The Total Failure Of The War On Poverty

[Penguin]

Re: The Total Failure Of The War On Poverty

When you see it firsthand it makes a lasting impression doesn't it Prazak? And, I have to admit, it affected me (at least) in ways that will probably never go away. Having seen what happened to people who lose a job and permanently exit the middle class... well I have a lot more in common with the Depression generation than you would think given my age. It is hard to be feeewheeling and a spendthrift when you have a part of your brain whispering "What if....?"

I imagine the young'ens watching their parents losing homes and awash in debt will have similar thoughts.

Will

[vinoveri]

Re: No jobs for the poor

Great thread and discussion; many thanks. The world of secular authority seems so inverted to normalcy in many ways that I'm sorry not to have any concrete political solutions, other than for the individual - love your neighbor, i.e., will the others good as well as your own.

The breakdown of the family and community and increasing secular worldview has led us where we are and where we are going - social Darwinism and corptocracy and one side and Marxist ideals on the other each seeking an effective top-down control via centralized authority, but neither of these are correct or will lead to a just society, which must in the end begin in the human heart. Catholic worldview on this has been promulgated for a good while now and remains imo a key element of any long term solution (notwithstanding that the Church has not succumbed to the lure of wealth, power and corruption herself). Solidarity and Subsidiarity. Both of these, taken together, are anathema to any central locus of power be it the plutocrats or the Marxists b/c they may empower individuals and communities to thrive w/o the intrusion of or dependence on big gov or big bus, who of course are now in league against the common good and commonwealth.

[Southernguy]

Re: The Total Failure Of The War On Poverty

Something interesting to note: before 2001 there was a close relation between poverty and unemployment. Since then no more. After the AFC unemployment down 3% poverty rate stays the same. I think the explanation is the degradation of salaried work in the line of what Penguin (very interesting story probably repeated through most of the world except China and other new industrial powerhouses) tells us. Low salaries so even working people stay poor.

What EJ calls "FIRE economy" I would call(not original at all certainly) "neoliberal" economy. The surge of China and other Asian industrial powers was a functional part of the scheme drawn in the late seventies by the ruling capitalist western class (Reagan and Thatcher formally leading) to change the distribution of income-richess all over the world. The demise of the Soviet Union and the rest were a political substratum for the whole operation. So they killed the trade unions, they relocated the industry without so much of social turmoil. EJ is probably right: the next recession shall settle with a substantially higher poverty rate. Unless the dispossessed manage to some form of reaction. FIRE was the result of the need to let consumption going on by low wages earners. So far they have attained their objectives. The crisis, far from a problem for them, has been an opportunity for further enrichment.

[Penguin]

Re: The Total Failure Of The War On Poverty

It isn't necessarily that the Democrats are wrong it is that they are wrongheaded.

The decision to walk away from labor and turn toward identity politics was a surefire winner long term. If being the dominant party were all that mattered. Granted labor did not help their cause with a somewhat exclusionary mindset that left a lot of folks out of the fold. The labor movement was, by and large, a white middle class venture. Their failure to expand their footprint and gain larger support across the political spectrum left an open door to those who resented this stubborn and hard to bully portion of the electorate.

So when the Democratic party took their infamous "Third Way" following the Reagan revolution... well it was a done deal in most senses of the word anyway.

It is small consolation to all the identity groups that they will get 'their fair share' when the portion of the pie left after FIRE and whatnot has steadily shrunk. Identity politics has both parties in a death embrace. This distraction has to be extinguished if politics is to have any real meaning to those who work for a living. Otherwise we're trapped in a zero sum game of our own making.

When the offhand comments on homosexuality by some duck hunting hoopie from Louisiana can bring the US media to a standstill to the exclusion of all else? For weeks? Well you know that we're not going to address the real problems any time soon.

Will

[lektrode]

Re: No jobs for the poor

.....In the end the strong dollar policy and the reserve currency status were pursued to maintain cheap oil. And we traded our industrial base to do it.

