The War On Poverty: Lost

[kaz]

[

Under Franklin Roosevelt- "No depression, or recession, had ever lasted even half this long."

a. 8,020,000 Americans were unemployed in 1931. In 1939, after the 'excellent' decisions by Franklin Roosevelt, there were 9,480,000 unemployed.
Folsom, "New Deal of Raw Deal," p. 3.

Yes, it was a particularly bad recession that had already dragged on for THREE YEARS before FDR got there.

True, other countries got out a little quicker, by totally scrapping that whole "Democracy" thing and having a World War.

It's a BS number of unemployed used and it has been explained to PC in detail in other threads how those unemployment numbers are distorted. All the workers in the public works projects, even the building of three aircraft carriers were counted as unemployed because the were on "relief projects". So, while they collected pay checks for building infrastructure, much of it still being used today, they are declared as unemployed when the actual unemployment number was brought down to 9.6%, as low or lower than the average in the global depression.

Economically, all the people being paid to do "public works projects" were paid from the same source as people who got welfare, the money came out of the economy, the economy that was in depression. While I personally applaud people who would rather work than get something for free, they were still just as big a drag on the economy.

Remember that next time you travel over the Triborough Bridge or through the Lincoln Tunnel. All the workers who built them were "unemployed".

Do you realize what you said didn't contradict me? You don't, do you?

 

[PoliticalChic]

So....how come you can't dispute any of the facts?

You must be a government school grad, huh?

In general YOUR facts are twisted in order to PROVE something that you, yourself believe to be fact.

Do insults count as facts??? If so, you're the foremost authority on everything under the sun.

You won't even try to deal with my facts.

Insults?????

Me???

Winning hearts and minds. That's what I'm all about!

 

[NYcarbineer]

It was NEVER a War on Poverty. It was a War For Bigger Government.

So Medicaid has not made anyone less poor? Has not made anyone better off?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Look at you! Wrong on both counts!


1. FDR extended the recession into a depession

2. "Incomes Have Dropped Twice as Much During the 'Recovery' as During the Recession
New estimates derived from the Census Bureau's Current Population Survey by Sentier Research indicate that the real (inflation-adjusted) median annual household income in America has fallen by 4.4 percent during the "recovery," after having fallen by 1.8 during the recession."
Incomes Have Dropped Twice as Much During the Recovery as During the Recession The Weekly Standard

Cutting and pasting your way through life is a cheap trick to avoid thinking.

Link?


And stop staring at me!

 

[Unkotare]

She's a stay at home mom by her own admission. Someone else pays the bills. She posts here and moves dishes in and out of the dishwasher,...

It is all but certain that the work of a mom is harder and more important than whatever you do, douchebag.

 

[NYcarbineer]

[

So...you actually believe that FDR made things better?????

You should study history.

?

No, people who lived through that time period believed that. I'm old enough to have met them and talked to them.

That's why he was ELECTED FOUR TIMES.

While the rich hated FDR, most working folks know he made their lives better, that they were in FAR better shape thanks to his policies.

if it wasn't for FDR they would have been in a world of trouble ... especially when WW2 hit

"if it wasn't for FDR they would have been in a world of trouble .."

Education coming right up:


1. Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., liberal New Deal historian wrote in The National Experience, in 1963, “Though the policies of the Hundred Days had ended despair, they had not produce recovery…” He also wrote honestly about the devastating crash of 1937- in the midst of the “second New Deal” and Roosevelt’s second term. “The collapse in the months after September 1937 was actually more severe than it had been in the first nine months of the depression: national income fell 13 %, payrolls 35 %, durable goods production 50 %, profits 78% .

2. In 1935, the Brookings Institution (left-leaning) delivered a 900-page report on the New Deal and the National Recovery Administration, concluding that “ on the whole it retarded recovery.”
The Real Deal - Society and Culture - AEI

Those are just a couple of opinions not supported by the facts.

She's a stay at home mom by her own admission. Someone else pays the bills. She posts here and moves dishes in and out of the dishwasher,...

It is all but certain that the work of a mom is harder and more important than whatever you do, douchebag.

Oh really? So stay at home mom is a fulltime job?

Then why do people like you want a stay at home mom on welfare to get a SECOND job?

 

[NYcarbineer]

[

So...you actually believe that FDR made things better?????

You should study history.

?

No, people who lived through that time period believed that. I'm old enough to have met them and talked to them.

That's why he was ELECTED FOUR TIMES.

