GOP's Myth: We’ve Spent Vast Sums Fighting Poverty

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 05, 2015 4:14 AM GMT
    NYT: In reality, federal spending on means-tested programs other than Medicaid has fluctuated between 1 and 2 percent of G.D.P. for decades, going up in recessions and down in recoveries. That’s not a lot of money — it’s far less than other advanced countries spend — and not all of it goes to families below the poverty line.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/04/opinion/paul-krugman-race-class-and-neglect.html
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 05, 2015 4:34 AM GMT
    More bullshit from you, woodsmen, and Krugman too. His main assertion about federal government spending is unsubstantiated and even unspecified. "...programs [unspecified] other than Medicaid..."

    All you do is peddle crap here. Like the earlier misleading piece today about Morell that I dissected.

    You also lie when you concoct thread titles to suggest newspaper headlines that are different.

    Are you trying to counter the thread I posted earlier about how bankrupt you and your ideology are? I'll post it here in bold.

    http://www.realjock.com/gayforums/4046760

    For the past 48 years, Democrats have controlled the city of Baltimore.

    During that time, the city's population has fallen 30% and the poverty situation has grown more intense.

    During the last five years, the federal government has poured billions of dollars into the poor areas of Baltimore … stimulus money.

    Total taxpayer money given: $1.8 billion.

    One poor neighborhood, Mid-Town Belvedere, got a whopping $838 million.

    That includes $467 million to education, $206 million to the environment, $24 million to "the family," and $15 million to transportation.

    The result: Not much improvement.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 05, 2015 4:48 AM GMT
    Most of The Money to Help Poor Ends in Businesses That Kept Them in Poverty

    NYT: A business model based on inadequate pay has essentially turned public aid into corporate welfare.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/01/opinion/picking-up-the-tab-for-low-wages.html
  • bobbobbob

    Posts: 2812

    May 05, 2015 7:06 AM GMT
    Here's an article I read 3 years ago that will add some insight on the subject.

    9/13/2012 From Forbes.com
    If The US Spends $550 Billion On Poverty How Can There Still Be Poverty In The US?

    The nation’s official poverty rate in 2011 was 15.0 percent, with 46.2 million people in poverty. After three consecutive years of increases, neither the poverty rate nor the number of people in poverty were statistically different from the 2010 estimates.

    Medicaid is largely health care for the poor. This costs, in 2010 at least it did, some $400 billion. SNAP, the renamed food stamps, cost some $70 billion in the same year. The EITC handed out $55 billion. Add those sums up and we’ve got $525 billion being spent on the alleviation of poverty. Which is close enough, given the level of accuracy being used here, to have entirely abolished poverty in the United States. If we’d simply given the cash to poor people then there would no longer be any poor people.

    It’s actually really strange. The US spends half a trillion dollars a year on this problem. That’s $500,000,000,000 and more in reducing poverty. And the way it’s counted is that poverty has not been reduced by one, single, solitary person.

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2012/09/13/if-the-us-spends-550-billion-on-poverty-how-can-there-still-be-poverty-in-the-us/?&_suid=143080852201501042092286515981

    He makes some good points except for the sentence I emphasized in red. The problem with persistent poverty is never solved by throwing money at it and turning away expecting those in poverty to break age free of old self-impoverishing "hand to mouth" mentality that keeps them in poverty. You need only look at what happens to many of them after winning lotteries to understand this.

    He only counts Medicaid, SNAP (food stamps) and Earned Income Tax Credits in his figures and doesn't include Social Security, SSI, and many other state and federal programs that are dedicated to helping people out of poverty. Had he his figures would have been considerably higher.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 05, 2015 10:02 AM GMT
    things like the Baltimore riots are an indicator there are NOT lots of opportunity in the land of the free.
  • conservativej...

    Posts: 2465

    May 05, 2015 12:42 PM GMT
    pellaz saidthings like the Baltimore riots are an indicator there are NOT lots of opportunity in the land of the free.


    That's what happens when a 'Ho spreads her legs.
  • musclmed

    Posts: 3287

    May 05, 2015 1:22 PM GMT
    pellaz saidthings like the Baltimore riots are an indicator there are NOT lots of opportunity in the land of the free.


    Lesson of the 80's and 90's is that generational welfare did little to help and mostly hurt. When Clinton and Congress got tough on it, many got jobs improved there lives and moved away from the blighted neighborhoods.