And as for jobs? Hell yes. Global trade has added millions upon millions of good producing jobs. Elsewhere.

again will - very well put = 100% agreement - and again i will offer that The US had a choice back in the 1970's in which direction ENERGY policy could go - and IMHO - energy policy went in The WORST possible direction - that is, rather than make a quantum leap into nuclear energy back in those days - what did the pandering-party do ?

like ostriches, stuffed their heads into the dirt, while they allowed a RAZOR-THIN MINORITY to hijack ENERGY POLICY and killed the best alternative that would've prevented nearly all of the problems that have developed since the LUDDITE brigade shut-down construction of the seabrook NH plant - and then only 'succeeded' in slowing its eventual completion, while bankrupting PSNH and caused electric rates to launch (and killed one of my business endeavors at the time, that depended on low rates, just as the price of oil tanked)

the anti-nuke brigade WAS WRONG IN 1976 - the results of their 'success' having been ACID RAIN, ENDLESS WAR FOR OIL, WITH ENDLESS BUDGET DEFICITS TO PAY FOR IT, GLOBAL WARMING/CLIMATE CHANGE, ACIDIFICATION OF THE OCEANS

and - quite arguably - all of the previous mentioned FAILURES of industries since.

and yet - the political class still allows this same RAZOR THIN MINORITY that the lib-dems insist on pandering to - for a 51% margin of 'victory' - to call all the shots in what is - quite arguably - the ONLY ISSUE THAT MATTERS going forward

and that would be ENERGY policy - since all of the other stuff critically depends on getting it RIGHT THIS TIME.

that is unless their plan really is to have us revert back to an agrarian economy - or that somehow the knowledge-based 'intellectual property' economy is going to save us?

uh huh - its been doing a splendid job of creating jobs - EVERYWHERE BUT HERE.

we need to REBUILD THE INDUSTRIAL ECONOMY - since its what BUILT THE MIDDLE CLASS IN THE FIRST PLACE
not be focused on cranking out the next generation of 'journalists', bankers, lawyers, social/political 'scientists' -

while the rest of us are supposed to do what? - besides 'do each others laundry' in the 'service economy'

and to rebuild the INDUSTRIAL economy, WE WILL REQUIRE an energy source that will give us a LIMITLESS supply of home-grown KWH's - now maybe someday that might be from something more than the 2 or 3 or maybe even 10% of the 'renewables' might be good for sometime in the next 25 - but WE NEED INDUSTRIAL JOBS BASED UPON EXISTING TECHNOLOGIES and WE NEED THEM ***NOW*** not 25years from now - there simply isnt any other choice -

and the next-gen nuke power systems are available NOW.

(adding...)

and here, i'll even agree with... GASP!!!...

krugman...
;)

but if we're gonna deficit spend our way to prosperity - WE NEED TO SPEND THE MONEY ON SOMETHING THAT IS GUARANTEED TO SUCCEED (vs the choices the current occupants have squandered trillions on, that would be bailouts of lower manhattan, crony-class pie-in-the-sky energy schemes, and TRILLION dollar giveways/corporate-welfare scams masquerading as 'helping the working-class/poor'

[Prazak]

Re: The Total Failure Of The War On Poverty

When you see it firsthand it makes a lasting impression doesn't it Prazak? And, I have to admit, it affected me (at least) in ways that will probably never go away. Having seen what happened to people who lose a job and permanently exit the middle class... well I have a lot more in common with the Depression generation than you would think given my age. It is hard to be feeewheeling and a spendthrift when you have a part of your brain whispering "What if....?"

I imagine the young'ens watching their parents losing homes and awash in debt will have similar thoughts.

Will

Indeed it does, and I was thinking about the Depression generation, and more specifically my grandparents, just yesterday. I remember in the 70s marveling at how deeply the values of frugality and re-usage the depression had imprinted on them. They never changed their ways, even in the face of gentle ribbing from their boomer children, because they were always certain another depression was just around the corner. I don't think they lived long enough to realize that a depression was slow-boiling all around them.