While the rich hated FDR, most working folks know he made their lives better, that they were in FAR better shape thanks to his policies.

if it wasn't for FDR they would have been in a world of trouble ... especially when WW2 hit

"if it wasn't for FDR they would have been in a world of trouble .."

Education coming right up:


1. Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., liberal New Deal historian wrote in The National Experience, in 1963, “Though the policies of the Hundred Days had ended despair, they had not produce recovery…” He also wrote honestly about the devastating crash of 1937- in the midst of the “second New Deal” and Roosevelt’s second term. “The collapse in the months after September 1937 was actually more severe than it had been in the first nine months of the depression: national income fell 13 %, payrolls 35 %, durable goods production 50 %, profits 78% .

2. In 1935, the Brookings Institution (left-leaning) delivered a 900-page report on the New Deal and the National Recovery Administration, concluding that “ on the whole it retarded recovery.”
The Real Deal - Society and Culture - AEI

Those are just a couple of opinions not supported by the facts.

She's a stay at home mom by her own admission. Someone else pays the bills. She posts here and moves dishes in and out of the dishwasher,...

It is all but certain that the work of a mom is harder and more important than whatever you do, douchebag.

Oh really? So stay at home mom is a fulltime job?

Then why do people like you want a stay at home mom on welfare to get a SECOND job?

haha, PoliticalChic now admits that stay at home mom is a fulltime job, but thinks moms on welfare should get a job!!

lol, by your own measure, they already have a job.

 

[NYcarbineer]

[

So...you actually believe that FDR made things better?????

You should study history.

?

No, people who lived through that time period believed that. I'm old enough to have met them and talked to them.

That's why he was ELECTED FOUR TIMES.

While the rich hated FDR, most working folks know he made their lives better, that they were in FAR better shape thanks to his policies.

if it wasn't for FDR they would have been in a world of trouble ... especially when WW2 hit

"if it wasn't for FDR they would have been in a world of trouble .."

Education coming right up:


1. Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., liberal New Deal historian wrote in The National Experience, in 1963, “Though the policies of the Hundred Days had ended despair, they had not produce recovery…” He also wrote honestly about the devastating crash of 1937- in the midst of the “second New Deal” and Roosevelt’s second term. “The collapse in the months after September 1937 was actually more severe than it had been in the first nine months of the depression: national income fell 13 %, payrolls 35 %, durable goods production 50 %, profits 78% .

2. In 1935, the Brookings Institution (left-leaning) delivered a 900-page report on the New Deal and the National Recovery Administration, concluding that “ on the whole it retarded recovery.”
The Real Deal - Society and Culture - AEI

and the responses even get more jaded by Politicalchicken .... you keep trying ... when you start printing the whole truth then we can take you serious but these little short stories of your a one opinion statements we might take you serious but your partisan opinions are, how did you say, Retarded ....

See if you can find an adult willing to help you get a library card.

Know what a library is?

Let's quote the real Arthur Schlesinger Jr.

"Conservatism in its crisis of despair turns to fascism."

 

[Camp]

No, people who lived through that time period believed that. I'm old enough to have met them and talked to them.

That's why he was ELECTED FOUR TIMES.

While the rich hated FDR, most working folks know he made their lives better, that they were in FAR better shape thanks to his policies.

if it wasn't for FDR they would have been in a world of trouble ... especially when WW2 hit

"if it wasn't for FDR they would have been in a world of trouble .."

Education coming right up:


1. Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., liberal New Deal historian wrote in The National Experience, in 1963, “Though the policies of the Hundred Days had ended despair, they had not produce recovery…” He also wrote honestly about the devastating crash of 1937- in the midst of the “second New Deal” and Roosevelt’s second term. “The collapse in the months after September 1937 was actually more severe than it had been in the first nine months of the depression: national income fell 13 %, payrolls 35 %, durable goods production 50 %, profits 78% .

2. In 1935, the Brookings Institution (left-leaning) delivered a 900-page report on the New Deal and the National Recovery Administration, concluding that “ on the whole it retarded recovery.”
The Real Deal - Society and Culture - AEI

and the responses even get more jaded by Politicalchicken .... you keep trying ... when you start printing the whole truth then we can take you serious but these little short stories of your a one opinion statements we might take you serious but your partisan opinions are, how did you say, Retarded ....

See if you can find an adult willing to help you get a library card.

Know what a library is?

Let's quote the real Arthur Schlesinger Jr.

"Conservatism in its crisis of despair turns to fascism."

Did he know PC in person or was he just making a general comment?

