Do entitlements help the poor get out of poverty?

[305rob305]

Just saw on tv that the poverty level in 1965 was 14.3%. Today's poverty level is 14%. So, after trillions of dollars spent on entitlements, they don't help the poor get out of poverty. All they do is maintain the poor under the Democrat's wings during elections. Democrats don't care about u, they just use it as a gimmick for your vote.

 

[U.S. Socialist.]

First of all what source are you getting your information from? Second of all what is the Republican plan to help the poor? Let' the vaunted "free market" help them. However let me say this entitlements aren't the answer. The system itself is broken and creates poverty. Capitalism will always create poverty. For the poor to be free capitalism must be abolished. The elites need as many poor people as possible. They want people who are desperate to work no mater the wages or conditions. We are in seeing the surplus army of labor Marx talked about.

 

[305rob305]

First of all what source are you getting your information from? Second of all what is the Republican plan to help the poor? Let' the vaunted "free market" help them. However let me say this entitlements aren't the answer. The system itself is broken and creates poverty. Capitalism will always create poverty. For the poor to be free capitalism must be abolished. The elites need as many poor people as possible. They want people who are desperate to work no mater the wages or conditions. We are in seeing the surplus army of labor Marx talked about.

U are right. Capitalism will create the poor because most of them CHOOSE to be. I've seen poor people graduate from college and make a nice living. capitalism makes us choose to be what we want. Nobody is holding anyone back and this is why lots of people come to the U.S. for the opportunity

 

[sawyerloggingon]

Yes entitlements help the poor, they help them STAY POOR!

 

[U.S. Socialist.]

U are right. Capitalism will create the poor because most of them CHOOSE to be. I've seen poor people graduate from college and make a nice living. capitalism makes us choose to be what we want. Nobody is holding anyone back and this is why lots of people come to the U.S. for the opportunity

Oh this argument I've heard it so many times. You think people choose to be poor? Not everyone can afford to college. Not everyone has the opportunity or desire to go to college Those people have a right to a good job and good life. There is a terrible rescission that has made people lose their job. Oh and I've seen poor people who work 2 jobs and are just barely able to get by, so don't dare use that "poor people are lazy" argument with me.

Meanwhile the vaunted "job creators" are busy creating jobs in China, because we sign free trade agreements with them. I swear this people choose to be poor stuff really angers me. The fact that you have no compassion for people is sick.

 

[Paschendale]

Social programs to help the poor would help a whole lot more if they were targeted at improvement, rather than maintaining the status quo. Few programs will help an impoverished family maintain their homes in the face of hardship, or afford medical treatment, or acquire an education to find a job that pays more than flipping burgers. We do such a piss poor job with most of our social programs that it's hardly a surprise that they don't bring enough people out of poverty.

U are right. Capitalism will create the poor because most of them CHOOSE to be. I've seen poor people graduate from college and make a nice living. capitalism makes us choose to be what we want. Nobody is holding anyone back and this is why lots of people come to the U.S. for the opportunity

This is one of the most ignorant things I've ever heard. Who would CHOOSE poverty, you madman? No one elects to be poor. You must believe that there are millions of families that abuse welfare, too, and that all poor people are lazy and stupid...

We work very hard in this country to ensure that we keep a poor underclass to do our bidding.

 

[apdst]

Oh this argument I've heard it so many times. You think people choose to be poor? Not everyone can afford to college. Not everyone has the opportunity or desire to go to college Those people have a right to a good job and good life. There is a terrible rescission that has made people lose their job. Oh and I've seen poor people who work 2 jobs and are just barely able to get by, so don't dare use that "poor people are lazy" argument with me.

Meanwhile the vaunted "job creators" are busy creating jobs in China, because we sign free trade agreements with them. I swear this people choose to be poor stuff really angers me. The fact that you have no compassion for people is sick.

Most poor people are poor, because of the choices they've made. So...yes...those personel are poor by choice.

 

[U.S. Socialist.]

Social programs to help the poor would help a whole lot more if they were targeted at improvement, rather than maintaining the status quo. Few programs will help an impoverished family maintain their homes in the face of hardship, or afford medical treatment, or acquire an education to find a job that pays more than flipping burgers. We do such a piss poor job with most of our social programs that it's hardly a surprise that they don't bring enough people out of poverty.





This is one of the most ignorant things I've ever heard. Who would CHOOSE poverty, you madman? No one elects to be poor. You must believe that there are millions of families that abuse welfare, too, and that all poor people are lazy and stupid...

