering of the "least of these" than all our good intentions combined.
Maybe free-market Econ should be required in seminary?
Edited on Sep 14, 2010 at 11:56amMay '10
Re: The War on Poverty: Stalemate
For those with a special interest in the matter, here is an article on the deficulty defining a "poverty line" from the Stanford Social Innovation Review.
Beyond the poverty line.
Here's a quote:
"Most people who care about measuring poverty—academics, policymakers, nonprofit leaders, and the like—agree that the way the federal government currently determines who is poor and who is not doesn’t work."
Government attempts to turn a deeply rooted and complex phenomena into something simple, captured in a simple metric, will never succeed, nor will programs based on that overly simple understanding.
Sep '10
Re: The War on Poverty: Stalemate
The census puts out a report every September called "Income, Poverty and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States".
You can get it here.
http://www.census.gov/prod/2009pubs/p60-236.pdf
If you look at the chart on page 13 showing the rate of poverty 1959 to 2008, you can see the rate was about 22% in 1959, the rate dropped to about 12% in 1974 and has bounced between there and 15% since then. Big surprise, its worse just after a recession ends. Once you look at the graph you understand that the "article" you first linked to is just cherrypicking data from the graph to willfully mislead people into thinking we have reached some sort of crisis level. The rate has been higher than 15% twice since 1980 and was much higher before 1965. You know the good old days.