 

[initforme]

Theres one way out of poverty...a college or tech school education. Without that your odds are slim to none in America. No gov't program is going to get one out of poverty. Then again low skilled workers fall prey to working for employers who take full advantage of them. Again the way to avoid this is education.

 

[JQPublic1]

Letting those of us forced to fund such programs keep more of what WE'VE EARNED is a far better idea than thinking someone else has a right to something they didn't earn. What I want YOU to do is if you see such a need, buy their food, pay their power bill, fund their kid's school, and pay the premium for their healthcare. Both thing involve each of us getting what we want. Different between that and now is the bleeding hearts would actually have to fund what they support totally with their own money voluntarily rather than finding ways to have others forced to do.

Are you suggesting that as a middle-classed Republican your tax dollars are holier than those of middle classed Democrats? Obviously you have forgotten the War on the Middle Class being waged relentlessly by the GOP. That war is instrumental in driving the poverty in this country and is key to the diminishing numbers of the middle class. Yet, you, being as gullible as a cuckold , are clueless as to what is happening in your political bedroom. That must be the case since you encapsulated your beliefs with the following:

The entire war on poverty is a failure yet you retard Liberals want to keep doing what hasn't work for the past 50 years. Explain that.

It is not just "liberals", who ever those are, that had to take counter measures to offset the GOP War on the Middle class, many other Americans of conscience, seeing their own middle income status melting away, or threatened, had no choice but to support the war on poverty. It is their tax dollars that have made a difference....consider yours as going up in bomb smoke and US bases around the world!

 

[Wry Catcher]

What will it take for folks to realize that, just like the title, big government is a loser?

It misdirects assets, takes what is earned and gives it away in exchange for votes, and has no interest in actually solving societal problems.

Are voters so stupid that they are willing to overlook the black hole of abysmal waste that the welfare state has become?






1. "Today, [September 16, 2014 ] the U.S. Census Bureau will release its annual report on poverty. This report is noteworthy because this year marks the 50thanniversary of President Lyndon Johnson’s launch of the War on Poverty.
Liberals claim that the War on Poverty has failed because we didn’t spend enough money. Their answer is just to spend more. But the facts show otherwise.


2. ... taxpayers have spent $22 trillion on Johnson’s War on Poverty (in constant 2012 dollars). Adjusting for inflation, that’s three times more than was spent on all military wars since the American Revolution.


3. ... government currently runs more than 80 means-tested welfare programs. These programs provide cash, food, housing and medical care to low-income Americans. Federal and state spending on these programs last year was $943 billion. (These figures do not include Social Security, Medicare, or Unemployment Insurance.)


4. .... about one third of the U.S. population, received aid from at least one welfare program at an average cost of $9,000 per recipient in 2013. If converted into cash, current means-tested spending is five times the amount needed to eliminate all poverty in the U.S.

5. .... Census will almost certainly proclaim that around 14 percent of Americans are still poor. The present poverty rate is almost exactly the same as it was in 1967 ....


6. [The scam:] Census counts a family as poor if its income falls below specified thresholds. But in counting family “income,” Census ignores nearly the entire $943 billion welfare state."
The War on Poverty Has Been a Colossal Flop


How much more clearly does the public need to be shown that Liberalism is a failure?

Another "ain't it awful" thread by the Queen curmudgeon, sans any hint of what could/should be done. Pointing fingers at liberals, when a problem which has existed since the birth of our nation, and bi-partisan votes have funded efforts to end poverty is at best disingenuous.

But let us not leave this thread, one which is important and deserves more than a partisan spin. In another thread I posted the following link, so that an informed debate on the issue and real world ideas can be vetted.

Follow the history of efforts to build a safety net beginning in 1776, and follow the timeline to 1969:

1776-1799 ElderWeb

"Pointing fingers at liberals,..."

Yup.

With good reason.

