Comments about ‘Ending poverty's cycle’

Most of the discussion of income inequality focuses on the vast increase in the wealth gap between the middle class and the very rich, not the chronically poor. The causes of chronic poverty and the possibilities to ameliorate them are well worth studying, but it is not really part of the inequality argument.

When you have corporate executives who don't bat an eye when they 'right size' a company (lay off workers) and then give themselves a big bonus at the same time, its no wonder that many middle class turn to government for economic justice. Where else can they turn?

Education is the answer but that is not limited to a college degree. If anyone has been in a university class within the last 10 years you know that requirements have been so watered down in order to include people who cannot write a 500 word essay on butterflies. Release the strangle hold that universities have as the gatekeepers to employment, encourage people to consider other training in vocational or tech schools that can lead to steady jobs (this is a model that Germany uses with much success, modern factories require technical training outside of high school.) Teach basic financial classes in high school because many students parents have never heard of the words "balanced check-book."

There are many solutions, don't fall into the trap of believing that a one size fits all university program will help. It will only further water down a college degree and the requirements to obtain one.

As a self described radical moderate, and a tagged liberal, it's obvious to me that the current welfare system has not worked as a mere saftey net, and stepping stool for certain segements of society. It has become a life style, and maybe (to long to discuss here) that's ok in some circumstances. For the others though the system has probably failed them and us. An interesting experiment in South America (I forget the country, but think it's Venezuela). They are attacking systemic poverty by introudicing a guaranteed income to poor families with strings attached. The family gets a guaranteed income but..the kids have to go to school, they have to graduate, and there are a couple of other stipulations I don't remember. The point though is to put the emphasis on the younger generation and to break the cycle.

Problem though..when was the last time America did anything that progressive, or future looking?

Did anyone notice that once the idea of "global warming" was tossed into the dustbin of history (like the world being flat) the topic of "income inequality" became the new crisis du jour? Why don't these communists just come right out and speak the truth: they want to take money by force and distribute it to those who they deem worthy of it. It's always the same crowd with the same agenda and a different rallying cry.
The only "income inequality" people should be worried about is the difference in salary/benefits between government workers and private sector workers. That's the real issue. I pay 100% of the cost of my health insurance and these teacher's in Wisconsin were having a hissy fit because the Governor and legislature asked them to pay 10% of the cost of their health insurance. That's a problem.

I was thinking over the weekend,
whatever happened hit TV shows like "Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous".

I suppose now that the American Dream has been smashed to bits, the 99% are no longer dreaming -- so pouring salt in those old wounds doesn't feel so good anymore.

Hard work will no longer pay off.
Middle America is gone.

You're either the 1% or the 99%.

The only way out of poverty is either not getting voted off the Island, winning American Idol, Dancing with the Stars, or another State's Lottery.

Pathetic.

@cjb - You raise a valid point, however there are several areas of this country where multi-generational poverty is rampant. That's where the problem lies. Not with the poor assembly-line worker who got laid off, but with the guy who goes and gets a job, does the bare minimum long enough to qualify for unemployment or welfare, and then gets himself laid off. These are the people who have grown up, not knowing anything besides welfare, and continue that pattern either because they don't think they can do better, or because that's all they know. I believe in government assistance, what I don't believe in is government handouts.

I live in South America where there is no such thing as government assistance, temporary shelter or food banks. It's pathetic that those living in the USA who have everything they need to flourish - don't.

Red State Pride. The reason that school teachers and other public workers had a "hissy fit" wasn't because of a demand that they pony up more for their health insurance, it was because Walker pushed though a bill that all but eliminated their right to collective bargaining. In a right to work state like Utah that issue is all but lost, but in Wisconsin where workers have rights, that is a very big deal.

Make assistance for those of working age based upon work. This idea has had great support in the nation but not with the politicians. Replace them. Distribute needed tasks at minimum wage to those who are unemployed.

The fields still produce crops; sheep and cattle still eat grass and produce food, wool, hides. Pigs eat leftovers and produce pork. Trees still grow in profusion in the mountains and used for timber. There is still ore in the mountains. There is oil, natural gas. There is salt in the Lake.

All the capital in the world is in the sinews and bone of the people and the natural products of the earth. It is not wealth that is in short supply, it is pieces of paper masquerading as money. We can still obtain wealth from the earth and from cattle etc. and distribute it by labor.

There is plenty of work to do. Those of us who still work often have enough, and to spare, to hire their unemployed neighbors to paint, clean, dig, plant. Some are qualified to repair, install, maintain. Some can develop photographs on their computers and do all sorts of wonderful things. Why not hire them?

Unless the "rich" are controlling the levers of government power, confiscating money from some, bestowing it on themselves and their friends, or otherwise standing in the way of private enterprise, the poverty of some is not caused by other people being rich. Just like the poverty of some nations is not caused by the fact that others are rich. This "income inequality" is simply the latest mantra of the Left to rile up anger among those who like to blame their situation on others, and thereby grab power. "Thou shalt not covet" was given as a commandment thousands of years ago for a very good reason.