    The worst is when a child is forced to go to a failing school. A school that despite its per student spending.

    The Baltimore school system ranked second among the nation's 100 largest school districts in how much it spent per pupil in fiscal year 2011, according to data released Tuesday by the U.S. Census Bureau. The city's $15,483 per-pupil expenditure was second to New York City's $19,770.
    El Paso, Tex. ($8,209), Brevard County, Fla. ($,7801) and the biggest school districts in Utah (all below $6,200).

    Why not give those students the 15k so they can go to a successful school? Its clear throwing money at this has never worked.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 05, 2015 1:55 PM GMT
    The 10 Most Impoverished Places in America Are Governed by Republicans

    NYT: The 10 lowest counties in the country, by this ranking, include a cluster of six in the Appalachian Mountains of eastern Kentucky (Breathitt, Clay, Jackson, Lee, Leslie and Magoffin), along with four others in various parts of the rural South: Humphreys County, Miss.; East Carroll Parish, La.; Jefferson County, Ga.; and Lee County, Ark.

    The ranking looks at six data points for each county in the United States: education (percentage of residents with at least a bachelor’s degree), median household income, unemployment rate, disability rate, life expectancy and obesity.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/26/upshot/where-are-the-hardest-places-to-live-in-the-us.html?_r=0&abt=0002&abg=1
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 05, 2015 2:00 PM GMT
    Poverty Has Fallen in the U.S.

    NYT: Christopher Jencks, a sociologist at Harvard presents data that undermines Republican claims that the war on poverty has been a failure – a claim exemplified by Ronald Reagan’s famous 1987 quip: “In the sixties we waged a war on poverty, and poverty won.”

    Jencks’s conclusion: “The absolute poverty rate has declined dramatically since President Johnson launched his war on poverty in 1964.” At 4.8 percent, Jencks’s calculation is the lowest poverty estimate by a credible expert in the field.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/25/opinion/how-poor-are-the-poor.html
  • musclmed

    Posts: 3287

    May 05, 2015 2:06 PM GMT
    woodsmen saidPoverty Has Fallen in the U.S.

    NYT: Christopher Jencks, a sociologist at Harvard presents data that undermines Republican claims that the war on poverty has been a failure – a claim exemplified by Ronald Reagan’s famous 1987 quip: “In the sixties we waged a war on poverty, and poverty won.”

    Jencks’s conclusion: “The absolute poverty rate has declined dramatically since President Johnson launched his war on poverty in 1964.” At 4.8 percent, Jencks’s calculation is the lowest poverty estimate by a credible expert in the field.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/25/opinion/how-poor-are-the-poor.html


    Yeah and the unemployment rate is 5.5%.

    Fact is that city and local has long been run by democrats. So if they didnt spend enough, who replaces them?

    The cities population has shrunk. Mainly from people fleeing it.

    I would be for handing people money as they leave. Not handing it to the politicians there who divert it to their own interests.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 05, 2015 3:28 PM GMT
    Why Someone Is Poor Depends on Whether You're a Republican Or Democrat

    19blowchart-articleLarge.gif

    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/19/opinion/blow-poverty-is-not-a-state-of-mind.html
  • jock_1

    Posts: 1492

    May 05, 2015 4:30 PM GMT
    woodsmen saidNYT: In reality, federal spending on means-tested programs other than Medicaid has fluctuated between 1 and 2 percent of G.D.P. for decades, going up in recessions and down in recoveries. That’s not a lot of money — it’s far less than other advanced countries spend — and not all of it goes to families below the poverty line.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/04/opinion/paul-krugman-race-class-and-neglect.html


    So then lets take half of what you personally make and give it towards poverty. Don't tell others what to do with the money they make. Better yet, lets take 3/4 of what you make and give it to those in poverty, or better yet you can donate it all to your favorite charity right now. You don't have to worry about the rest of us.
  • bobbobbob

    Posts: 2812

    May 05, 2015 7:50 PM GMT
    woodsmen saidWhy Someone Is Poor Depends on Whether You're a Republican Or Democrat

    19blowchart-articleLarge.gif

    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/19/opinion/blow-poverty-is-not-a-state-of-mind.html


    Oh Jeez.. Another opinion piece by Charles Blow; cherry picker extraordinaire, infamous player in "down low" sexuality for 20 plus years and defender of the indefensible.

