Large numbers of Americans are hurting bad. The problem is many just don't vote. Here is a thread I posted on this subject not too long ago:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=3486739"poor are politically mute...What rational politician would listen to the poor? They don’t vote..." So sad, but so true. If you read this you may or may not be shocked at the reasons attributed to being poor, I was!! Conservatives blame government (welfare) and personal failings (lack of discipline). If only it was that simple, but they have no idea of what causes a person or family to fall into poverty and what keeps them there. All I know is that it is way more complicated than that.
Over the past two decades, America has had the highest or near-highest poverty rates for children, individual adults and families among 31 developed countries, according to the Luxembourg Income Study, a 23-year project that compares poverty and income data from 31 industrial nations. To me, this is inexcusable, and the worst part is that the government doesn't seem to care. The right, to the degree that it pays any attention to the issue at all,...represents a failure of government meddling, not a mandate for more of it. Now I know there are those that do care, but not enough to attempt an answer. This entire situation is reprehensible. Read on and see if you are as shocked as I am.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Poverty, Maybe We're All Wrong
By Steven Pearlstein
Wednesday, August 29, 2007
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/20... <<snip>>
The left expresses moral outrage -- in the richest country the world has ever known, one in every eight residents still lives in poverty -- and calls for government to do something about it.
The right, to the degree that it pays any attention to the issue at all, notes that while the poverty rate goes up and down with the economic cycle, it has remained relatively stable over the past 35 years and, in any case, represents a failure of government meddling, not a mandate for more of it.
<<snip>>
It is more than a bit disingenuous for liberals to push for worthwhile programs like food stamps, housing vouchers, child tax credits and the earned income tax credit -- and then to constantly cite official income and poverty statistics that do not include the impact of food stamps, housing vouchers, child tax credits and the earned income tax credit.
<<snip>>
Much better, conservatives say, to do away with all those patronizing and inefficient social welfare schemes that create perverse incentives and "empower" the poor to act in their own best interest using the same traditional market mechanisms as everyone else.
The best refutation of this argument that I've seen in a long time is contained in a new book, "The Persistence of Poverty," by a friend of mine, Charles "Buddy" Karelis, a professor at George Washington University. Karelis isn't an economist or social welfare expert but a philosopher by profession with wide-ranging curiosity, a dry wit and a weakness for unconventional wisdom. And after doing lots of reading and giving it extensive thought, Karelis concluded that the reason some people are perpetually poor is that they don't have enough money.
<<snip>>
The reason the poor are poor is that they are more likely to not finish school, not work, not save, and get hooked on drugs and alcohol and run afoul of the law. Liberals tend to blame it on history (slavery) or lack of opportunity (poor schools, discrimination), while conservatives blame government (welfare) and personal failings (lack of discipline), but both sides agree that these behaviors are so contrary to self-interest that they must be irrational.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted on Tue, Aug. 28, 2007 10:10 AM
U.S. poverty rate drops; Kansas sees increase in household income
The Associated Press
http://www.kansascity.com/news/breaking_news/story/2502... <<snip>>
The poverty level is the official measure used to decide eligibility for federal health, housing, nutrition and child care benefits. It differs by family size and makeup. For a family of four with two children, for example, the poverty level is $20,444. The poverty rate — the percentage of people living below poverty — helps shape the debate on the health of the nation’s economy.
<<snip>>
Poverty has not been a big issue in the campaign, and political scientists said they doubted the new numbers would change that.
“The poor are politically mute,” said Larry Jacobs, a political scientist at the University of Minnesota. “What rational politician would listen to the poor? They don’t vote, they don’t write checks, why care?”
<<snip>>
“For three decades we have had an economy where workers with a high school diploma or less have hardly kept up with inflation,” Danziger said.
Low-wage workers have been hurt by the nation’s declining manufacturing sector, which has lost more than 3 million jobs since Bush took office.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Many Americans are falling deeper into depths of poverty
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/20035... Over the past two decades, America has had the highest or near-highest poverty rates for children, individual adults and families among 31 developed countries, according to the Luxembourg Income Study, a 23-year project that compares poverty and income data from 31 industrial nations.
With the exception of Mexico and Russia, the U.S. devotes the smallest portion of its gross domestic product to federal anti-poverty programs, and those programs are among the least effective at reducing poverty, the study found. Again, only Russia and Mexico do worse jobs.
One in three Americans will experience a full year of extreme poverty at some point in his or her adult life, according to long-term research by Mark Rank, a professor of social welfare at Washington University in St. Louis.
An estimated 58 percent of Americans between the ages of 20 and 75 will spend at least a year in poverty, Rank said. Two of three will use a public-assistance program between ages 20 and 65, and 40 percent will do so for five years or more.
These estimates don't include illegal immigrants. Rank said if illegal immigrants were factored in, the numbers would be worse.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