1. The government conducted a study, 1971-1978 known as the Seattle-Denver Income Maintenance Experiment, or SIME-DIME, in which low income families were give a guaranteed income, a welfare package with everything liberal policy makers could hope for.
2. Result: for every dollar of extra welfare given, low income recipients reduced their labor by 80 cents. http://www.policyarchive.org/handle/10207/bitstreams/12794.pdf

[The results for husbands show that the combination of negative income tax plans tested in SIME/DIME — which, as already mentioned, represents on average a relatively generous cash transfer program with a guarantee of 115% of the poverty line and a tax rate of 50% — has a significant negative effect on hours worked per year.
Overview of the Final Report of the SIME DIME Report]

a. Further results: dissolution of families: “This conclusion was unambiguously unfavorable to advocates of a negative income tax that would cover married couples, for two important reasons. First, increased
marital breakups among the poor would increase the numbers on
welfare and the amount of transfer payments, principally because the
separated wife and children would receive higher transfer payments.
Second, marital dissolutions and the usual accompanying absence of
fathers from households with children are generally considered unfavorable outcomes regardless of whether or not the welfare rolls increase.” http://www.bos.frb.org/economic/conf/conf30/conf30c.pdf

b. “When families received guaranteed income at 90% of the poverty level, there was a 43% increase in black family dissolution and a 63% increase in white family dissolution. At 125% of the poverty levels, dissolutions were 75% and 40%.”
Robert B. Carleson, “Government Is The Problem,” p. 57.



Liberalism.....the path to destruction.

more right wing distortions .... we get it ...take a aspirin .... your ability to post facts is
clouded your ability to post with any factual bases to it

Check out the links and sources, you imbecile.

Is it because I suggested you are a bad-tempered, difficult, cantankerous person? Least you forget, I will address your "links and sources" with a quote from above:

PC is not short on facts, more accurately she cherry picks facts and 'authorities' who support her extreme ideological bias. It is of course true that she hates liberals, and since hate is a very strong emotion, one might speculate that she was somehow harmed (emotionally?) by a liberal in the past; or someone she presumes is a liberal since they have the audacity to disagree with her."

 

[Wry Catcher]

Theres one way out of poverty...a college or tech school education. Without that your odds are slim to none in America. No gov't program is going to get one out of poverty. Then again low skilled workers fall prey to working for employers who take full advantage of them. Again the way to avoid this is education.

The Comprehensive Education and Training Act was very effective, see:

U.S. Department of Labor -- History -- Employment and Training Administration ETA

 

[Unkotare]

Oh really? So stay at home mom is a fulltime [sic] job?

It sure is, and I doubt a bigmouth nobody like you could do it for a week.

 

[Unkotare]

Then why do people like you want a stay at home mom on welfare to get a SECOND job?

When did I ever say that, you lying sack of shit? "Want" has very little to do with it. Most people do what they have to do; some people do what they can get away with.

 

[Unkotare]

haha, PoliticalChic now admits that stay at home mom is a fulltime job, but thinks moms on welfare should get a job!!

lol, by your own measure, they already have a job.

Lots of people work more than one job, you fucking idiot. Is hard work an alien concept to you, slug?

 

[Bfgrn]

The soft bigotry of reduced expectations applies to more than skin color.

Your usual vacuous bluster...

Your usual shallow, simplistic, closed-minded partisan ideology.

.

THAT is a laugh...talk about 'partisan ideology'....you use of the term "reduced expectations"...

What do you know about the War on Poverty that actually was a initiative of JFK's New Frontier?

What were the 'core principles' of the War on Poverty? What was the agency that was created??

 

[Bfgrn]

So....how come you can't dispute any of the facts?

You must be a government school grad, huh?

In general YOUR facts are twisted in order to PROVE something that you, yourself believe to be fact.

Do insults count as facts??? If so, you're the foremost authority on everything under the sun.

You won't even try to deal with my facts.

Insults?????

Me???

Winning hearts and minds. That's what I'm all about!

Whining is what you are about PC. This isn't the first time you have tried to misrepresent the War on Poverty. And this is not the first time (or the last time, knowing your authoritarian upbringing) that I will correct you...


You are a wealth of right wing parrot squawk...

Good example...the War on Poverty...

Ironically, the War on Poverty SHOULD have been strongly supported by conservatives. But they only offer empty rhetoric, while trying to tear down the working men and women of our nation and always trying to create an aristocracy by propping up and worshiping the opulent.

Here are some FACTS for you on what the War on Poverty was and wasn't.

When President Kennedy's brother-in law Sargent Shriver accepted President Johnson's challenge and took on the 'War on Poverty' the first thing he discovered was rather startling and disturbing. Half of the Americans living in poverty were children. Another large segment were elderly and another segment were mentally and/or physically disabled. So a HUGE segment of the poor fit the TRUE definition of a dependent. So there is an obligation as a civil society to make sure those real dependents are not trampled on or extinguished.

To address some of the players in your fairy tale, voila! We have an unabashed flaming liberal...Sargent Shriver. But I hate to disappoint you. Sargent Shriver hated welfare and had no intention of creating a handout program. He didn't believe in handouts, he believed in community action, opportunity, responsibility, and empowerment.

