Laying The Blame

[PoliticalChic]

In their tireless thirst for power, Liberals/Democrats lay the groundwork for the end of America.

The divide-and-conquer, the grievance doctrines, the 'blame-America-first' methodology is aimed at keeping Americans glaring at each other.

1. Black Americans, contrary to the view that they are inferior to other groups, as advanced by Liberals, were actually about to advance along the same path as other Americans.....until they were 'helped out.'

a. It was the misfortune of black Americans that they were just on the verge of passing through the immigrant experience when damaging ideas about welfare and the lenient attitude about crime took hold. It could have happened to the Italians, Germans, Jews or Irish, but luckily for them, there were no Liberals around to “help” when they arrived. Coulter, "Mugged," chapter 7

b. In fact, black Americans were doing better in individual pursuits than many immigrants. Barone compared their American journey to the Irish: “Both rise smartly in hierarchies (government bureaucracies, the military) but haven't fared as well in free-market commerce.” http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/941114/archive_013670.htm




2. But Liberal welfare policies, clear failures, have provided not a safety net, but a weakening of the attempt by black Americans to fight their way to the top. And....instead of accepting the so-sorely-deserved blame, Liberals point to the ephemeral 'legacy of slavery.'

"Discussions of racial problems almost invariably bring out the cliche of "a legacy of slavery."
....whether fatherless children, crime or whatever -...

The great Supreme Court justice Oliver Wendell Holmes said that a good catch phrase could stop thinking for fifty years. Catch phrases about slavery have stopped people from thinking, even longer than that.

3..... the moral horror of slavery is so widely condemned that it is hard to realize that there were thousands of years when slavery was practiced around the world by people of virtually every race.

[Not] Africans, Asians, Polynesians nor the indigenous peoples of the Western Hemisphere saw anything wrong with slavery, even after small segments of British and American societies began to condemn slavery as morally wrong in the 18th century.

What was special about America was not that it had slavery, which existed all over the world, but that Americans were among the very few peoples who began to question the morality of holding human beings in bondage.





4. ... the "legacy of slavery" as an explanation of social problems in black American communities today, anyone who was serious about the truth -- as distinguished from talking points -- would want to check out the facts.
Were children raised with only one parent as common at any time during the first 100 years after slavery as in the first 30 years after the great expansion of the welfare state in the 1960s?

As of 1960, 22 percent of black children were raised with only one parent, usually the mother. Thirty years later, two-thirds of black children were being raised without a father present."
A Legacy of Cliches - Thomas Sowell - Page full

Poor little brown asian girl so hard trying to be white as your avitar

In their tireless thirst for power, Liberals/Democrats lay the groundwork for the end of America.

The divide-and-conquer, the grievance doctrines, the 'blame-America-first' methodology is aimed at keeping Americans glaring at each other.

1. Black Americans, contrary to the view that they are inferior to other groups, as advanced by Liberals, were actually about to advance along the same path as other Americans.....until they were 'helped out.'

a. It was the misfortune of black Americans that they were just on the verge of passing through the immigrant experience when damaging ideas about welfare and the lenient attitude about crime took hold. It could have happened to the Italians, Germans, Jews or Irish, but luckily for them, there were no Liberals around to “help” when they arrived. Coulter, "Mugged," chapter 7

b. In fact, black Americans were doing better in individual pursuits than many immigrants. Barone compared their American journey to the Irish: “Both rise smartly in hierarchies (government bureaucracies, the military) but haven't fared as well in free-market commerce.” http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/941114/archive_013670.htm




2. But Liberal welfare policies, clear failures, have provided not a safety net, but a weakening of the attempt by black Americans to fight their way to the top. And....instead of accepting the so-sorely-deserved blame, Liberals point to the ephemeral 'legacy of slavery.'

"Discussions of racial problems almost invariably bring out the cliche of "a legacy of slavery."
....whether fatherless children, crime or whatever -...

The great Supreme Court justice Oliver Wendell Holmes said that a good catch phrase could stop thinking for fifty years. Catch phrases about slavery have stopped people from thinking, even longer than that.

3..... the moral horror of slavery is so widely condemned that it is hard to realize that there were thousands of years when slavery was practiced around the world by people of virtually every race.

[Not] Africans, Asians, Polynesians nor the indigenous peoples of the Western Hemisphere saw anything wrong with slavery, even after small segments of British and American societies began to condemn slavery as morally wrong in the 18th century.

What was special about America was not that it had slavery, which existed all over the world, but that Americans were among the very few peoples who began to question the morality of holding human beings in bondage.





4. ... the "legacy of slavery" as an explanation of social problems in black American communities today, anyone who was serious about the truth -- as distinguished from talking points -- would want to check out the facts.
Were children raised with only one parent as common at any time during the first 100 years after slavery as in the first 30 years after the great expansion of the welfare state in the 1960s?

As of 1960, 22 percent of black children were raised with only one parent, usually the mother. Thirty years later, two-thirds of black children were being raised without a father present."
A Legacy of Cliches - Thomas Sowell - Page full

Poor little brown asian girl so hard trying to be white as your avitar

This forum never ceases to amaze. Now we have an Asian girl with an identity crisis who has read Thomas Sowell and become a street corner philisopher on the "plight" of Black Americans?

The variety here beats the hell out of a trip to the zoo.

What your post shows is that, in actuality, I beat the heck out of you Liberals.


Couldn't find a single item in my posts to contest, could you.

In their tireless thirst for power, Liberals/Democrats lay the groundwork for the end of America.

The divide-and-conquer, the grievance doctrines, the 'blame-America-first' methodology is aimed at keeping Americans glaring at each other.

