The Total Failure Of The War On Poverty

[Polish_Silver]

Re: The Total Failure Of The War On Poverty

+1

Until we throw out both sides of both Houses of the Federal Legislature, nothing will be done.

We desperately need a third party. I don't know all the numbers, but I think we could take care of the poor and protect our borders with far lower taxes than we have now. I think proportional representation is the ONLY way to get there.

Let's face it: the military is so huge because it is no longer defending the USA. It is defending Israel, the government of Saudi Arabia,
propping up governments in Iraq, Afghanistan, and who knows where else.

[Penguin]

Re: Are Rector's facts wrong?

Fascinating.

An entire article about poverty and not a single word about jobs. Or industrial policy. Or trade policy. Or a group of parasitic industries that have strangled the produce/consume economy. Or the benefits of a self sufficient economy.... Or anything of real consequence pertaining to the real problem of poverty: a dearth of gainful employment opportunities.

All of these politicians, economists, political science professors and their ilk standing around in the boat with water lapping at their ankles and smoking guns in their hands wondering how all of those holes got in the boat.

Will

[gwynedd1]

Re: Are Rector's facts wrong?

We have won so many battles against the poor. I believe victory will soon be at hand.

[Thailandnotes]

Re: Are Rector's facts wrong?

We have won so many battles against the poor. I believe victory will soon be at hand.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/o...public-safety/

[Mn_Mark]

Re: Are Rector's facts wrong?

Margaret Sanger would be proud. Hitler would certainly agree.

This is the blessed fruit of eugenics: euthanize the mentally deficient Germans as the Nazis did in the late 1930s.
They called them "useless eaters". Hey, they were only trying to assist "nature"!

Such an attitude breeds contempt for ones fellow human beings and callouses a human heart, making it fit only for eternal ruin.






Evolution takes place in a fallen world. It shows no feeling or compassion whatsoever.
This is the fruit of a cosmic rebellion that took place eons ago as one being cursed the Light and became the Lord of Darkness.
For the sake of mercy don't befriend it.




Okay. I say it is indeed heartless.





I suppose sterilization is preferable to the gas chambers. But if one sees their fellow man in this regard it is a certainty that the gas chambers and ovens will of necessity soon follow.

I hope you will rethink this entire post. You are in the grip of real darkness.

When one writes something that is so out of synch with the prevailing worldview, then I guess it's inevitable that people will read into it much more than is there. All of their preconceptions and biases lurch out of the subconscious and suddenly, if you suggest that it may be a problem that stupid people are having many more children than smart people, you are Hitler.

I made no proposal to shove people into gas chambers or to engage in forced sterilization. That is the kind of hysterical hyperbole that short-circuits any serious attempt to discuss the root causes of the problems we face.

I said that a serious approach would stop rewarding people for having children they can't support. Dull-witted people generally can't support many children. And as technology eliminates more and more simple jobs, they will be able to support even fewer. A society that blindly hands out welfare to enable those people to reproduce without being able to provide for their children will end up like the movie "Idiocracy", which I imagine many readers have seen.

I made a very simple point that your tut-tutting did nothing to refute or address: nature is unavoidably Darwinian. Human beings are subject to nature's laws. Therefore human societies are unavoidably subject to the same natural selection realities. You can look at that with open eyes and say, let's find a sensible, humane way to deal with those realities...or you can wave your hands and roll your eyes and cry "Margaret Sanger! Hitler! Abomination! Horror!" and continue on with the current state of affairs and let them lead where they are going.

Which was my other point - that I think that's exactly where we're going. Rude re-introduction to natural selection realities, courtesy of the well-meaning neo-Puritan Left (see Mencius Moldbug) who will Chavez us right into the ground.

Postscript: I've found it interesting that so many on the left claim to be environmentalists, and thus presumably understand that nature operates according to natural selection, and that when human beings try to interfere with that they end up making things worse...but somehow these same people think human beings and human society are exempt from the same imperatives.

By all means, we must have kindness as our guiding star in whatever we do. Real kindness, from the heart. But that does not mean we ignore the real destructive consequences of stupid people - and there is such a thing as stupidity! - having eight children by eight different men, and then expecting society to support them.

[Woodsman]

Re: Are Rector's facts wrong?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/o...public-safety/

[Woodsman]

Re: Are Rector's facts wrong?