The 'War on Poverty' was called the Office of Economic Opportunity. The core principles were opportunity, responsibility, community and empowerment. The program's goal was maximum feasible participation. One of the concepts of empowerment was poor people had a right to one-third of the seats on every local poverty program board. It was a community based program that focused on education as the keys to the city. Programs such as VISTA, Job Corps, Community Action Program, and Head Start were created to increase opportunity for the poor so they could pull themselves out of poverty with a hand UP, not a hand out. Even when Johnson effectively pulled the plug on the War on Poverty to fund the war in Vietnam, Shriver fought on and won. During the Shriver years more Americans got out of poverty than during any similar time in our history. (The Clinton years - employing the same philosophy - were the second best.) Ref

Here is one of the agencies created by the WOP...

Job Corps is a program administered by the United States Department of Labor that offers free-of-charge education and vocational training to youth ages 16 to 24.

Job Corps offers career planning, on-the-job training, job placement, residential housing, food service, driver's education, basic health and dental care, a bi-weekly basic living allowance and clothing allowance. Some centers offer childcare programs for single parents as well.

Besides vocational training, the Job Corps program also offers academic training, including basic reading and math, GED attainment, college preparatory, and Limited English Proficiency courses. Some centers also offer programs that allow students to remain in residence at their center while attending college.[citation needed] Job Corps provides career counseling and transition support to its students for up to one year after they graduate from the program.

Career paths

Career paths offered by Job Corps include:

Advanced manufacturing

Communication design
Drafting
Electronic assembly
Machine appliance repair
Machining
Welding
Manufacturing technology
Sign, billboard, and display

Automotive and machine repair

Automobile technician
General services technician
Collision repair and refinish
Heavy construction equipment mechanic
Diesel mechanic
Medium/heavy truck repair
Electronics tech
Stationary engineering

Construction

Bricklaying
Carpentry
Cement masonry
Concrete and terrazzo
Construction craft laborer
Electrical
Electrical overhead line
Facilities maintenance
Floor covering
Glazing
HVAC
Industrial engineering technician
Licensed electrician (bilingual)
Mechanical engineering technician
Painting
Plastering
Plumbing
Roto-Rooter plumbing
Tile setting

Extension programs

Advanced Career Training (ACT)
General Educational Development (GED)
Commercial driver's license (CDL)
Off-Center Training (OCT Program)
High school diploma (HSD Program)

Finance and Business

Accounting services
Business management
Clerical occupations
Legal secretary
Insurance and financial services
Marketing
Medical insurance specialist
Office administration
Paralegal
Purchasing

Health care/allied health professions

Clinical medical assistant
Dental assistant
EKG technician
Emergency medical technician
Exercise/massage therapy
Hemodialysis technician
Licensed practical/vocational nurse
Medical office support
Nurse assistant/home health aide
Opticianry
Pharmacy technician
Phlebotomy
Physical therapy assistant
Rehabilitation therapy
Rehabilitation technician
Registered nurse
Respiratory therapy
Sterile processing
Surgical technician

Homeland security

Corrections officer
Seamanship
Security and protective services

Hospitality

Culinary arts
Hotel and lodging

Information technology

A+ Microsoft MSCE
Computer Networking/Cisco
Computer systems administrator
Computer support specialist
Computer technician
Integrated system tech
Network cable installation
Visual communications

Renewable resources and energy

Forest conservation and urban forestry
Firefighting
Wastewater
Landscaping

Retail sales and services

Behavioral health aide
Criminal justice
Child development
Residential advisor
Cosmetology
Retail sales

Transportation

Asphalt paving
Material and distribution operations
Clerical occupations
Heavy equipment operations
Roustabout operator
Heavy truck driving
TCU administrative clerk

 

[Mac1958]

The soft bigotry of reduced expectations applies to more than skin color.

Your usual vacuous bluster...

Your usual shallow, simplistic, closed-minded partisan ideology.

.

THAT is a laugh...talk about 'partisan ideology'....you use of the term "reduced expectations"...

What do you know about the War on Poverty that actually was a initiative of JFK's New Frontier?

What were the 'core principles' of the War on Poverty? What was the agency that was created??

If you have a point to make, make it.

I made mine, and without games.

It ain't that tough, I swear.

.

 

[PoliticalChic]

What will it take for folks to realize that, just like the title, big government is a loser?