1. Black Americans, contrary to the view that they are inferior to other groups, as advanced by Liberals, were actually about to advance along the same path as other Americans.....until they were 'helped out.'

a. It was the misfortune of black Americans that they were just on the verge of passing through the immigrant experience when damaging ideas about welfare and the lenient attitude about crime took hold. It could have happened to the Italians, Germans, Jews or Irish, but luckily for them, there were no Liberals around to “help” when they arrived. Coulter, "Mugged," chapter 7

b. In fact, black Americans were doing better in individual pursuits than many immigrants. Barone compared their American journey to the Irish: “Both rise smartly in hierarchies (government bureaucracies, the military) but haven't fared as well in free-market commerce.” http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/941114/archive_013670.htm




2. But Liberal welfare policies, clear failures, have provided not a safety net, but a weakening of the attempt by black Americans to fight their way to the top. And....instead of accepting the so-sorely-deserved blame, Liberals point to the ephemeral 'legacy of slavery.'

"Discussions of racial problems almost invariably bring out the cliche of "a legacy of slavery."
....whether fatherless children, crime or whatever -...

The great Supreme Court justice Oliver Wendell Holmes said that a good catch phrase could stop thinking for fifty years. Catch phrases about slavery have stopped people from thinking, even longer than that.

3..... the moral horror of slavery is so widely condemned that it is hard to realize that there were thousands of years when slavery was practiced around the world by people of virtually every race.

[Not] Africans, Asians, Polynesians nor the indigenous peoples of the Western Hemisphere saw anything wrong with slavery, even after small segments of British and American societies began to condemn slavery as morally wrong in the 18th century.

What was special about America was not that it had slavery, which existed all over the world, but that Americans were among the very few peoples who began to question the morality of holding human beings in bondage.





4. ... the "legacy of slavery" as an explanation of social problems in black American communities today, anyone who was serious about the truth -- as distinguished from talking points -- would want to check out the facts.
Were children raised with only one parent as common at any time during the first 100 years after slavery as in the first 30 years after the great expansion of the welfare state in the 1960s?

As of 1960, 22 percent of black children were raised with only one parent, usually the mother. Thirty years later, two-thirds of black children were being raised without a father present."
A Legacy of Cliches - Thomas Sowell - Page full

Poor little brown asian girl so hard trying to be white as your avitar

In their tireless thirst for power, Liberals/Democrats lay the groundwork for the end of America.

The divide-and-conquer, the grievance doctrines, the 'blame-America-first' methodology is aimed at keeping Americans glaring at each other.

1. Black Americans, contrary to the view that they are inferior to other groups, as advanced by Liberals, were actually about to advance along the same path as other Americans.....until they were 'helped out.'

a. It was the misfortune of black Americans that they were just on the verge of passing through the immigrant experience when damaging ideas about welfare and the lenient attitude about crime took hold. It could have happened to the Italians, Germans, Jews or Irish, but luckily for them, there were no Liberals around to “help” when they arrived. Coulter, "Mugged," chapter 7

b. In fact, black Americans were doing better in individual pursuits than many immigrants. Barone compared their American journey to the Irish: “Both rise smartly in hierarchies (government bureaucracies, the military) but haven't fared as well in free-market commerce.” http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/941114/archive_013670.htm




2. But Liberal welfare policies, clear failures, have provided not a safety net, but a weakening of the attempt by black Americans to fight their way to the top. And....instead of accepting the so-sorely-deserved blame, Liberals point to the ephemeral 'legacy of slavery.'

"Discussions of racial problems almost invariably bring out the cliche of "a legacy of slavery."
....whether fatherless children, crime or whatever -...

The great Supreme Court justice Oliver Wendell Holmes said that a good catch phrase could stop thinking for fifty years. Catch phrases about slavery have stopped people from thinking, even longer than that.

3..... the moral horror of slavery is so widely condemned that it is hard to realize that there were thousands of years when slavery was practiced around the world by people of virtually every race.

[Not] Africans, Asians, Polynesians nor the indigenous peoples of the Western Hemisphere saw anything wrong with slavery, even after small segments of British and American societies began to condemn slavery as morally wrong in the 18th century.

What was special about America was not that it had slavery, which existed all over the world, but that Americans were among the very few peoples who began to question the morality of holding human beings in bondage.





4. ... the "legacy of slavery" as an explanation of social problems in black American communities today, anyone who was serious about the truth -- as distinguished from talking points -- would want to check out the facts.
Were children raised with only one parent as common at any time during the first 100 years after slavery as in the first 30 years after the great expansion of the welfare state in the 1960s?

As of 1960, 22 percent of black children were raised with only one parent, usually the mother. Thirty years later, two-thirds of black children were being raised without a father present."
A Legacy of Cliches - Thomas Sowell - Page full

Poor little brown asian girl so hard trying to be white as your avitar

This forum never ceases to amaze. Now we have an Asian girl with an identity crisis who has read Thomas Sowell and become a street corner philisopher on the "plight" of Black Americans?

The variety here beats the hell out of a trip to the zoo.

What your post shows is that, in actuality, I beat the heck out of you Liberals.


Couldn't find a single item in my posts to contest, could you.

Why would you assume that I am a liberal? And your "cut and paste" job is devoid of any original thought worth contesting.

I have read Thomas Sowell over many years, most likely prior to you being born and certainly prior to you embarking on your journey as a safely insulated psuedo intellectual with no credible life experience.

While he has abundant "theories" on the social plight of Black Americans, he has offered no viable solutions that have been put into practice and produced positive change.

As for you, you're quite entertaining...carry on.

"And your "cut and paste" job is devoid of any original thought worth contesting."

Any coward who pretends that, somehow, shouting 'cut and paste' is a rebuttal of the facts, is a fool and/or a Liberal.


Escaping the glare of the spotlight. It is well known that, for Liberals, feeling passes for knowing. That is the reason that they quake when actual facts, truth, data is presented.

The best defense for Libs is to find a way not to have to face the truth.

A number of dodges have presented themselves...

1. cut and paste

2. quote mine

3. out of context

4. cherry pick

5. refuse to accept the source. (Being conservative is not disqualifying.)