    About two months ago I saw Charles Blow on MSNBC's Morning Joe making these claims. Mika Brzezinski turned him into a stammering fool when she proposed that since he is a highly successful black man presenting the figures as true then he should be admitting that attained his success in spite of not having worked as hard as others, that he had advantages over others, he put forth less effort than others and that luck had more to do with his success than anything he himself had done. All Blow could say in response was, "but the problem is how Republicans perceive poverty - not how Democrats perceive it." That was when Joe Scarborough went off on him.

    Blow is an ideological bigot who makes the flimsiest irrational claims possible in very well written English.

    My qualm with the statement is the insistence on a “traditional marriage.” Loving families, of any formation, can suffice. While it is true that two adults in a home can provide twice the time, attention and income for a family, those adults needn’t necessarily be in a traditional marriage. Yes, marriage can have a sustaining and fortifying effect on a union and a family, but following that argument, we should be rushing headlong to extend it to all who desire it. In some cases, even parents living apart can offer a nurturing environment for children if they prioritize parenting when it comes to their time and money. Not all parents have to reside together to provide together. What he doesn't say is that not everyone is like him, able to afford nannies and maids to do most of the parenting work that he takes credit for as a single father. He makes this statement and omits all the hundreds of studies over the past thirty years that all show a two parent family not only has profound advantages for the parents and children but also produces the most stable, and crime resistant children into adulthood.

    A Pew Research Center/USA Today survey in January found that, unlike Democrats and independents, most Republicans believe that people are poor primarily because of a lack of effort, and that people are rich primarily because they work harder than others.Here again he ignores all the tons of evidence to the contrary. "Sixty-seven percent of high-net-worth Americans are self-made millionaires, according to the survey. Only 8 percent inherited their wealth. One third of the millionaires surveyed were women and half of them made their own fortunes independent from husbands." Not only that but every 20 years over half the people listed as millionaires are replaced by newer ones who have worked their ways to the top. WORKING HARD, BEING EDUCATED AND BEING AMBITIOUS WORKS.

    Then Blow just had to resort to repeating a disproven talking point.
    “Indeed, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics’ latest survey of consumer expenditure found that the poorest fifth of America’s households contributed an average of 4.3 percent of their incomes to charitable organizations in 2007. The richest fifth gave at less than half that rate, 2.1 percent.” The charity of the poorest fifth accounts for 9% of the total charitable donations in the US when all charity organizations are counted. USBLS gets its data from United Way and similar large umbrella charity organizations. They do not count local or regional charities that are more efficient and responsive to the needs of communities than the mega-charities and thus more likely to be supported by savvy people with money to donate.

  • Svnw688

    Posts: 3350

    May 05, 2015 8:03 PM GMT
    woodsmen saidWhy Someone Is Poor Depends on Whether You're a Republican Or Democrat

    19blowchart-articleLarge.gif

    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/19/opinion/blow-poverty-is-not-a-state-of-mind.html


    Precisely. It simply proves what we already know. Republicans are cold, fearful, and have an every man for himself mentality. Democrats are our brother's keeper and care more about fellow citizens.

    Spin all you want GOP operatives, but that's the truth and everyone knows it.
  • bobbobbob

    Posts: 2812

    May 05, 2015 8:28 PM GMT

    19blowchart-articleLarge.gif

    Any liberal who wishes to defend these percentages needs to step away from the attack on conservatives and get your asses busy making your own damned personal narrative match the survey. Otherwise you're just another hypocrite deceiving yourself more than others.

    Start here

    1. admit nothing you've accomplished was due to your own hard work and efforts.
    2. admit you had "unfair" advantages over others (rich parents, trust funds, rich sugar daddies, full scholarhips, guaranteed job positions)
    3. admit that all your accomplishments happened randomly by luck and had nothing to do with your own goals and ambitions put into motion.
  • Svnw688

    Posts: 3350

    May 05, 2015 8:43 PM GMT
    I admit that GOD SHED HIS GRACE ON ME when it happened, either by divine choice or dumb luck, to be born in the mightiest and wealthiest nation the world has ever seen.

    I admit that I am the unworthy benefactor of hard work, blood, sweat and tears that built this nation's infrastructure--from railways to dams to bridges that I use for my needs everyday.

