Posted on 12/15/2014 12:08:35 PM PST by PROCON
In the United States—as in all of the world’s wealthier nations—ending poverty is not a matter of resources. Many economists, including Timothy Smeeding of the University of Wisconsin (and former director of the Institute for Research on Poverty) have argued that every developed nation has the financial wherewithal to eradicate poverty. In large part this is because post-industrial productivity has reached the point where to suggest a deficit in resources is laughably disingenuous. And despite the occasional political grandstanding against welfare, there is no policy, ideology or political party that is on the books as pro-starvation, pro-homelessness, pro-death or anti-dignity.
Yet, poverty continues to exist. In the U.S., for example, almost 15 percent of citizens (and almost 20 percent of children) live in poverty. Of those, slightly under 2 percent live on less than $2 per person per day.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsweek.com ...
The GOP are guided by them.
Income is not wealth.
Who do you think is going to wind up with that money in the end? It won’t be the poor folks.
“There is no party that is ... pro-death”
Since every abortion results in a death and Democrats are universally pro-abortion, isn’t the Democratic Party pro-death?
But this article is clearly a communist screed, so who expected logic of all things?
This should be financed from Obama’s ‘stash’.
So, every developed nation has the resources to eradicate poverty?
Really?
Maybe they can reduce gravity while they’re at it.
How do you convince “the poor” not to spend any income they get on assets that increase in value instead of on “consumables”?
Milton Friedman observing how means tested programs created a disincentive to work came up with the idea of a Guaranteed Minimum Income. Also, Charles Murray has a book on this. He claims if you take all the income redistribution programs you send each man, woman, and child in America a check for $10,000 per year. I would be in favor of this approach if it meant replacing all the current gov’t programs and firing all the case workers and bureaucrats.
right in the middle of the article “Try Newsweek for only $1.25 per week”
Newsweek, why not give it away for free to everyone as part of the basic income check you cheap bastards?
Living on $2 a day?
I smell a rat. The po’ folk I see walking around spend more than that on soda pop at 7-eleven.
what an idiot.....how can he claim to be an economist when he obviously does not understand what a baseline is
Brilliant, George Soros bring your checkbook.
War on Poverty at 50 -- despite trillions spent, poverty wonIn 2012, the federal government spent $668 billion to fund 126 separate anti-poverty programs. State and local governments kicked in another $284 billion, bringing total anti-poverty spending to nearly $1 trillion. That amounts to $20,610 for every poor person in America, or $61,830 per poor family of three.
Spending on the major anti-poverty programs increased in 2013, pushing the total even higher.
Over, the last 50 years, the government spent more than $16 trillion to fight poverty.
Newsweek is a shell of what it once was. Saw a copy last year; could not believe how far it has fallen.
Communist garbage.
Anyone remember Richard Nixon who proposed a guaranteed income plan in the 1970s?
A basic income check? And in two years when inflation catches up to those worthless basic income checks and poverty is WORSE and not better - then what?
Its been said that if you took all the wealth from the rich and gave it to the poor - the rich would have it back within 2 years.
What happens when as a result inflation starts spiraling out of control?
Probably not even that long.
Communists had a solution for that.....kill the rich.
Guess what happens when you flood the marketplace with extra money? Prices go up as more dollars chase the same resources.
This would do nothing to eradicate poverty, but sure would make more people dependent on their EBT card or equivalent.
Here's a simple IF/THEN statement that shows why this is a monumentally stupid idea.
IF $X = Amount of "Basic Income Check",
THEN $X = The NEW Zero.
moron, Moron, MORON!!!!!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.