Why did we lose the war on poverty?
 

Depends on who you believe, we have spent anywhere from $5-15 trillion$ on the war on poverty and today there are more people than ever in the poverty level.

This is not an Obama bash thread.. We have been losing this war since Johnson started it in 1964.

You cant ask a bunch of poor people why they are poor. The answer will never be satisfying, intelligent or insightful.

Ronald Reagan, he allowed the rich to pay less taxes and get richer. Our distribution of wealth got spread out. No one wants to pay more taxes but it is a nice way to redistribute the wealth.

I don't buy that. None of the welfare programs were stopped during any presidents administration. The money continued to flow to those that needed it.

becasue the focus was on poverty, instead of wealth

to expand a bit on that, all that keeps on being done is a reinforcement of 'we are poor' 'we are in poverty' 'we are in the welfare trap' 'woe is us', and it just breeds doom, gloom, and the same old same old.

There is no collective mindset of creating wealth, creating a better neighbourhood, creating opportunities, or any of the positive steps that need to be taken (first in the mind, then in reality).

The 'war on poverty' will last forever as long as the focus is on all the negative shit - just like wealth is a mindset, so is poverty, woe is me, drudgery, repetitiveness, struggle, and so on.

Slavery, ghettos, racism.

Ask any colored guy and that is what they will tell you.

Because we never had a war on poverty. If we had, we would have had:

- A mandatory draft for any military action longer than thirty days
- Never started a drug war
- No government sanctioned gambling like lotteries and horse racing
- Single Payer Healthcare with supplemental private insurance
- A much higher minimum wage with teeth
- Serious regulation of education prices
- A stronger SEC regulating the market than the SEC that plays Football
- The Buffet Rule
- An FCC focused on breaking up monopolies in media
- Completely different class action lawsuit rules
- No Citizens United decision by the Supreme Court
- Unions focused on safety and benefits for workers
- Term limits
- Immigration reform
- Public campaign financing and six month campaign periods
- Elimination of carried interest and 10,000 other loopholes
- No Inheritance tax haven in the Dakotas
- Civics as a required high school course
- Readilly available birth control everywhere
- National sales tax and lower income taxes
- Zero for profit business in the prison industry
- Laws against banks charging minimum balance fees
- A required one hour unbiased class before getting a first mortgage
This list could be thousands of lines longer....

I'm not saying I'm for all these items, but they would reduce poverty pretty quickly if enacted...

Because the rules and the way they are applied are vastly skewed based on your class.

it is math not faith.

Not sure I am clear.. The money was spent, that's a certainty. And it continues to be spent. We've gone through some amazing upswings in the economy over those 50 years.

Whether it was 5 or 15T, that is a lot of money.

has there been a 'war on ___" that has ever been won?

We have never had a war on poverty, we have had a war on the average man. The entire system is built to suck as much money out of every person possible. It happens not just from the govt it's self, but also corporate America.

The average person is nothing more than a little worker bee, being used till it becomes useless and dies.

President Lyndon Johnson stood in the Capitol on Jan. 8, 1964, and, in his first State of the Union address, committed the nation to a war on poverty.

"We shall not rest until that war is won," Johnson said. "The richest nation on Earth can afford to win it. We cannot afford to lose it."

It was an effort that had been explored under President Kennedy, but it firmly — and quickly — took shape under Johnson.

http://www.npr.org/2014/01/08/260572...y-was-personal

Claiming to have a war on something, doesn't mean they actually do anything about it.

Look at the war on drugs and how little it accomplishes yet how much money gets spent to keep it going. We aren't trying to win the war on drugs, it's just an excuse to shove money at ways to control the less desirable of the population and let defense contractors get extra cash.

lol ... got that right ... facinating how to get the attention of Americans, you just need to put '' war on ...'' ... they really love war ...

Just on A&E, must be at least 5 shows with war such as Storage War .... :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

I drove from California to Vegas, some 500 miles or so. Took me through some very beautiful areas of the US I had "heard about but never seen". My trip took me through an Indian reservation, which is exactly what I thought it would be like - Little tiny two room houses and mobile homes with half of the windows missing and using cardboard. It was very depressing.