Let's get something straight. Anyone who uses phrases such as 'cut and paste' or 'out of context' is simply trying to hide the fact that they cannot respond to the item so labeled.


If a quote in question is wrong...,prove it.




And...Dr. Sowell....what he has offered is undeniable proof that Liberal policies are frauds and failures.

Clearly, you either have not read Sowell....or you're not bright enough to understand the facts he presents.

A refresher:

1. When the Federal Reserve of Boston commissioned a report to identify the reasons that blacks, with the same characteristics as whites were turned down 17% of the time, while whites, 11%. This was the conclusion: “…a serious problem exists in the market for mortgage loans, and lenders, community groups, and regulators must work together to ensure that minorities are treated fairly.”
   1. Of course, the immediate assumption was racial discrimination. But a closer study revealed that the differing rates of approval for blacks and whites was due to just one bank. That bank was owned by blacks. Zelnick, “Backfire: A Reporter’s Look at Affirmative Action,” p.330.
   2. But let’s assume the discrimination theory correct. That would mean that, to obtain the loan, blacks would need a higher-creditworthiness than whites. And, in turn, would suggest that subsequent default rates for those blacks would be lower than for whites. Nope. Empirical evidence did not find such a racial difference in default. Lending Discrimination The Unending Search The Freeman Foundation for Economic Education
   3. “Even the study conducted by the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, which has been held by many as evidence of widespread discrimination, shows that taking credit-worthiness into account reduces the differences in rejection rates among racial groups. Its author, Alicia Munnell, has conceded that her study does not prove discrimination…. Alicia Munnell continues to insist that lending discrimination occurs even though she had admitted that neither she noranyone elsehas any evidence of it..” Ibid.

H. L. Mencken once called politics “the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedies.”


The above from chapter six of “Economic Facts and Fallacies,” Sowell.

 

[NYcarbineer]

More whites receive aid within the framework of the welfare state than do blacks. Why do you people always make this a race thing?

Is your solution to simply exclude black Americans from the benefits of the social safety net programs?

It sure sounds that way.

Typical non-thinking response from a leftist...anyone who suggests that welfare programs are a failure, wants poor black Americans to die.

We mustn't change a thing....keep doing what we know fails...the motto of the Leftist.

How do you know they're a failure? How do you know that the poor in America would be better off today if the programs of the so-called war on poverty had never happened?

Who would be better off today if Medicaid had never been created?

Be specific.

Another typical DUMB response from a leftist. Just claim Welfare works.

Read the OP. I doubt you will understand, but it is worth a try.

So you actually have no substantive evidence that the war on poverty has been a failure.

You are a leftist cliche (hey I like that...leftist cliche...now that is good)...and describes you to a tee.

When informed of the evidence, just claim the evidence does not exist. Leftism in one sentence.

The evidence doesn't exist. You have no idea whatsoever where poverty in America would be today if there had been no anti-poverty programs ever created in the last 50 years.

Poverty could very easily be much worse today than it is.

 

[PoliticalChic]

More whites receive aid within the framework of the welfare state than do blacks. Why do you people always make this a race thing?

Is your solution to simply exclude black Americans from the benefits of the social safety net programs?

It sure sounds that way.

Typical non-thinking response from a leftist...anyone who suggests that welfare programs are a failure, wants poor black Americans to die.

We mustn't change a thing....keep doing what we know fails...the motto of the Leftist.

How do you know they're a failure? How do you know that the poor in America would be better off today if the programs of the so-called war on poverty had never happened?

Who would be better off today if Medicaid had never been created?

Be specific.

Another typical DUMB response from a leftist. Just claim Welfare works.

Read the OP. I doubt you will understand, but it is worth a try.

So you actually have no substantive evidence that the war on poverty has been a failure.

You are a leftist cliche (hey I like that...leftist cliche...now that is good)...and describes you to a tee.

When informed of the evidence, just claim the evidence does not exist. Leftism in one sentence.

Typical non-thinking response from a leftist...anyone who suggests that welfare programs are a failure, wants poor black Americans to die.

We mustn't change a thing....keep doing what we know fails...the motto of the Leftist.

How do you know they're a failure? How do you know that the poor in America would be better off today if the programs of the so-called war on poverty had never happened?

Who would be better off today if Medicaid had never been created?

Be specific.

Another typical DUMB response from a leftist. Just claim Welfare works.

Read the OP. I doubt you will understand, but it is worth a try.

So you actually have no substantive evidence that the war on poverty has been a failure.

You are a leftist cliche (hey I like that...leftist cliche...now that is good)...and describes you to a tee.

When informed of the evidence, just claim the evidence does not exist. Leftism in one sentence.

The evidence doesn't exist. You have no idea whatsoever where poverty in America would be today if there had been no anti-poverty programs ever created in the last 50 years.

Poverty could very easily be much worse today than it is.

So THAT'S why you are known as the NYLiar!!!

 

[NYcarbineer]

And if you knew anything about this subject, you would know black Americans were doing better economically before the Great Society programs existed...when racism was rampant. Please tell me you know this?

So how would never having started Medicaid made black Americans better off today?

I know it is hard for you to comprehend, but NO ONE IS SUGGESTING COMPLETE ELIMINATION OF THE SAFETY NET.

Why is it always black or white with you leftists?

You need to get informed. Do you really think a nation can survive as a welfare state when 20% of households are on food stamps, nearly 100 million working age Americans are not working, invasion of illiterate third worlders, and so many other facts that your kind refuse to accept.

No one is suggesting we eliminate the programs that people like you keep calling a complete failure?

lol. You people don't know what you want.

Medicaid is the single biggest part of the so-called war on poverty, so logically you people must be arguing that it is the single biggest contributor to what you call this 'failure'.

But every time it's brought up, you people don't want to get rid of it.

That is how you lose an argument, you, PC, and all the rest of the RW yakkers on this subject.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Typical non-thinking response from a leftist...anyone who suggests that welfare programs are a failure, wants poor black Americans to die.

