Yeah; so. Who are you this time?Hmmm, you seem familiar to me.
Oh, and total eye roll at the "watering the entire garden" nonsense.
Yeah; so. Who are you this time?
Ga'head, roll your eyes. If 'ya can't argue credibly, then of course :roll:
Liberals aren't interested in getting people out of poverty, that would only cost them votes. They want to keep the poor in the poor house and buy their votes with government freebies. Surely everyone realizes that.
Blast. I thought we were more subtle than that.
`
Surely you jest?
I was listening to some talk show the other day, Hannity I think and he had Paul Ryan as a guest. They were speaking about the war on poverty and talking about how its success is measured. I thought that would make an interesting poll. What would be the best indicators of success (or failure)? I'll make it multiple choice.
Working on the poll, options will be;
1) By money allocated for social programs, e.g. the more the better
2) By helping the most people possible live more comfortably regardless of their income or lack of it (I may need to shorten this one).
3) By how many people are actually able to get out of poverty
4) Other
Two indicators : crime and suicides , also, there is the drop-out rate at our high schools.
This was supposed to be an adult conservation ....I think poorly of such childish remarks .Liberals aren't interested in getting people out of poverty, that would only cost them votes. They want to keep the poor in the poor house and buy their votes with government freebies. Surely everyone realizes that.
This was supposed to be an adult conservation ....I think poorly of such childish remarks .
a lot of that can be due to mental illness, but yeah, if crime and suicide go up, better believe it's owing to increase in desperate poverty
Liberals aren't interested in getting people out of poverty, that would only cost them votes. They want to keep the poor in the poor house and buy their votes with government freebies. Surely everyone realizes that.
Its an error to judge policies based on intent, rather than the effects. The results of the failed "war on poverty" are abysmal, and yet the same people who cry about the "war on drugs" cant seem to see how they appear on this "war".
Indeed but poverty is not an insurmountable challenge. If one can graduate from high school (a requisite for basic skills, and hiring), get married (two income earners), and hold a full time job (demonstrating reliability) at least one year-they will no longer be poor.
As is-the biggest predictor of poverty is single parenting-which condemns most children to a future of poverty and diminished outcomes.
These objective truths are too important to ignore.
Try all the sports socialism with new stadiums and corporate socialism and "tax-cuts-to-the-rich" socialism .I think the goal of getting people off poverty is a good one and one that's worth pursuing.
Of course, I'd like to see "welfare to work" programs. Also, for those who are legitimately able, I think work should be a requirement.
I think welfare should be used to subsidize those who are working, not pay people more to not work.
Reagan got his and O'Neill got his--I don't call that working together.
I call it selling out the country and the definite beginning of our $18 trillion TAD--as Cheney's words will always remind us .
Paul Ryan was on social programs from a young age all the way through college.
Then he went to work for Jack Kemp and has never known anything but living off the public dole.
Try all the sports socialism with new stadiums and corporate socialism and "tax-cuts-to-the-rich" socialism .
TAD ? As in Temporary Attached Duty ?
Navy/Marine acronym
I mean grade school through college--but you knew that.You mean like elementary school and stuff?
The point is you forget the conservative side of the ledger--as usual .So, is the point here that we should not even inquire or concern ourselves with the effectiveness of so called the War on Poverty?
So what do you propose, to give up and watch the whole country collapse into 3rd world detroit?
These are complex issues where one can disagree with how it's being handled. Opposition to the drug "war" is largely ideological; it's simply no one's business what i put into my body. It's inherently a failure, even if it did lead to less drug use.
So now everyone has to marry just to escape poverty. Perhaps that's simply not a sacrifice they're willing to make, and for you to instruct others how to live...
Cause full time minimum wage, which is about all high school can guarantee, is $15392/year. That's barely above the poverty level. If you ask me, reform is most needed for the working poor. People aren't going to put up with this forever, not while their corporate barons are exploiting them more and more - about 14 fold since 1960s (source: EPI)
I seem to remember when President Reagan said, " The federal government declared war on poverty and poverty won."
In layman terms, liberals/progressives won when it comes to keeping Americans living in poverty.
It's the only platform the Democrat Party has, fighting poverty.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?