Which made me even more thankful for everything I have.

The only one that I can think of the war on the Constitution and the government is actually winning that one...bit by bit they are chipping away individuals rights and freedoms. :mad:

If you aren't working at 12 years old,you're a slacker and deserve poverty.dog eat dog from early on.

Well fare programs keep people poor, they don't get much. In order for people to get out of poverty they need good paying job, which are very rare now a days. Poverty is something that will always exist, poor people have to work, educate them selfs, save their money and try to over come being poor. The government can only do so much for poor them.

Simple answer: a dollar is worth nothing these days and the US has lost too many of the manufacturing jobs overseas.

reverse above and poverty will reverse

Worldwide there are billions of people who have been lifted out of poverty in the last 20 years

http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_roslin...n_poverty.html

I agree with your statement about government programs keeping people poor. And we need more jobs etc..but the *war* on poverty has been going on now for 50 years. There have been some incredible booms in the economy over that period where employers couldn't find enough people to work.

Right now, my company is hiring. A number of businesses in our industrial park are hiring and we are not seeing applicants. A few weeks ago we hired a new OTR sales person. This is a great job. I thought we were going to see hundreds of applicants as we listed the starting wage in the ads. We saw 4 people.

I think there are a few things that are contributing to the problem.

In no specific order of importance:

1. Wages have basically been stagnant since 1980. When you adjust for inflation wages have only increased about $8,000 per year over the last 33 years. That works out to roughly 12 cents per hour per year increase.

2. At the same time that wages have been stagnant, many things have increased dramatically. Housing costs have gone through the roof, cars are more expensive, the cost of education has gone up. All of these things, and others, have increased at a much faster rate than have wages. This causes the average person to have more debt and if they lose their job, get sick or hurt it can financially destroy them.

3. If a person has one dependent, works a minimum wage job and works full time they are still below the federal poverty line. Roughly 3.6 million workers in the US currently make minimum wage or less.

4. There is little incentive to getting out of the poverty. If you have a kid and you make minimum wage you can qualify for a lot of different welfare programs. If you get food stamps, child care assistance, housing assistance, health insurance and possibly even money, when you combine that with your wage you can actually live a decent life. It isn't glamorous by any means, but you can have a decent place to live, food on your table and pay your bills and still have money left over each month. The reality is that if you are doing this you would need to likely jump up to $12-$13 per hour from the $7.25 you are making in order make enough money to live an equivalent lifestyle. Why work hard and try to get a better job when you are likely going to have to struggle when you can just flip burgers for 25-30 hours a week and live just a well?

5. We stress the wrong types of education. This might rub some people wrong, but parents and teachers need to be more pragmatic with kids. Last year there were twice as many people that graduated from college with liberal arts degrees than with degrees in some kind of applied science. Paying for your kid to get a degree in music or art history or film or writing is likely not going to help them get a job in their desired field. All is is going to do is put you and or your kid in debt. If a person is going to go to college or any kind of trade school they should focus on learning something they can actually use in the real world. I know some will disagree with me, but the reality is that writers write and painters paint and singers sing. You can work as an accountant or an engineer or in a bank and still pursue that dream, but at least you have a marketable skill to fall back on if and when it doesn't work out and you aren't just sitting there with potentially tens of thousands of dollars of debt and working at The Gap folding shirts.

6. The overall education system in this country is fucked. My nephew has a high school diploma. Not a GED or some kind of certificate, an actual high school diploma and he can barely read or write. My 10-year-old niece reads and writes better than him. When he was in 8th grade he had a total of 18 classes that year (6 per semester) he failed 15 of them (he only passed P.E.) and yet he was allowed to go on to high school. Now sure, there is some responsibility here that has to be put on the parent and his mom is a terrible parent, but the school system should not allow that. When I was in 8th grade in 1984 had I gotten those grades they would have held me back no matter what my mom would have said (for the record she would have killed me so I wouldn't be typing this right now :)). School funding is being cut and handled poorly and the overall system is in shambles. If you live in a nice neighborhood you likely will have a good public school to go to, but if you are poor or live in a shitty neighborhood good luck.