We mustn't change a thing....keep doing what we know fails...the motto of the Leftist.

How do you know they're a failure? How do you know that the poor in America would be better off today if the programs of the so-called war on poverty had never happened?

Who would be better off today if Medicaid had never been created?

Be specific.

Another typical DUMB response from a leftist. Just claim Welfare works.

Read the OP. I doubt you will understand, but it is worth a try.

So you actually have no substantive evidence that the war on poverty has been a failure.

You are a leftist cliche (hey I like that...leftist cliche...now that is good)...and describes you to a tee.

When informed of the evidence, just claim the evidence does not exist. Leftism in one sentence.

How do you know they're a failure? How do you know that the poor in America would be better off today if the programs of the so-called war on poverty had never happened?

Who would be better off today if Medicaid had never been created?

Be specific.

Another typical DUMB response from a leftist. Just claim Welfare works.

Read the OP. I doubt you will understand, but it is worth a try.

So you actually have no substantive evidence that the war on poverty has been a failure.

You are a leftist cliche (hey I like that...leftist cliche...now that is good)...and describes you to a tee.

When informed of the evidence, just claim the evidence does not exist. Leftism in one sentence.

The evidence doesn't exist. You have no idea whatsoever where poverty in America would be today if there had been no anti-poverty programs ever created in the last 50 years.

Poverty could very easily be much worse today than it is.

So THAT'S why you are known as the NYLiar!!!

Prove that there would be less poverty in America today if programs like Medicaid, Medicare, food stamps, housing assistance, etc., etc., had never been started.

Prove it.

 

[ClosedCaption]

It isn't any 'legacy of slavery' that has hurt the group.......

Slavery has nothing to do with it but welfare programs do? According to what? The Sowell book of say so? Just silly shit.

Oh, making it illegal to learn to read didnt mean nothing!

Not allowed to have property or property where you wanted didnt mean anything!

Its all welfares fault! I'm starting to see why you guys like this Sowell guy. His head is in the clouds and nothing is at fault....except welfare

OK...ok....I am remiss.

After all the empty non-posts about which I have berated you.....you actually made a stab at confronting the facts of the thread.

Bravo!

And it only took you two replies to the same post to comprehend. Congrats!

Of course, your post would be more believable if you were able to indicate multitudes for whom it was made "illegal to learn to read."

False, my post is believable because people being not allowed to learn to read is real and factual. You dont even disagree with it you just want names or something to believe what you already do not disagree with.

And, the same applies to this fabrication: "Not allowed to have property or property where you wanted didnt (sic) mean anything!"

LOL!!! Oh yeah, redlining, steering, housing discrimination and all that stuff is just a figment of my imagination! I'm seeing a pattern of denying reality and just screaming "not true"

Now, so that no one leaps to the conclusion that you post stems from Liberal indoctrination and propaganda.....
...can you name several of Dr. Sowell's books that you've read?

If there are none....well, you can see why some might consider you no more than a Liberal windbag.

Thanks but your entire post is summed up in emotions.

You didnt point out any lie I told, all you did was scream liar and run.

You didnt disagree with anything I said, all you did was scream "liberal" and thought that was a point.

Then after not being able to point out any lie, falsehood, etc etc you turn to your last ditch effort of asking me about how many books I've read.

I feel good about that because you didnt have one come back that made sense

 

[gipper]

How do you know they're a failure? How do you know that the poor in America would be better off today if the programs of the so-called war on poverty had never happened?

Who would be better off today if Medicaid had never been created?

Be specific.

Another typical DUMB response from a leftist. Just claim Welfare works.

Read the OP. I doubt you will understand, but it is worth a try.

So you actually have no substantive evidence that the war on poverty has been a failure.

You are a leftist cliche (hey I like that...leftist cliche...now that is good)...and describes you to a tee.

When informed of the evidence, just claim the evidence does not exist. Leftism in one sentence.

Another typical DUMB response from a leftist. Just claim Welfare works.

Read the OP. I doubt you will understand, but it is worth a try.

So you actually have no substantive evidence that the war on poverty has been a failure.

You are a leftist cliche (hey I like that...leftist cliche...now that is good)...and describes you to a tee.

When informed of the evidence, just claim the evidence does not exist. Leftism in one sentence.

The evidence doesn't exist. You have no idea whatsoever where poverty in America would be today if there had been no anti-poverty programs ever created in the last 50 years.

Poverty could very easily be much worse today than it is.

So THAT'S why you are known as the NYLiar!!!

Prove that there would be less poverty in America today if programs like Medicaid, Medicare, food stamps, housing assistance, etc., etc., had never been started.

Prove it.

Are you really this dense?

as you can see, if you have even average intelligence which I question, poverty was descending dramatically BEFORE your beloved FAILED Great Society programs were instituted and went UP after they were instituted.

You are wrong.

 

[NYcarbineer]

When will the Left admit that the welfare state is a terrible failure and that it caused tremendous harm to black Americans? Based on responses from leftists in this thread, it would appear they never will.

When will the Right propose some better ideas?

I propose 'em all the time.

The CliffNotes version: get rid of Liberals, Liberal propaganda, and Liberal policies.


We could begin with liars like you.

Start by ending Medicaid? Is that one of those liberal policies?

Show us how that will make low income Americans better off.

Be specific.

 

[PoliticalChic]

And if you knew anything about this subject, you would know black Americans were doing better economically before the Great Society programs existed...when racism was rampant. Please tell me you know this?

So how would never having started Medicaid made black Americans better off today?

I know it is hard for you to comprehend, but NO ONE IS SUGGESTING COMPLETE ELIMINATION OF THE SAFETY NET.

Why is it always black or white with you leftists?

You need to get informed. Do you really think a nation can survive as a welfare state when 20% of households are on food stamps, nearly 100 million working age Americans are not working, invasion of illiterate third worlders, and so many other facts that your kind refuse to accept.