I made no proposal to shove people into gas chambers or to engage in forced sterilization. That is the kind of hysterical hyperbole that short-circuits any serious attempt to discuss the root causes of the problems we face. I said that a serious approach would stop rewarding people for having children they can't support. Dull-witted people generally can't support many children. And as technology eliminates more and more simple jobs, they will be able to support even fewer. A society that blindly hands out welfare to enable those people to reproduce without being able to provide for their children will end up like the movie "Idiocracy", which I imagine many readers have seen. I made a very simple point that your tut-tutting did nothing to refute or address: nature is unavoidably Darwinian. Human beings are subject to nature's laws. Therefore human societies are unavoidably subject to the same natural selection realities. You can look at that with open eyes and say, let's find a sensible, humane way to deal with those realities...or you can wave your hands and roll your eyes and cry "Margaret Sanger! Hitler! Abomination! Horror!" and continue on with the current state of affairs and let them lead where they are going. Which was my other point - that I think that's exactly where we're going. Rude re-introduction to natural selection realities, courtesy of the well-meaning neo-Puritan Left (see Mencius Moldbug) who will Chavez us right into the ground. Postscript: I've found it interesting that so many on the left claim to be environmentalists, and thus presumably understand that nature operates according to natural selection, and that when human beings try to interfere with that they end up making things worse...but somehow these same people think human beings and human society are exempt from the same imperatives. By all means, we must have kindness as our guiding star in whatever we do. Real kindness, from the heart. But that does not mean we ignore the real destructive consequences of stupid people - and there is such a thing as stupidity! - having eight children by eight different men, and then expecting society to support them.

"Chapter IV: Genetic and Racial Hygiene" in the Hitler Youth Handbook

"The genetic health laws of the Third Reich have been vigorously attacked from various sides. Some wanted to deny the state the right to interfere in people’s personal freedoms. The answer is that the laws apply only to the very worst cases, and furthermore, the medical treatment is safe and causes no harm to those affected. More than that, a deep humanity underlies these efforts to relieve suffering and further damage. It is better and more humane to prevent great misery than to pity the unfortunates later and burden the people’s community with their care. It is also the natural right of a community to protect itself against threats from individuals. Everywhere in nature, safety measures are aimed at the good of the whole. The existence of the individual plays no role whatever. Have people been given reason and understanding only to ignore such natural laws? Is it not in fact the task of the human spirit to recognize these natural laws and bring them to expression in humane ways? That is what we believe."

"60,000 Reichsmark is what this person suffering from a hereditary defect
costs the People's community during his lifetime. Fellow citizen, that is your
money too. Read 'A New People', the monthly magazine of the
Bureau for Race Politics of the NSDAP."

Of the five identifiable steps by which the Nazis carried out the principle of "life unworthy of life," coercive sterilization was the first. There followed the killing of "impaired" children in hospitals; and then the killing of "impaired" adults, mostly collected from mental hospitals, in centers especially equipped with carbon monoxide gas. This project was extended (in the same killing centers) to "impaired" inmates of concentration and extermination camps and, finally, to mass killings in the extermination camps themselves.

Medical Killing and the Psychology of Genocide, Robert Jay Lifton

[gwynedd1]

Re: Are Rector's facts wrong?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/o...public-safety/

Hmm, that's sounds similar to my plan to tax poverty to discourage the practice.

[gwynedd1]

Re: Are Rector's facts wrong?

Yeah , hardly any real Chicagoans anymore. I hike more than a mile to the train, just to get to the inbound station. -15 F was actually warm. Did it a few winters ago at -23 F.

[gwynedd1]

Re: Are Rector's facts wrong?

Thanks for sharing, lake. It seems the ground is being prepared by the right for an offensive. So many similar stories across the right-wing media complex and starting from the head of the serpent, Heritage, then followed by the WSJ and now NR. And just as Obama begins reigniting his plans for a grand bargain.

Aside: It's almost charming that Kristoff still considers himself a liberal.

If you go looking for the catastrophe that laid this area low, you’ll eventually discover a terrifying story: Nothing happened.

Nothing happened?
Now I would never beat an idiot neocon with a stick of hickory for their repugnant ignorance on Appalachia. I would do it with American Chestnut.
Who pays for this "article"?


http://ecosystems.psu.edu/research/c...nference/davis

[vt]

Re: Are Rector's facts wrong?

"So many similar stories across the right-wing media complex"

There has been more coverage of Christie's Bridgegate in the last 24 hours than the coverage of the IRS attack on conservative groups in the last 6 months. And you are worried about an "offensive" from the right? Woodsman, you keep saying you don't support either side but constantly disdain the right and never the left. The IRS has NO right to attack anyone because of political views. Nixon and Agnew had no right to attack Democrats in illegals ways either.