7. We have our priorities messed up in this country. There are currently more people in prison then there are high school teachers in America. That troubles me. Some of those prisoners will be in prison for life (deservedly so), but most of them will eventually get out. They have zero, let me repeat that, ZERO prospects. Can they get their shit together and become a productive member of society? Sure, they could, but likely it is not going to happen. The deck is so stacked against them they are likely going to either end up back in prison or somehow in the system. Many of these people, some would estimate as many as 40%, are there for non-violent drug crimes.

8. Kids are not taught how money works or how to deal with it. The idea of saving, investing and trying to grow your money is something that is a foreign to most people as Mars. When they get money they spend it on shit they don't need. They also get credit too easily and on things they don't need to get credit on. Somehow debt is no longer a bad thing.

These are just a few things off the top of my head.

Sorry for the long post. It is late and I can't sleep and I have a few glasses of scotch in me LOL.

As long as human kind relies on a monetary system there will always be poverty, when mankind no longer needs worthless pieces of paper or metal and lives in a utopian society then and only then will poverty be eradicated. :2 cents:

As I read this I am hearing Judy Garland singing...


Stalin thought the same thing, as long as he was in charge and everyone else did his bidding.

Late? It's 6am here and I have been up for an hour! :1orglaugh
Humor aside, All your points I would have to agree with. But the one that is missing is the mindset of people at the bottom. We have created a nanny state over the years and too many people simply like not having to be responsible for themselves. The 50 year war proved one thing. There is no cure for laziness.

What percentage of the poor do you think are poor primarily because they are lazy?

How many do I think are taking generational handouts from the federal government for 50 years because they are lazy? 99%

Taxation without representation.

And if you think politicians represent the will of the people - you're sadly naive and delusional.

That isn't what I asked, and your logic can be applied just as easily to the wealthy.
How many wealthy people taking generational handouts for 50 years as inheritance are lazy? Also 99%

Now let's get back to the question I asked....
What percentage of all poor people do you think are poor primarily because they are lazy?

the web has given the poor the greatest ever portal out of poverty. no longer can a person claim they could not get their education because of their schools.

:)

I know that's not what you asked. It was a loaded question. My answer is in line with the original topic. The failure of a 50 year multi-trillion dollar war on poverty in America

While of course the Indians whom were killed when the white man came here got screwed and those afterwards as this country took their lands. However today's generations have only their selves to blame. They have free land and I'm pretty sure are not taxed on their earnings in the reservations. No one else gets a deal like that..

I'm sorry but there comes a time when you have to stop using the past as an excuse and work for your own future..

the reservation system doesn't work. sure they 'own' their land buts it owned by the band and the band chiefs get all the funding and use it to line their and their friends pockets while the rest go without. they are not allowed to own their own homes so no wonder they live in shit shacks.

While many are not lazy, many are not smart with their money.. How many low income people do you see whom smoke cigarettes, drink countless sodas or beer each day? A single bottle of coke cola is about $1.60 in most places. That's nearly $50 a month to drink a single soda a day and you know damn well most people drink more. Those energy drinks are like $3 a pop...do the math.. That's easily someone electric bill in an apartment or car insurance..

That's the problem with many low income people is they waste money on stupid shit like bad habits. It's not limited to just low income, but others can afford to waste money on that stuff if they want. Low income people can not afford to have bad habits, yet most of them do.

This maybe true but that aren't stuck on the street. As long as they don't get kicked off their reservation they always have a place to live. Even if it's a shitty shack, it's still an advantage most people don't have. If they went out and got normal jobs, they could live in normal houses off the reservation if they choose to do so.

No one is holding them back except for themselves. I'm all for helping people out that are having a bad time or are in an unfortunate place, but not if they don't try to help themselves.