No one is suggesting we eliminate the programs that people like you keep calling a complete failure?

lol. You people don't know what you want.

Medicaid is the single biggest part of the so-called war on poverty, so logically you people must be arguing that it is the single biggest contributor to what you call this 'failure'.

But every time it's brought up, you people don't want to get rid of it.

That is how you lose an argument, you, PC, and all the rest of the RW yakkers on this subject.

1. I never lose an argument, because I don't argue. I simply explain why I'm right...and never resort to lies, as you do.


2. "All this spending has not bought an appreciable reduction in poverty. … the poverty rate has remained relatively constant since 1965, despite rising welfare spending. In fact, the only appreciable decline occurred in the 1990s, a time of
state experimentation with tightening welfare eligibility, culminating in the passage of national welfare reform (the Personal Responsibility and Work Responsibility Act of 1996).

And, since 2006, poverty rates have risen despite a massive increase in spending. Census Bureau, “Table 5–Percent of People by Ratio of Income to Poverty Level: 1970–2010,”
http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/data/historical/hstpov5.xls.


3. Throwing money at the problem has neither
reduced poverty nor made the poor self-sufficient.
Scribd

 

[NYcarbineer]

Another typical DUMB response from a leftist. Just claim Welfare works.

Read the OP. I doubt you will understand, but it is worth a try.

So you actually have no substantive evidence that the war on poverty has been a failure.

You are a leftist cliche (hey I like that...leftist cliche...now that is good)...and describes you to a tee.

When informed of the evidence, just claim the evidence does not exist. Leftism in one sentence.

So you actually have no substantive evidence that the war on poverty has been a failure.

You are a leftist cliche (hey I like that...leftist cliche...now that is good)...and describes you to a tee.

When informed of the evidence, just claim the evidence does not exist. Leftism in one sentence.

The evidence doesn't exist. You have no idea whatsoever where poverty in America would be today if there had been no anti-poverty programs ever created in the last 50 years.

Poverty could very easily be much worse today than it is.

So THAT'S why you are known as the NYLiar!!!

Prove that there would be less poverty in America today if programs like Medicaid, Medicare, food stamps, housing assistance, etc., etc., had never been started.

Prove it.

Are you really this dense?

as you can see, if you have even average intelligence which I question, poverty was descending dramatically BEFORE your beloved FAILED Great Society programs were instituted and went UP after they were instituted.

You are wrong.

Your chart shows no cause and effect. If you cannot show cause and effect you have no argument.

 

[PoliticalChic]

How do you know they're a failure? How do you know that the poor in America would be better off today if the programs of the so-called war on poverty had never happened?

Who would be better off today if Medicaid had never been created?

Be specific.

Another typical DUMB response from a leftist. Just claim Welfare works.

Read the OP. I doubt you will understand, but it is worth a try.

So you actually have no substantive evidence that the war on poverty has been a failure.

You are a leftist cliche (hey I like that...leftist cliche...now that is good)...and describes you to a tee.

When informed of the evidence, just claim the evidence does not exist. Leftism in one sentence.

Another typical DUMB response from a leftist. Just claim Welfare works.

Read the OP. I doubt you will understand, but it is worth a try.

So you actually have no substantive evidence that the war on poverty has been a failure.

You are a leftist cliche (hey I like that...leftist cliche...now that is good)...and describes you to a tee.

When informed of the evidence, just claim the evidence does not exist. Leftism in one sentence.

The evidence doesn't exist. You have no idea whatsoever where poverty in America would be today if there had been no anti-poverty programs ever created in the last 50 years.

Poverty could very easily be much worse today than it is.

So THAT'S why you are known as the NYLiar!!!

Prove that there would be less poverty in America today if programs like Medicaid, Medicare, food stamps, housing assistance, etc., etc., had never been started.

Prove it.

Am I correct, then, that you have given up trying to deny that $ trillions has not resulted in a diminution of the problem?




Take notes:

"This week, the U.S. Census Bureau is scheduled to release its annual poverty report. The report will be notable because this year marks the 50th anniversary of the launch of President Lyndon Johnson’s War on Poverty. In his January 1964 State of the Union address, Johnson proclaimed, “This administration today, here and now, declares unconditional war on poverty in America.”[1]


Since that time, U.S. taxpayers have spent over $22 trillion on anti-poverty programs (in constant 2012 dollars). Adjusted for inflation, this spending (which does not include Social Security or Medicare) is three times the cost of all military wars in U.S. history since the American Revolution. Despite this mountain of spending, progress against poverty, at least as measured by the government, has been minimal.
War on Poverty After 50 Years Conditions of the Poor in America



"Despite this mountain of spending, progress against poverty, at least as measured by the government, has been minimal."

 

[Camp]

When will the Left admit that the welfare state is a terrible failure and that it caused tremendous harm to black Americans? Based on responses from leftists in this thread, it would appear they never will.

When the right admits that discrimination in jobs, education and housing caused huge numbers of minorities, particularly black Americans to be trapped and held in poverty.

Hey...did you hear? We have a black president.

When will the Left admit that the welfare state is a terrible failure and that it caused tremendous harm to black Americans? Based on responses from leftists in this thread, it would appear they never will.

When the right admits that discrimination in jobs, education and housing caused huge numbers of minorities, particularly black Americans to be trapped and held in poverty.

Hey...did you hear? We have a black president.

The OP and follow ups are about public assistance programs and policies that were initiated during the 60's and 70's but brought about in large part by events of the mid and late 50's. Your Obama derangement syndrome is showing.

Of course you fool, no one disputes that racism towards blacks existed decades ago. Why the stramman argument?

We are talking about the failure of welfare and its terrible consequences on blacks TODAY. Please try not to distort the debate.

Thomas Sowell is being used as a source. He used data from the 60's and 70's to compile his early (1981 and 1983) books on this topic. His commentary published this week is just a rehash and reflection on his earlier works. So why is it inappropriate use of history to counter the OP and your claims but appropriate for you to promote your agenda with it? You want to point out and complain about a situation but don't want to acknowledge the causes and can not offer realistic solutions.