We work very hard in this country to ensure that we keep a poor underclass to do our bidding.

Everything you said is true. Our entitlements do need reform. Here are a few suggestions: free universal education for all who want it, a living wage that guarantees a decent standard of living, healthcare for all. Of course none of this will happen anytime soon because as you said the elites want people to be poor.

 

[U.S. Socialist.]

Most poor people are poor, because of the choices they've made. So...yes...those personel are poor by choice.

Oh please as it's already been pointed out we work very hard to keep people poor. Most of the poor work just as hard and in most cases much harder than the rich do.

 

[AdamT]

The fact is that Social Security and Medicare cut the poverty rate among seniors in half. Taking 1965 as a starting point is cherrypicking at it's best, as that was the year the modern safety net took what is essentially its present form. In 1959 the povert rate was about 23%. By 1969 it was down to about 12%.

 

[305rob305]

Everything you said is true. Our entitlements do need reform. Here are a few suggestions: free universal education for all who want it, a living wage that guarantees a decent standard of living, healthcare for all. Of course none of this will happen anytime soon because as you said the elites want people to be poor.

What u want is take from someone and disperse to whom u think needs it. Our founding fathers didn't have this in mind. I work in the private sector, a company that owes me Nothing. Whenever they want they can just fire me with no questions asked. There's no entitlements there....so what's the problem in living in a place with no entitlements?

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

Some will some wont

Canada, continental europe, and the Scandinavian (sp) countries have higher levels of social mobility then does the US, or the UK. They also have universal health care (western europe does I believe generally), they also have higher levels of social spending including on public education.

The ability to move up the socio economic ladder is fairly dependant on being healthy and being able to gain a good education. Something the poor will have a harder time in the US then in Canada. It can be done, but in the US you are punished health care wise when you get a job and get kicked of medicaid. Which leads to some people not working and staying on welfare and medicaid to have access to health care. Which also prevents good working habits from being developed

 

[U.S. Socialist.]

What u want is take from someone and disperse to whom u think needs it. Our founding fathers didn't have this in mind. I work in the private sector, a company that owes me Nothing. Whenever they want they can just fire me with no questions asked. There's no entitlements there....so what's the problem in living in a place with no entitlements?

Recently in an argument about communism an opponent of it mentioned that it was against human nature because human nature is selfish. If that is true then why should the workers give a damn if they taking from others. It is in their selfish best interest to overthrow capitalism and own the means of production itself. When you base your argument against socialism on the fact that human nature is selfish then you lose the ability to use the argument that people have no right to take from others. Just something I've been thinking about.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

Just saw on tv that the poverty level in 1965 was 14.3%. Today's poverty level is 14%. So, after trillions of dollars spent on entitlements, they don't help the poor get out of poverty. All they do is maintain the poor under the Democrat's wings during elections. Democrats don't care about u, they just use it as a gimmick for your vote.

To be fair, it should be noted that we're in kind of bind financially. Things have been unusually bad for American lately. That may have some impact on the poverty rate today.

here're some historical data from the census bureau:
http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/data/historical/hstpov13.xls


Year Number of poor families
1959 ..... 8320
1960 ..... 8243
1961 ..... 8391
1962 ..... 8077
1963 ..... 7554
1964 ..... 7160
1965 ..... 6721
1966 ..... 5784
1967 1/... 5667
1968...... 5047
1969...... 5008
1970...... 5260
1971 2/... 5303
1972...... 5075
1973...... 4828
1974 3/... 4922
1975...... 5450
1976...... 5311
1977...... 5311
1978...... 5280
1979 4/... 5461
1980...... 6217
1981 5/... 6851
1982...... 7512
1983 6/... 7647
1984...... 7277
1985...... 7223
1986...... 7023
1987 7/... 7005
1988...... 6874
1989...... 6784
1990...... 7098
1991 8/... 7712
1992 9/... 8144
1993 10/.. 8393
1994...... 8053
1995...... 7532
1996...... 7708
1997...... 7324
1998...... 7186
1999 11/.. 6792
2000 12/.. 6400
2001...... 6813
2002...... 7229
2003...... 7607
2004 14/.. 7835
2005...... 7657
2006...... 7668
2007...... 7623
2008...... 8147
2009...... 8792

As you can see, the numbers go up and down.

And there's no assurance that all the same people who were poor are still poor instead of people passing through poverty.