Lol free land and no taxes on the worst land there is in the US with zero fucking jobs. These reservations are seriously third world status when you drive through them

Casinos are a new thing and only aid a very few

Then leave.. That's the same typical BS you get from people in inner cities. If you can not improve your situation where you are, then you leave and go else where to find a better situation. Again there comes time when you have to accept that it's only yourself that can improve your situation. If there are no jobs, then you go where the jobs are.

This is something people have done since the beginning of this country they have gone where they could prosper. You can't just sit around expecting prosperity to fall in your lap, you have to go out and find it. No one is going to do it for you unless you are of the lucky few whom were born with silver spoons in their mouths. Everyone else has to find it their selfs and work hard to keep it.

They can either do that or they can complain their entire lives that they didn't get a fair shake.. Not everyone will get rich, but just about everyone whom wants to can improve their situation if they put effort into doing so.

But that's misleading. She's not rich because she's famous, but famous because she's rich - her father created a fortune with the Hilton Hotel chain (and others).

I agree with you. In this case it wasn't because the "white man is holding them down", it's because their Indian reservation is far from modern society. When I say "far from modern society" I mean drove three hundred miles and only drove through three towns, all of which had a population of less than five thousand if that. Those towns weren't much better off either.

What's even worse with the indians and their reservations is the casinos. We have a local tribe in my hometown who own a huge amount of land. They built what I believe is the largest casino in Northern California. Each one of the indians made bank off of this - they get a yearly salary just because they are a member of the tribe. But it hasn't changed much. There was a series of news stories written about it a few years ago - The end result is they have nicer cars, still live in crappy mobile homes, and the drinking problem has now become a much larger drug problem.

You are sounding a lot like...........
;



;



;



;


;



;
me. :winkwink:

That's why some people would call you a successful idiot. Bro.

Alaska natives aren't on reservations. They have every advantage in the world, including piles of money handed to them for free, free homes (from Clinton era HUD programs) free medical care, free education, endless loan advantages etc. Outside of developed cities, they are largely all still broke, alcoholic idiots living like hillbillies in a shack in Kentucky.... from Barrow to Dutch Harbor. Their cities have some of the highest crime per capita in the nation (Bethel in particular), they have to ban alcohol from cities and boroughs to keep them from raping, robbing and killing each other while drunk. Incest and child sexual abuse is the norm.

So... so much for your theory.

Anyone can live anywhere and do and be anything they want to, within the law. Many choose not to.

It's not really a loaded question. I'm not asking for a statistical analysis.
What does your gut tell you? 1% of them? 5%, 15%, 50%, 100%? If you want to win the war on poverty you have to believe poor people are capable of more than being poor. The ones who are poor due to laziness can't be helped.

My view is that a very high percentage of poor people have lazy parents and become lazier as they get older and remain poor to complete the cycle from one generation to the next, but only a tiny fraction (less than 5%) of people who are poor start out poor primarily due to their own laziness. That is the crux of the problem with fixing the war on poverty....

Things that break the cycle of poverty matter most. It is unlikely we would ever be able to help poor people over the age of 30 or 40 in any way beyond social safetynet programs. You can give them fish but only a tiny fraction can be taught to fish at that point.

What would we do if we wanted to teach younger poor people to fish? Apprenticeship programs, civics courses, public preschool, tradeschools, reconfigure education costs and student debts, enact the 30 day draft rule, provide single payer basic health care, end the drug war, provide serious tax benefits to people who put in time as qualified mentors, massive prison system reform and so on... all the things that allow someone with lazy parents to choose a different path and safeguards to prevent them from being derailed (by unnecessary wars or selective enforcement) if they are otherwise headed in the right direction.

If you think they are genetically lazy nothing will help. I think it's a learned behavior and you can intercede as a society if you want the next generation to be better than the prior generation. Over 10 years the results will be minimal, over 3 generations they would be enormous. :2 cents:

Also as I have mentioned in many of our previous discussions... the world does not need a huge percentage of the population to do any work at all and that number will continue to grow. As more gets automated and the globe gets smaller the number of people with no work to do will grow much larger internationally.

Do we kill them? Colonize another planet? or Take care of them?