 

[NYcarbineer]

And if you knew anything about this subject, you would know black Americans were doing better economically before the Great Society programs existed...when racism was rampant. Please tell me you know this?

So how would never having started Medicaid made black Americans better off today?

I know it is hard for you to comprehend, but NO ONE IS SUGGESTING COMPLETE ELIMINATION OF THE SAFETY NET.

Why is it always black or white with you leftists?

You need to get informed. Do you really think a nation can survive as a welfare state when 20% of households are on food stamps, nearly 100 million working age Americans are not working, invasion of illiterate third worlders, and so many other facts that your kind refuse to accept.

No one is suggesting we eliminate the programs that people like you keep calling a complete failure?

lol. You people don't know what you want.

Medicaid is the single biggest part of the so-called war on poverty, so logically you people must be arguing that it is the single biggest contributor to what you call this 'failure'.

But every time it's brought up, you people don't want to get rid of it.

That is how you lose an argument, you, PC, and all the rest of the RW yakkers on this subject.

1. I never lose an argument, because I don't argue. I simply explain why I'm right...and never resort to lies, as you do.


2. "All this spending has not bought an appreciable reduction in poverty. … the poverty rate has remained relatively constant since 1965, despite rising welfare spending. In fact, the only appreciable decline occurred in the 1990s, a time of
state experimentation with tightening welfare eligibility, culminating in the passage of national welfare reform (the Personal Responsibility and Work Responsibility Act of 1996).

And, since 2006, poverty rates have risen despite a massive increase in spending. Census Bureau, “Table 5–Percent of People by Ratio of Income to Poverty Level: 1970–2010,”
http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/data/historical/hstpov5.xls.


3. Throwing money at the problem has neither
reduced poverty nor made the poor self-sufficient.
Scribd

So the poverty programs have held the line against the US's ongoing decline in the world. How about that?
You are aware of the job losses to foreign countries aren't you? You are aware of the stagnation of US wages for decades, aren't you?

You have yet to produce one iota of evidence that America's poverty rate would be lower today if no aid to the poor had ever been instituted.

btw: You do understand that government assistance makes a poor person less poor don't you?

 

[PoliticalChic]

It isn't any 'legacy of slavery' that has hurt the group.......

Slavery has nothing to do with it but welfare programs do? According to what? The Sowell book of say so? Just silly shit.

Oh, making it illegal to learn to read didnt mean nothing!

Not allowed to have property or property where you wanted didnt mean anything!

Its all welfares fault! I'm starting to see why you guys like this Sowell guy. His head is in the clouds and nothing is at fault....except welfare

OK...ok....I am remiss.

After all the empty non-posts about which I have berated you.....you actually made a stab at confronting the facts of the thread.

Bravo!

And it only took you two replies to the same post to comprehend. Congrats!

Of course, your post would be more believable if you were able to indicate multitudes for whom it was made "illegal to learn to read."

False, my post is believable because people being not allowed to learn to read is real and factual. You dont even disagree with it you just want names or something to believe what you already do not disagree with.

And, the same applies to this fabrication: "Not allowed to have property or property where you wanted didnt (sic) mean anything!"

LOL!!! Oh yeah, redlining, steering, housing discrimination and all that stuff is just a figment of my imagination! I'm seeing a pattern of denying reality and just screaming "not true"

Now, so that no one leaps to the conclusion that you post stems from Liberal indoctrination and propaganda.....
...can you name several of Dr. Sowell's books that you've read?

If there are none....well, you can see why some might consider you no more than a Liberal windbag.

Thanks but your entire post is summed up in emotions.

You didnt point out any lie I told, all you did was scream liar and run.

You didnt disagree with anything I said, all you did was scream "liberal" and thought that was a point.

Then after not being able to point out any lie, falsehood, etc etc you turn to your last ditch effort of asking me about how many books I've read.

I feel good about that because you didnt have one come back that made sense

1. "...my post is believable because people being not allowed to learn to read is real and factual."

But we're speaking of modern history.

Living people.

You're refusing to learn to read is purely voluntary.


2. "all you did was scream liar and run."

Run?

Whose post is this?


3. And speaking of running (and hiding) where is your explanation for the lack of educational materials in black households?

That would be the study I provided in post #17....

Here is the amazing consequence of half a century of indoctrination:




Overall, white homes had 2.5 times as many books as black homes.

But the most surprising finding is that the top quintile of black homes reported having fewer books (69) than the bottom quintile of white homes (71).

Report Negligent Parenting Hurts Black Students Performance



"When I get a little money I buy books; and if any is left I buy food and clothes."

Erasmus



And yes.....I blame Liberal indoctrination.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Another typical DUMB response from a leftist. Just claim Welfare works.

Read the OP. I doubt you will understand, but it is worth a try.

So you actually have no substantive evidence that the war on poverty has been a failure.

You are a leftist cliche (hey I like that...leftist cliche...now that is good)...and describes you to a tee.

When informed of the evidence, just claim the evidence does not exist. Leftism in one sentence.

So you actually have no substantive evidence that the war on poverty has been a failure.

You are a leftist cliche (hey I like that...leftist cliche...now that is good)...and describes you to a tee.

When informed of the evidence, just claim the evidence does not exist. Leftism in one sentence.

The evidence doesn't exist. You have no idea whatsoever where poverty in America would be today if there had been no anti-poverty programs ever created in the last 50 years.

Poverty could very easily be much worse today than it is.

So THAT'S why you are known as the NYLiar!!!

Prove that there would be less poverty in America today if programs like Medicaid, Medicare, food stamps, housing assistance, etc., etc., had never been started.

Prove it.

Am I correct, then, that you have given up trying to deny that $ trillions has not resulted in a diminution of the problem?