    I admit that I cannot do anything alone, and that only by society am I capable of doing what I do in running a Manhattan law firm. I turn on the switch and power runs my computer. I take the subway and am driven to my destination safely. I walk into the Court house that I did not build. I file briefs on paper I did not cut down. I pay for ink that I did not distill. I cash checks at a bank that I do not guard. Etc.

    I admit I am the beneficiary of geniuses, and I am standing on the shoulders of giants to accomplish "my lot."

    I admit that there was hard work and sacrifice on my part, but that more than anything, I am a product of dumb luck, divine intervention, and/or circumstances. No man is an island, and I am but a small piece in larger society. I support it, and it supports me.

    GOD SHED HIS GRACE ON ME.
  • bobbobbob

    Posts: 2812

    May 05, 2015 10:20 PM GMT
    Woodsmen Caught Spreading BULLSHIT.
    Reading the article cited below I looked for any reference saying the counties Woodsmen listed are governed by GOP.


    woodsmen said The 10 Most Impoverished Places in America Are Governed by Republicans
    (LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES)

    NYT: The 10 lowest counties in the country, by this ranking, include a cluster of six in the Appalachian Mountains of eastern Kentucky (Breathitt, Clay, Jackson, Lee, Leslie and Magoffin), along with four others in various parts of the rural South: Humphreys County, Miss.; East Carroll Parish, La.; Jefferson County, Ga.; and Lee County, Ark.


    Color coded for your easy comprehension

    Breathitt County KY. Democrats 10,390 / Repoblicans 888
    Clay County KY. Democrat majority until 2012. 2012 election fraud case busted 6 Democrat officials, 1 Republican. 156 years in sentences handed down. http://www.kentucky.com/2010/03/26/1197075/jury-convicts-all-8-defendants.html
    Jackson Co Ky. Democrats 312,251 / Republicans 176,884

    Lee County Ky Democrats 1,954 / 3,193
    Leslie County KY Democrats 948 / Republicans 7,507
    Magoffin County Ky Democrats 7,153 / Republicans 2,799 [url]http://elect.ky.gov/SiteCollectionDocuments/Election%20Results/2010-2019/2014/statcnty.txt[/url]
    Humphreys County, Miss 77% Democrat 74% Black http://www.city-data.com/county/Humphreys_County-MS.html
    East Carroll Parrish La. 74+% Democrat 70% black. Obama got 87% of vote. http://www.louisiana-demographics.com/east-carroll-parish-demographics
    Jefferson County, Ga 55% black 54% Democrat. http://www.homefacts.com/politics/Georgia/Jefferson-County.html
    Lee County Arkansas 56% black 58% Democrats

    You can't make up your own facts just because you can't find any you like
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 06, 2015 2:25 AM GMT
    ^ I stand corrected Bob. I should have double checked. Apologies.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 06, 2015 2:27 AM GMT
    woodsmen said^ I stand corrected Bob. I should have double checked. Apologies.

    Bullshit woodsmen. That is your typical MO. Why did you even make the statement if you didn't know it was true? And you knew damn well it wasn't in the article you quoted. You just got caught this time.
  • bobbobbob

    Posts: 2812

    May 06, 2015 5:43 AM GMT
    socalfitness said
    woodsmen said^ I stand corrected Bob. I should have double checked. Apologies.

    Bullshit woodsmen. That is your typical MO. Why did you even make the statement if you didn't know it was true? And you knew damn well it wasn't in the article you quoted. You just got caught this time.


    DOUBLE CHECKED?
    There was no SINGLE FIRST check done.. period.
    You just pulled that out of your ass metaphorically speaking without checking.

    And you've not been corrected. You've been exposed.

    Your apology to me is misdirected. You did nothing to me to apologize for. Your transgression was against honesty. Find a way to apologize to it if you can.

    EDIT
    For me this is a deeper and bigger issue than what woodsmen did. It goes against a core value that was ingrained in me from childhood; Words should always be attached to substance. Never say words you don't mean. Never say words you cannot back up with reasoning or facts. Never intentionally say words that are untrue. Never make verbal commitments you cannot live up to.

    There's a great benefit to this. People will know when you say something they can rely on your words. You build trust and respect in business, friendships and even with adversaries because they know your words are based on substance and not thin air.