Robert J. Samuelson: Is Ending Poverty A Mission Impossible?

Investors Business Daily ^ | September 1, 2016 | ROBERT J. SAMUELSON

[expat_panama]

Don't expect a second War on Poverty, regardless of who wins the election.

Picking up where Lyndon Johnson left off in the 1960s would seem a logical response to the campaign's relentless criticism of economic inequality. But appearances are deceiving. Most proposals to reduce inequality -- conspicuously from Hillary Clinton -- are aimed at the middle class. Spillovers for the very poor would be mostly incidental.

These proposals include: raising Social Security payments; increasing subsidies for early childhood care; reducing -- or eliminating -- college tuition at state colleges and universities; boosting the minimum wage. For his part, Donald Trump has pledged not to trim Social Security benefits and to cut taxes across the board. That automatically favors the rich and middle class because they pay most of the taxes.

There are two powerful reasons for slighting the poor.

First, the poor are not where the votes are...

...second reason is less recognized: There's no consensus in public opinion for launching a second War on Poverty...

...here's the contradiction: Government isn't judged up to the job. Both surveys asked whether government knew enough to eliminate poverty even if it could "spend whatever is necessary." In 1985, 70% said "no." In 2016, the negative response was 73%.

What emerges is an ambiguous consensus. Government can and should help, but it can do only so much. The poor themselves -- along with their families, churches and charities -- must play the starring role. None of this constitutes a powerful mandate for a vast new anti-poverty program. We know more now than we did in the 1960s. We are no longer so optimistic and confident of success. To many Americans, eliminating poverty has become a mission impossible.

[reed13k]

Define poverty in terms other than $s and do not modify it. You will then see that the only ones truly living in poverty in the US either suffer from mental issues or refuse to take offered aid. Poverty in terms of what the political ass-hats define is a relative measurement rather than discrete and therefore can never be eliminated.

[Pelham]

“It is when you keep importing 10s of millions of uneducated unskilled workers who procreate for “birthright status” to remain here.”

Importing poverty via 3rd world immigration, legal as well as illegal. And “refugees” most of all. It’s all been a huge drain on Americans.

[fella]

King James Bible
For ye have the poor with you always, and whensoever ye will ye may do them good: but me ye have not always.

[Just mythoughts]

I have pondered this warning. I do consider it a warning, given our welfare society and tin horn dictators that become state gods. Communism and all its bastard step-children isms, divined by humans not only creates poor in wealth but destroys the soul as well. Just look at North Korea, those people live in perpetual darkness.

[Jim Noble]

To many Americans, eliminating poverty has become a mission impossible

In other news, water is wet and A=A.

[Graybeard58]

What emerges is an ambiguous consensus. Government can and should help

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Show me in the constitution where the government is authorized to “help” anybody.

[Graybeard58]

We should spare no expense until everyone is above average.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Reminds me of what Hillary said during the primaries:
“If elected, I will close all the below average schools in the U.S.”

[Wonder Warthog]

"......but these globalists/corporatists are making their money off the backs of the poor when they get into all this shite.

I work with the very poor on a weekly basis as a volunteer with the Society of St. Vincent de Paul. We go to the living places of the poor with food and assistance of many sorts.

I have yet to find even ONE individual made poor by "globalists/corporalists". The statistics run very heavily to "personal bad choices" (got on drugs, got knocked up while single, dropped out of school, etc., etc.)as the root cause of most.

[JimRed]

As long as there are the stupid, the lazy, the unmotivated and the unlucky there will be poverty. Help the unlucky; ignore the rest.

[thesligoduffyflynns]

I also work with the poor in my community so I know where you are coming now that you have made your position clear.

I’m speaking in the broadest sense of the term regarding globalists & corporatists & not the DIRECT affect.

Believe me , I have seen many things you have seen.

[JimRed]

Let me modify that; help the unlucky and any of the stupid who will admit their stupidity and try to get smarter. Credit for effort.

[Wonder Warthog]

"I’m speaking in the broadest sense of the term regarding globalists & corporatists

I hear this frequently, mostly from socialists or communists of various sorts (note...that is NOT saying "you" are either one), so I'll ask you the same thing I ask them "where is a system that works better, even described in theory".

Like it or not, the hard in-hand data says that it is that same "globalist corporalist" system that is lifting whole countries out of poverty, not socialism, and certainly not communism. G/C has and causes problems, but I don't see anything out there that promises better.

[thesligoduffyflynns]

OK, let’s re-configure here: My definition of a a globalist is George Soros and his Open Society . org(s). Globalism and corporatism go hand in hand. To the best of my knowledge it is something to avoided at all costs just as the UK now has done with Brexit.

There is a agenda and it’s not 21 it’s 2030 and as long as the elite, the power brokers, the political brokers, fiends & fools have control, you don’t. You are rendered powerless on all levels.