As for me, someone with a set of wheels who got out of there, there's a sense in which I am permanently alienated from those I grew up with, who stayed and tended to the community there -- a little like the emigree guilt one encounters overseas. And now I'm old enough to see the wisdom in my grandparents' view of the world, and find myself slowly turning into them.

[Polish_Silver]

Re: Are Rector's facts wrong?

I dislike ag subsidies as much as you. Classic corporate welfare. But I don't see any data that we have people with physical hunger. 7-11 and McDonalds have spent zillions to prevent accounting of how food stamps are spent.

[Woodsman]

Re: Are Rector's facts wrong?

I dislike ag subsidies as much as you. Classic corporate welfare. But I don't see any data that we have people with physical hunger. 7-11 and McDonalds have spent zillions to prevent accounting of how food stamps are spent.

USDA list 14.5 percent (17.6 million households) as food insecure, with 5.7 percent of U.S. households (7.0 million households) as experiencing very low food security and 10.0 percent of households with children were unable at times during the year to provide adequate, nutritious food for their children. More details below.

http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications...rt/err155.aspx
.

[lektrode]

Re: Are Rector's facts wrong?

as usual woody - you make very good points that are really difficult to argue with - somehow i suspect you were on the team that won every debate back in school (a compliment) - and i'll certainly agree that the ag subsidies are right up there with THE SCAM OF THE CENTURY - esp the ones that go for the biggest ag scam of all - while The Rest of US get to pay upwards of 5bux/lb for stuff like TOMATOES and other table foods.

altho not sure where paul allen's pittance comes into play, considering the name of the entity, even stranger that it gets 'spread' where it does - but i'm willing to let mr allen slide on the benefit of the doubt - considering his other pet projects...
(and NO.. i've never worked on his biggest ;)

but the prikzters... uhhh... i mean the pritzkers - they didnt ALL get 1.3mil ea, i assume only the ONE entity they own did?
so... well... yer embellishing a bit more than you - or the nyt - really needed to, to make the point - eh?

but there are a couple of em that do get my goat a'barkin, i will admit

one in particular, that we had a go'round about this past summer - and another, who seems to have near limitless capacity for... ummmm.... secrets - at least his accountants apparently must - how DO they get away with this stuff, anyway?

but... i guess that when we hear about how fuzzy things get "from 40000feet" the political class can rationalize just about anything that their 'constituents' can come up with

[vt]

Re: Are Rector's facts wrong?

Weren't food stamps supposed to eliminate hunger? Are they trading food stamps for other things? Certainy we don't want to see people not receiving nourishment.

But why hasn't $20 Trillion been able to reduce poverty? As EJ says it is poor government policy and FIRE. We have structural unemployment, an educational system that is not preparing people for jobs, poor job skills for some, and lack of mobility to get workers to job sites.

[Polish_Silver]

Re: Are Rector's facts wrong?

USDA list 14.5 percent (17.6 million households) as food insecure, with 5.7 percent of U.S. households (7.0 million households) as experiencing very low food security and 10.0 percent of households with children were unable at times during the year to provide adequate, nutritious food for their children. More details below.

http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications...rt/err155.aspx

I don't like the "food security" category---too subjective. I'd be more impressed if they had data that said children had to live on less than 1500 kcal, or went 12 hours without eating, or something like that.

The public safety nurse seems to disagree with USDA, so I don't know who to believe. But these 10% of households--are they not eligible for foodstamps?

[lektrode]

Re: Are Rector's facts wrong?

...
But why hasn't $20 Trillion been able to reduce poverty? As EJ says it is poor government policy and FIRE. We have structural unemployment, an educational system that is not preparing people for jobs, poor job skills for some, and lack of mobility to get workers to job sites.

i'd also offer that a bunch of the trillions have disappeared down that blackhole/buraCRAT-infestation known as 'administration'

and THEN we see just whom is 'administering' a bunch of it ???
never mind where these decisions get made - and whom else gets their fingers into it
then it all starts to get clearer on what the real game is....