It misdirects assets, takes what is earned and gives it away in exchange for votes, and has no interest in actually solving societal problems.

Are voters so stupid that they are willing to overlook the black hole of abysmal waste that the welfare state has become?






1. "Today, [September 16, 2014 ] the U.S. Census Bureau will release its annual report on poverty. This report is noteworthy because this year marks the 50thanniversary of President Lyndon Johnson’s launch of the War on Poverty.
Liberals claim that the War on Poverty has failed because we didn’t spend enough money. Their answer is just to spend more. But the facts show otherwise.


2. ... taxpayers have spent $22 trillion on Johnson’s War on Poverty (in constant 2012 dollars). Adjusting for inflation, that’s three times more than was spent on all military wars since the American Revolution.


3. ... government currently runs more than 80 means-tested welfare programs. These programs provide cash, food, housing and medical care to low-income Americans. Federal and state spending on these programs last year was $943 billion. (These figures do not include Social Security, Medicare, or Unemployment Insurance.)


4. .... about one third of the U.S. population, received aid from at least one welfare program at an average cost of $9,000 per recipient in 2013. If converted into cash, current means-tested spending is five times the amount needed to eliminate all poverty in the U.S.

5. .... Census will almost certainly proclaim that around 14 percent of Americans are still poor. The present poverty rate is almost exactly the same as it was in 1967 ....


6. [The scam:] Census counts a family as poor if its income falls below specified thresholds. But in counting family “income,” Census ignores nearly the entire $943 billion welfare state."
The War on Poverty Has Been a Colossal Flop


How much more clearly does the public need to be shown that Liberalism is a failure?

Another "ain't it awful" thread by the Queen curmudgeon, sans any hint of what could/should be done. Pointing fingers at liberals, when a problem which has existed since the birth of our nation, and bi-partisan votes have funded efforts to end poverty is at best disingenuous.

But let us not leave this thread, one which is important and deserves more than a partisan spin. In another thread I posted the following link, so that an informed debate on the issue and real world ideas can be vetted.

Follow the history of efforts to build a safety net beginning in 1776, and follow the timeline to 1969:

1776-1799 ElderWeb

"Pointing fingers at liberals,..."

Yup.

With good reason.

1. The government conducted a study, 1971-1978 known as the Seattle-Denver Income Maintenance Experiment, or SIME-DIME, in which low income families were give a guaranteed income, a welfare package with everything liberal policy makers could hope for.
2. Result: for every dollar of extra welfare given, low income recipients reduced their labor by 80 cents. http://www.policyarchive.org/handle/10207/bitstreams/12794.pdf

[The results for husbands show that the combination of negative income tax plans tested in SIME/DIME — which, as already mentioned, represents on average a relatively generous cash transfer program with a guarantee of 115% of the poverty line and a tax rate of 50% — has a significant negative effect on hours worked per year.
Overview of the Final Report of the SIME DIME Report]

a. Further results: dissolution of families: “This conclusion was unambiguously unfavorable to advocates of a negative income tax that would cover married couples, for two important reasons. First, increased
marital breakups among the poor would increase the numbers on
welfare and the amount of transfer payments, principally because the
separated wife and children would receive higher transfer payments.
Second, marital dissolutions and the usual accompanying absence of
fathers from households with children are generally considered unfavorable outcomes regardless of whether or not the welfare rolls increase.” http://www.bos.frb.org/economic/conf/conf30/conf30c.pdf

b. “When families received guaranteed income at 90% of the poverty level, there was a 43% increase in black family dissolution and a 63% increase in white family dissolution. At 125% of the poverty levels, dissolutions were 75% and 40%.”
Robert B. Carleson, “Government Is The Problem,” p. 57.



Liberalism.....the path to destruction.

more right wing distortions .... we get it ...take a aspirin .... your ability to post facts is
clouded your ability to post with any factual bases to it

Check out the links and sources, you imbecile.

Is it because I suggested you are a bad-tempered, difficult, cantankerous person? Least you forget, I will address your "links and sources" with a quote from above:

PC is not short on facts, more accurately she cherry picks facts and 'authorities' who support her extreme ideological bias. It is of course true that she hates liberals, and since hate is a very strong emotion, one might speculate that she was somehow harmed (emotionally?) by a liberal in the past; or someone she presumes is a liberal since they have the audacity to disagree with her."

I appreciate the fact that you didn't deny being an imbecile.

That, of course, is the hermeneutical key to all of your posts.


I'll wait while you get a dictionary.