Take notes:

"This week, the U.S. Census Bureau is scheduled to release its annual poverty report. The report will be notable because this year marks the 50th anniversary of the launch of President Lyndon Johnson’s War on Poverty. In his January 1964 State of the Union address, Johnson proclaimed, “This administration today, here and now, declares unconditional war on poverty in America.”[1]


Since that time, U.S. taxpayers have spent over $22 trillion on anti-poverty programs (in constant 2012 dollars). Adjusted for inflation, this spending (which does not include Social Security or Medicare) is three times the cost of all military wars in U.S. history since the American Revolution. Despite this mountain of spending, progress against poverty, at least as measured by the government, has been minimal.
War on Poverty After 50 Years Conditions of the Poor in America



"Despite this mountain of spending, progress against poverty, at least as measured by the government, has been minimal."

You falsely assume that you are measuring against an unchanging economy.

Years ago I got a very good paying job in industry. Only 15 people showed up to apply for it.

Today you get 1000's showing up to apply for low paying jobs at Walmart.

Are you taking those economic realities into account in your calculations, or are such details too complicated for you?

 

[NYcarbineer]

It isn't any 'legacy of slavery' that has hurt the group.......

Slavery has nothing to do with it but welfare programs do? According to what? The Sowell book of say so? Just silly shit.

Oh, making it illegal to learn to read didnt mean nothing!

Not allowed to have property or property where you wanted didnt mean anything!

Its all welfares fault! I'm starting to see why you guys like this Sowell guy. His head is in the clouds and nothing is at fault....except welfare

OK...ok....I am remiss.

After all the empty non-posts about which I have berated you.....you actually made a stab at confronting the facts of the thread.

Bravo!

And it only took you two replies to the same post to comprehend. Congrats!

Of course, your post would be more believable if you were able to indicate multitudes for whom it was made "illegal to learn to read."

False, my post is believable because people being not allowed to learn to read is real and factual. You dont even disagree with it you just want names or something to believe what you already do not disagree with.

And, the same applies to this fabrication: "Not allowed to have property or property where you wanted didnt (sic) mean anything!"

LOL!!! Oh yeah, redlining, steering, housing discrimination and all that stuff is just a figment of my imagination! I'm seeing a pattern of denying reality and just screaming "not true"

Now, so that no one leaps to the conclusion that you post stems from Liberal indoctrination and propaganda.....
...can you name several of Dr. Sowell's books that you've read?

If there are none....well, you can see why some might consider you no more than a Liberal windbag.

Thanks but your entire post is summed up in emotions.

You didnt point out any lie I told, all you did was scream liar and run.

You didnt disagree with anything I said, all you did was scream "liberal" and thought that was a point.

Then after not being able to point out any lie, falsehood, etc etc you turn to your last ditch effort of asking me about how many books I've read.

I feel good about that because you didnt have one come back that made sense

1. "...my post is believable because people being not allowed to learn to read is real and factual."

But we're speaking of modern history.

Living people.

You're refusing to learn to read is purely voluntary.


2. "all you did was scream liar and run."

Run?

Whose post is this?


3. And speaking of running (and hiding) where is your explanation for the lack of educational materials in black households?

That would be the study I provided in post #17....

Here is the amazing consequence of half a century of indoctrination:




Overall, white homes had 2.5 times as many books as black homes.

But the most surprising finding is that the top quintile of black homes reported having fewer books (69) than the bottom quintile of white homes (71).

Report Negligent Parenting Hurts Black Students Performance



"When I get a little money I buy books; and if any is left I buy food and clothes."

Erasmus



And yes.....I blame Liberal indoctrination.

So you're making a case for race based inferiority. Why don't you just state that upfront as your topic, and we can debate that?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Another typical DUMB response from a leftist. Just claim Welfare works.

Read the OP. I doubt you will understand, but it is worth a try.

So you actually have no substantive evidence that the war on poverty has been a failure.

You are a leftist cliche (hey I like that...leftist cliche...now that is good)...and describes you to a tee.

When informed of the evidence, just claim the evidence does not exist. Leftism in one sentence.

So you actually have no substantive evidence that the war on poverty has been a failure.

You are a leftist cliche (hey I like that...leftist cliche...now that is good)...and describes you to a tee.

When informed of the evidence, just claim the evidence does not exist. Leftism in one sentence.

The evidence doesn't exist. You have no idea whatsoever where poverty in America would be today if there had been no anti-poverty programs ever created in the last 50 years.

Poverty could very easily be much worse today than it is.

So THAT'S why you are known as the NYLiar!!!

Prove that there would be less poverty in America today if programs like Medicaid, Medicare, food stamps, housing assistance, etc., etc., had never been started.

Prove it.

Are you really this dense?

as you can see, if you have even average intelligence which I question, poverty was descending dramatically BEFORE your beloved FAILED Great Society programs were instituted and went UP after they were instituted.

You are wrong.

The seventies were also the starting point for the mass exodus of good paying jobs from the US to cheap labor markets overseas.

Where did you factor that into your calculations?

 

[PoliticalChic]

And if you knew anything about this subject, you would know black Americans were doing better economically before the Great Society programs existed...when racism was rampant. Please tell me you know this?

So how would never having started Medicaid made black Americans better off today?

I know it is hard for you to comprehend, but NO ONE IS SUGGESTING COMPLETE ELIMINATION OF THE SAFETY NET.

Why is it always black or white with you leftists?

You need to get informed. Do you really think a nation can survive as a welfare state when 20% of households are on food stamps, nearly 100 million working age Americans are not working, invasion of illiterate third worlders, and so many other facts that your kind refuse to accept.

No one is suggesting we eliminate the programs that people like you keep calling a complete failure?

lol. You people don't know what you want.

Medicaid is the single biggest part of the so-called war on poverty, so logically you people must be arguing that it is the single biggest contributor to what you call this 'failure'.

But every time it's brought up, you people don't want to get rid of it.