Heck Rahm Emanuel does more Bridgegates in Chicago every month than Christie is accused of. If Christie is lying he's finished, but at least he takes reaponsibility.

Your denials are wearing thin.

I think the right has lots of problems with their views, but the left has even more. They are not your father's Democrat party. There are not any statesmen like Sam Nunn, Patrick Moyihan, Jacob Javits, Harry Truman, or John Kennedy.

Both parties are corrupt, incompetent, and disrespectful.

But the American people have started to wise up. The left and rights days are numbered.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/166763/record-high-americans-identify-independents.aspx?ref=image

[BadJuju]

Re: Are Rector's facts wrong?

Yeah , hardly any real Chicagoans anymore. I hike more than a mile to the train, just to get to the inbound station. -15 F was actually warm. Did it a few winters ago at -23 F.

I am thinking of moving to Chicago soon. I will hike in -50 F to the train!

[Woodsman]

Re: Are Rector's facts wrong?

"So many similar stories across the right-wing media complex"

There has been more coverage of Christie's Bridgegate in the last 24 hours than the coverage of the IRS attack on conservative groups in the last 6 months. And you are worried about an "offensive" from the right? Woodsman, you keep saying you don't support either side but constantly disdain the right and never the left. The IRS has NO right to attack anyone because of political views. Nixon and Agnew had no right to attack Democrats in illegals ways either.

Heck Rahm Emanuel does more Bridgegates in Chicago every month than Christie is accused of. If Christie is lying he's finished, but at least he takes reaponsibility.

Your denials are wearing thin.

I think the right has lots of problems with their views, but the left has even more. They are not your father's Democrat party. There are not any statesmen like Sam Nunn, Patrick Moyihan, Jacob Javits, Harry Truman, or John Kennedy.

Both parties are corrupt, incompetent, and disrespectful.

But the American people have started to wise up. The left and rights days are numbered.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/166763/record-high-americans-identify-independents.aspx?ref=image

Oh man, are we back to that again? Geez louise, vt, we've been over this ground so many times. You know where I stand here in terms of both parties and this notion that I have to satisfy yours or anyone else's sense of balance is for the birds. I've written about it in the past so many times and I'll refer you to those.

You're right about this not being my father's Democrats. And who can recognize the GOP from the days of yore? I've said that too. And yes, that style of doing business is unremarkable for Chicago. Really, it's unremarkable for politics in general and I have to laugh seeing everyone so shocked to learn that there's gambling in the casino. Then again, lots of people still think Dick Cheney wasn't the de facto president from from 2001 to 2009, so it's hard to blame them for their lack of sophistication.

Christie is an amusing sideshow and I've enjoyed it very much, thanks. But if you think what Christie exhibited this week is "taking responsibility," well we will have to disagree. Me, I wouldn't be so quick to write his political obit. People are dumb about this stuff and will revert to their favorite team with familiar and soothing tu quoque rationalizations.

Otherwise, there's not much disagreement between us with regard to the state of the Dems and the GOP. Until we get to +51% independents and see incumbents losing more than they win, I'll remain skeptical as to how awake the American people seem to be. Press me and I'll tell you that I don't really believe we can vote our way out of this mess. But that's for another thread.

I will say this, if you are serious about political independence then consider that you might be hurting your own cause by this dogged insistence that "Left" is a synonym of "Democrat" and "Right" is one for "Republican." It ain't so, brother. You're so close to cutting loose the ballast and flying free, I can tell, but the weight of the past is very strong. I'm rooting for you and that's a sincere hope on my part. There's only one party now, vt. It's the power party and it leans to the right. The rest is misdirection to entertain the folks back home.

Anyway, it's my opinion and I can make a strong case that it's fact. I understand that you don't agree and it's okay by me. The gap is closing, oh so slowly, but we just might get close enough to reach hands and shake before it's all over. One day it will be about as hard to find a Republican or Democrat around here as it was to find a supporter of Vichy France post WWII.

BTW, I still have that copy of Hedges waiting for you if you want it.

[Slimprofits]

Re: Are Rector's facts wrong?

EJ,
such interesting statistics.
could you state the source of these wage projections?
Thanks,
EasternBelle

They're from the BS, excuse me, the BLS.

[Slimprofits]

Re: Are Rector's facts wrong?

We have won so many battles against the poor. I believe victory will soon be at hand.

Very good!