This article points to access of Education as the greatest factor for the poor, I would say while not perfect the access is there. What isn't there is the drive to succeed. With all the grants one can get from the government to go to school, especially if you are poor, college shouldn't be out of anyones reach. What people need, and this is not something you can force on them, is the desire to continue their educations.

'Unless the "rich" are controlling the levers of government power...' - gramma b - 9:39 a.m. Jan. 30, 2012

Gramma,

It can be argued...

that the wealthy DO control government.

As supported by:

**'Fox News Parent News Corp. Gives $1 Million to GOP' - by Brian Montopoli - CBS News - 04/17/10

**âFirm dissolves after giving pro-Romney PAC $1 millionâ â By Ken Thomas â AP â Published by DSNews â 08/04/11

The 'Super PACs' have been a constant source of speculation. As, corporations have actually MORE rights than the average American...

being able to make UNLIMITED donations to whatever canidate they support. Also, we have no way to TRACK those donations as...

they can 'dissolve' in just 24hours.

I don't know about you.

But I cannot simply 'dissolve.'

Are YOU a corporation?

When the government under the control of politicians performs any service, makes any law, authorizes and finances any study, it only happens because someone will profit financially whether or not the subjects of the study benefit or not.

Using the excuse of helping the people, politicians create actions that give themselves wealth.

The good news is that sometimes the actions really do help people and promote the general welfare.

With the right tools and a lot of determination we probably could trace every right and freedom that our government has given us back to the profit motive of politicians.

Even back to the founding fathers who gave us this nation as they went about waging the economic war against the king of England and his companies.

The scope of this inquiry is too narrow. The bigger question is the matter of the middle class falling into poverty. These matters cannot be studied wihtout at least including a marxian perspective in the mix. I say this, not because I think anybody is going to take me seriously in this very conservative paper, but rather because it happens to be true. Expect little light from this inquiry.

Red State "Did anyone notice that once the idea of "global warming" was tossed into the dustbin of history (like the world being flat)".....only in the world republican world of the war on science (evolution is a theory, climate change doesn't exsist, and alternative energy isn't practical)has global warming discarded, but then reality isn't the repbullicans strong point..witness the mythical President they are running against.

@red state pride
"Did anyone notice that once the idea of "global warming" was tossed into the dustbin of history"

Sounds like somebody hasn't paid any attention to climate science the past few years...

"Why don't these communists just come right out and speak the truth: they want to take money by force and distribute it to those who they deem worthy of it."

Romney's a commie? (His plan cuts taxes on the rich and increases them on the poor, by your definition... that makes him a commie).

"The only "income inequality" people should be worried about is the difference in salary/benefits between government workers and private sector workers."

Private sector contractors get paid more than gov't employees. Let me guess, you looked at something that compared all private sector and all public sector employees knowing full well the private sector has a ton of 8 buck an hour burger flipping jobs and the gov't mostly has more specialized jobs that have similarly high-paying equivalents in the private sector.

I'm not totally against the rich....

I saw that Bill and Melinda Gates are no longer the richest people on Earth, and not because of lost value....they've SPENT it.
They have single handedly irradicated polio in India. [1 Billion people].
Next is malaria...

Like Jon Huntsman Sr., they plan on giving away 95% of their net worth -- and not even leaving their lives of luxury.

If some of the rich could set such good examples such as this, the peasants won't be so likely to revolt.

The attitude of "Let them eat cake" from the WallStreet types always ends up in bloodshed.

Most of us have either helped others through difficult financial times or have been helped ourselves. One thing that I quickly learned is that paying someone's bills does not eliminate their problem of being able to pay their own bills. Unless they are given a job and expected to work, they will always want someone to help pay their bills.

Yes, people in a crisis need immediate financial help but unless the "crisis" is eliminated, they will always be in crisis-mode.

Work is the answer. It has always been the answer. Learning to work, and to work hard, is the key element that is missing in many homes where they think that the answer is government handouts.

If it takes a special bill for the government to learn that people need to work, then pass the bill. The sooner government learns that unless people work, they will always live in poverty, the sooner the problem can be addressed.

When people learn that they have to provide value, that they have to solve problems, that they have to WORK, they will lift themselves out of poverty.

Mike Richards | 12:04 p.m. Jan. 30, 2012
South Jordan, Utah

Agreed!

But the real problem is the RICH were given tax breaks, to create jobs.
Which they didn't, aren't, and never will.

and the one's they did create, went to the Communists in China.

This is why the Rich in America are getting richer,
and the poor are getting poorer.

The redistribution of Wealth your side (conservatives) needs to be worried about in America is the shift going to the Top 1% and to the Communists, not fellow citizens.