You may still have a point, but you haven't finished making your case for your point.

 

[AdamT]

The poverty rate goes up during recessions but it's hovered between 10 and 15% since about 1965.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

The poverty rate goes up during recessions but it's hovered between 10 and 15% since about 1965.

But the issue at hand refers to people staying in poverty. It's not clear from the data presented thus far how much turn over there is.

 

[AdamT]

Yes, that's true. I suspect that a lot of it is generational, and I do think that is in part an unintended consequence of welfare.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

Yes, that's true. I suspect that a lot of it is generational, and I do think that is in part an unintended consequence of welfare.

That may be. But, the stats so far don't show an uptick that's consistent with the onset of welfare. The stats kind of bounce around.

 

[TurtleDude]

Just saw on tv that the poverty level in 1965 was 14.3%. Today's poverty level is 14%. So, after trillions of dollars spent on entitlements, they don't help the poor get out of poverty. All they do is maintain the poor under the Democrat's wings during elections. Democrats don't care about u, they just use it as a gimmick for your vote.

I make the following fairly rational and logical assumptions

1) the major political parties (GOP and DEMS) want to win elections and get power

2) the major political parties are tuned into what works best for them to win elections

3) Parties will not promote policies that will seriously hurt their ability to win elections

4) the war on poverty has mainly been a dem policy

5) the dems believe that people who are receiving government handouts tend to reward, with votes, those who provide the handouts

based on those assumptions I believe that the Dems have a vested interest in keeping as many people dependent on the government as possible and the existence of large numbers of people in poverty not only provides a large pool of dem voters but also serves as an excuse for dems to appeal to some wealthier peoples' charitable instincts

the last thing the dem leadership wants is a country where almost all our citizens are independent and not beholden to government handouts

 

[Simon W. Moon]

1961 to 1973 seems the steepest decline. When was it that welfare kicked in?

 

[AdamT]

That may be. But, the stats so far don't show an uptick that's consistent with the onset of welfare. The stats kind of bounce around.

Oh, the stats clearly show that welfare cut the poverty rate substantially. But that happened rather quickly and poverty hasn't changed much since.

Welfare was developed over time, but it took on its modern form with the 60s Great Society legislation.

 

[305rob305]

To be fair, it should be noted that we're in kind of bind financially. Things have been unusually bad for American lately. That may have some impact on the poverty rate today.

here're some historical data from the census bureau:
http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/data/historical/hstpov13.xls


Year Number of poor families
1959 ..... 8320
1960 ..... 8243
1961 ..... 8391
1962 ..... 8077
1963 ..... 7554
1964 ..... 7160
1965 ..... 6721
1966 ..... 5784
1967 1/... 5667
1968...... 5047
1969...... 5008
1970...... 5260
1971 2/... 5303
1972...... 5075
1973...... 4828
1974 3/... 4922
1975...... 5450
1976...... 5311
1977...... 5311
1978...... 5280
1979 4/... 5461
1980...... 6217
1981 5/... 6851
1982...... 7512
1983 6/... 7647
1984...... 7277
1985...... 7223
1986...... 7023
1987 7/... 7005
1988...... 6874
1989...... 6784
1990...... 7098
1991 8/... 7712
1992 9/... 8144
1993 10/.. 8393
1994...... 8053
1995...... 7532
1996...... 7708
1997...... 7324
1998...... 7186
1999 11/.. 6792
2000 12/.. 6400
2001...... 6813
2002...... 7229
2003...... 7607
2004 14/.. 7835
2005...... 7657
2006...... 7668
2007...... 7623
2008...... 8147
2009...... 8792

As you can see, the numbers go up and down.

And there's no assurance that all the same people who were poor are still poor instead of people passing through poverty.

You may still have a point, but you haven't finished making your case for your point.

Good analysis.
It's funny that since 2008, the numbers are growing....Whatever happened to the Stimulus Package Obama chanted for?

 

[Renae]

Did you know most people on unemployment, find a job within 2 weeks of unemployment running out?

People do what's in their best interest.

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

Did you know most people on unemployment, find a job within 2 weeks of unemployment running out?

People do what's in their best interest.

So then there are plenty of jobs in the US economy left unfilled because people are collecting unemployement and not looking for work?

 

[Simon W. Moon]

5) the dems believe that people who are receiving government handouts tend to reward, with votes, those who provide the handouts

Which demographic groups are most likely to vote?
It would seem sensible to focus on those who're most likely to actually show up and vote.