That is how you lose an argument, you, PC, and all the rest of the RW yakkers on this subject.

1. I never lose an argument, because I don't argue. I simply explain why I'm right...and never resort to lies, as you do.


2. "All this spending has not bought an appreciable reduction in poverty. … the poverty rate has remained relatively constant since 1965, despite rising welfare spending. In fact, the only appreciable decline occurred in the 1990s, a time of
state experimentation with tightening welfare eligibility, culminating in the passage of national welfare reform (the Personal Responsibility and Work Responsibility Act of 1996).

And, since 2006, poverty rates have risen despite a massive increase in spending. Census Bureau, “Table 5–Percent of People by Ratio of Income to Poverty Level: 1970–2010,”
http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/data/historical/hstpov5.xls.


3. Throwing money at the problem has neither
reduced poverty nor made the poor self-sufficient.
Scribd

So the poverty programs have held the line against the US's ongoing decline in the world. How about that?
You are aware of the job losses to foreign countries aren't you? You are aware of the stagnation of US wages for decades, aren't you?

You have yet to produce one iota of evidence that America's poverty rate would be lower today if no aid to the poor had ever been instituted.

btw: You do understand that government assistance makes a poor person less poor don't you?

"You have yet to produce one iota of evidence that America's poverty rate would be lower today if no aid to the poor had ever been instituted."

Yet you have accidentally agreed that $22 trillion has not resulted in a commensurate decrease in 'poverty.'


The rest of your post is covered by this:

Spin…altering the truth without altering the facts.

 

[Camp]

Another typical DUMB response from a leftist. Just claim Welfare works.

Read the OP. I doubt you will understand, but it is worth a try.

So you actually have no substantive evidence that the war on poverty has been a failure.

You are a leftist cliche (hey I like that...leftist cliche...now that is good)...and describes you to a tee.

When informed of the evidence, just claim the evidence does not exist. Leftism in one sentence.

So you actually have no substantive evidence that the war on poverty has been a failure.

You are a leftist cliche (hey I like that...leftist cliche...now that is good)...and describes you to a tee.

When informed of the evidence, just claim the evidence does not exist. Leftism in one sentence.

The evidence doesn't exist. You have no idea whatsoever where poverty in America would be today if there had been no anti-poverty programs ever created in the last 50 years.

Poverty could very easily be much worse today than it is.

So THAT'S why you are known as the NYLiar!!!

Prove that there would be less poverty in America today if programs like Medicaid, Medicare, food stamps, housing assistance, etc., etc., had never been started.

Prove it.

Am I correct, then, that you have given up trying to deny that $ trillions has not resulted in a diminution of the problem?




Take notes:

"This week, the U.S. Census Bureau is scheduled to release its annual poverty report. The report will be notable because this year marks the 50th anniversary of the launch of President Lyndon Johnson’s War on Poverty. In his January 1964 State of the Union address, Johnson proclaimed, “This administration today, here and now, declares unconditional war on poverty in America.”[1]


Since that time, U.S. taxpayers have spent over $22 trillion on anti-poverty programs (in constant 2012 dollars). Adjusted for inflation, this spending (which does not include Social Security or Medicare) is three times the cost of all military wars in U.S. history since the American Revolution. Despite this mountain of spending, progress against poverty, at least as measured by the government, has been minimal.
War on Poverty After 50 Years Conditions of the Poor in America



"Despite this mountain of spending, progress against poverty, at least as measured by the government, has been minimal."

You have set an interpretation of success or failure of the war on poverty that suites your agenda of being able to call it a failure. However, everyone does not share your interpretation of success or failure. The war on poverty has greatly reduced the amount of suffering poor people have to endure. People living in poverty today have a quality of life that can not be compared to the quality of life before and when the war on poverty began. Viewed and judged on that level, the war on poverty has been an overwhelming huge success.

 

[PoliticalChic]

So you actually have no substantive evidence that the war on poverty has been a failure.

You are a leftist cliche (hey I like that...leftist cliche...now that is good)...and describes you to a tee.

When informed of the evidence, just claim the evidence does not exist. Leftism in one sentence.

You are a leftist cliche (hey I like that...leftist cliche...now that is good)...and describes you to a tee.

When informed of the evidence, just claim the evidence does not exist. Leftism in one sentence.

The evidence doesn't exist. You have no idea whatsoever where poverty in America would be today if there had been no anti-poverty programs ever created in the last 50 years.

Poverty could very easily be much worse today than it is.

So THAT'S why you are known as the NYLiar!!!

Prove that there would be less poverty in America today if programs like Medicaid, Medicare, food stamps, housing assistance, etc., etc., had never been started.

Prove it.

Am I correct, then, that you have given up trying to deny that $ trillions has not resulted in a diminution of the problem?




Take notes:

"This week, the U.S. Census Bureau is scheduled to release its annual poverty report. The report will be notable because this year marks the 50th anniversary of the launch of President Lyndon Johnson’s War on Poverty. In his January 1964 State of the Union address, Johnson proclaimed, “This administration today, here and now, declares unconditional war on poverty in America.”[1]


Since that time, U.S. taxpayers have spent over $22 trillion on anti-poverty programs (in constant 2012 dollars). Adjusted for inflation, this spending (which does not include Social Security or Medicare) is three times the cost of all military wars in U.S. history since the American Revolution. Despite this mountain of spending, progress against poverty, at least as measured by the government, has been minimal.
War on Poverty After 50 Years Conditions of the Poor in America



"Despite this mountain of spending, progress against poverty, at least as measured by the government, has been minimal."

You falsely assume that you are measuring against an unchanging economy.

Years ago I got a very good paying job in industry. Only 15 people showed up to apply for it.

Today you get 1000's showing up to apply for low paying jobs at Walmart.

Are you taking those economic realities into account in your calculations, or are such details too complicated for you?

"Years ago I got a very good paying job in industry."

That's quite an oblique way of referring to being a greeter at Wal-Mart.