I’m not a socialist & not a commie so put those thoughts away

end of subject JMJ

[thesligoduffyflynns]

On another note:

Like it or not, the hard in-hand data says that it is that same “globalist corporalist” system that is lifting whole countries out of poverty, not socialism, and certainly not communism. G/C has and causes problems, but I don’t see anything out there that promises better.

Capitalism is the answer, pure unadulterated gooey, greasy, slimey open market CAPITALISM!

[Harmless Teddy Bear]

Robert J. Samuelson: Is Ending Poverty A Mission Impossible?

Yes.

Because the definition of poverty is anything below "normal".

If the normal is fifty million then the guy with only a million is in poverty.

If the normal is a ten bed room house then the guy with a three bedroom house is in poverty.

Because the goal posts are constantly moving there is no way to "win".

Now if you are talking about "poverty" as having the basics of life; food, water, clothing and shelter, then the war on poverty is won.

The only people going hungry are those who are having food withheld from them. The only people who are without shelter are those who choose to be.

[Wonder Warthog]

"My definition of a a globalist is George Soros and his Open Society . org(s).

Only problem with that is that Soros is a socialist/communist. He just happens to be a very rich one.

"Globalism and corporatism go hand in hand. To the best of my knowledge it is something to avoided at all costs just as the UK now has done with Brexit."

Again, what the globalists are pushing is just more socialism.

"There is a agenda and it’s not 21 it’s 2030 and as long as the elite, the power brokers, the political brokers, fiends & fools have control, you don’t. You are rendered powerless on all levels.

Again...the agenda is global socialism. And those elitists, political brokers, etc. do NOT YET have sufficient power, although they are pushing for it by every means possible. In my wilder moments, I sometimes think that the US's Second Amendment is keeping not just the USA free, but the rest of the globe as well....which is why there is such an effort to get rid of it.

"Capitalism is the answer, pure unadulterated gooey, greasy, slimey open market CAPITALISM!

"Capitalism" is an economic system, not a philosophy of governance. The USA "had" (and still has vestiges of) the superior system of governance with the original republic established by the FF. That system allowed capitalism to flourish in a controlled way. Unfortunately, that system has been under attack ever since established, and much of it is long lost.

[Elsie]

Robert J. Samuelson: Is Ending Poverty A Mission Impossible?

Well...

Matthew 26:11
For ye have the poor always with you; but me ye have not always.

---

Depends kinda on what you BELIEVE; doesn't it?

[Elsie]

We know more now than we did in the 1960s.

We sure DO!

Are you still killing your unborn?

-- GOD

 

[Elsie]

It is when you keep importing 10s of millions of uneducated unskilled workers who procreate for “birthright status” to remain here.

SOMEONE has to replace the over 58,000,000 dead American's that never drew a breathe of air in this country!

---

I'd like to thank the United States Government for protecting me and my kind.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You see, 40 years ago, my odds of making it out of the egg, alive, were very poor; about 80% of us died. 

 (http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=rachel-carson-silent-spring-1972-ddt-ban-birds-thrive)

 

 

But a lady discovered our plight and wrote a book that addressed our problem,

and, in 1972, a law was ammended protecting us even further. (http://www.fws.gov/midwest/eagle/protect/laws.html)

 

 

 

 

 

 

What I find strange is that the same government passed a law the very next year that allowed for killing

of unborn, and apparently unwanted, humans.  Little ones still nestled safely in their Mother's womb.

Around 25% of them are dying before birth - on average nearly 3,300 - every day of the year.

 

 

I hear that by now, somewhere around 58 MILLION of them have perished.

Wouldn't that kind of mess up the humans plans for growth, and welfare, and

retirement?

 

 

 

 

 

Strange birds; these Homo Sapiens.  Perhaps they'll come to their senses

before they are ALL dead!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'd like to thank the United States Government for protecting me and my kind.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You see, 40 years ago, my odds of making it out of the egg, alive, were very poor; about 80% of us died. 

 (http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=rachel-carson-silent-spring-1972-ddt-ban-birds-thrive)

 

 

But a lady discovered our plight and wrote a book that addressed our problem,

and, in 1972, a law was ammended protecting us even further. (http://www.fws.gov/midwest/eagle/protect/laws.html)

 

 

 

 

 

 

What I find strange is that the same government passed a law the very next year that allowed for killing

of unborn, and apparently unwanted, humans.  Little ones still nestled safely in their Mother's womb.

Around 25% of them are dying before birth - on average nearly 3,300 - every day of the year.

 

 

I hear that by now, somewhere around 58 MILLION of them have perished.

Wouldn't that kind of mess up the humans plans for growth, and welfare, and

retirement?

 

 

 

 

 

Strange birds; these Homo Sapiens.  Perhaps they'll come to their senses

before they are ALL dead!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Elsie]

If poverty rules in the black community they will only solve it when they decide to fix it themselves and stop relying on everybody else.

If poverty rules in the Native American community they will only solve it when they decide to fix it themselves and stop relying on everybody else.

NatGeo has an article this month bemoaning the fact that Indians what to create jobs in THEIR land.

How long will it be before our Great White Father screws these poor folks once again?