[Woodsman]

Re: Are Rector's facts wrong?

Weren't food stamps supposed to eliminate hunger? Are they trading food stamps for other things? Certainy we don't want to see people not receiving nourishment.

But why hasn't $20 Trillion been able to reduce poverty? As EJ says it is poor government policy and FIRE. We have structural unemployment, an educational system that is not preparing people for jobs, poor job skills for some, and lack of mobility to get workers to job sites.

Respectfully, we've covered a lot of this ground already. And I'm not going to argue from false premises put forth by Rector and the Heritage Foundation. We've demostrated Rector and Heritage to be wilfully deceptive and that's all she wrote for me.

[vt]

Re: Are Rector's facts wrong?

And school breakfast and lunch programs. Are the USDA figures doctored to get more money in THEIR budget. Something doesn't compute.

Meanwhile government is spending a huge amount of money for what? Where is the accountability?

Woody, respectfully because you care for the poor as do I, where is Rector wrong in that all this money spent hasn't worked?

[lektrode]

Re: The Total Failure Of The War On Poverty

....when the Democratic party took their infamous "Third Way" following the Reagan revolution... well it was a done deal in most senses of the word anyway.

yep - and considering my gen'l political POV - i didnt even think all that badly about wild bill and there certainly was some progress made during that era (not counting certain 'improvements' ) - esp considering his comments about "jazz... America's Classical Music" and him being able to jam on a sax with the best of em - where he lost me was him looking directly into the cameras, pointing/shaking his finger and saying: "i did not have sex with that woman" - when all he had to do, and SHOULDVE DONE - is fire back at em with: yeah, i did her - SO WHAT - next question - and the entire charade woulda blown over (course he might've been sleeping with his 'buddy' and socks or been lorena'd by ole hil - but hey - by pullin that oh-so-lawyerly stunt, thereby causing the single largest disruption of US.gov ops since watergate? - which then caused them to not only drop the ball in the sudan - but then allowed a certain party aparatchik to mess up the entire intel system - and they STILL want to blame everything thats happened since on geedubya&co ?

thats the HILARIOUS part...

and they say the electorate has a short memory - when what it REALLY is, is the lib-dominated op/ed depts of lamestream media that is creating amnesia on demand to keep THEIR agenda on track

It is small consolation to all the identity groups that they will get 'their fair share' when the portion of the pie left after FIRE and whatnot has steadily shrunk. Identity politics has both parties in a death embrace. This distraction has to be extinguished if politics is to have any real meaning to those who work for a living. Otherwise we're trapped in a zero sum game of our own making.

When the offhand comments on homosexuality by some duck hunting hoopie from Louisiana can bring the US media to a standstill to the exclusion of all else? For weeks? Well you know that we're not going to address the real problems any time soon.

EXACTLY/PRE-CISELY!!!
that issue alone - being effectively wielded, just like the whole sideshow last year on gun control, with the farce in libya and
SYRIAOUSLY??? - along with the rest of it in the middle east (the fantasy of 'peace' over there) - is merely a DISTRACTION for them to IGNORE the biggest organized crime of the century - and because focusing instead on that, would make their team - and their major contributors - look bad

and while the issue of 'marriage rights' gets really old after while - while 'civil unions' ought to have sufficed - i personally dont care (could give a rats ass) what consenting adults want to do to/with each other in the PRIVACY of their own abodes - i just get tired of hearing about it CONSTANTLY as IF it was the ONLY thing that matters - meanwhile they let the oligarchs/banksters ride off into the sunset, WITH TRILLIONS IN BORROWED DEFICITS and then blame the "conservatives" for all the problems.

thats the real problem i have with the whole lib-dem facade of 'looking out for the working class'...
(and just to be clear, my use of RED highlighting is for emphasis on what makes me SEE RED, not disagreement with that so highlighted ;)