Published: Friday, Jan. 10 2014 12:00 a.m. MST
"Yet supporters of government welfare suggest that the solution to poverty
is more government assistance for more people."Why keep perpetuating
the myths of the welfare queens and lazy workers? Those advocating for those who
need help insist the solution is to provide LESS government assistance to those
who don't need it: corporations, corrupt bankers, industrial farmers,
wasteful militarization. Worker productivity, and resulting corporate profits,
have never been higher in real dollars -- and yet corporate welfare and bailouts
for those who caused the mess have never been higher. Military spending is
higher than the next dozen countries combined. And, if marriage is the answer,
why deny it to so many?
So let me get this straight. According to today's brand of conservatism,Unemployed people caught up in the biggest recession since the Great
Depression shouldn't have access to unemployment benefits, which makes them
poor, andPoor people and the middle class shouldn't have access
to affordable healthcare, andPoor families shouldn't have
access food stamps, andWorking people shouldn't expect their
employers to offer a retirement program, andWorking people
shouldn't be allowed to bargain collectively with their employers over pay
and benefits, andSocial Security should be shrunk, privatized, or
both, andThe solution to the accelerating gap between rich and poor,
and the rapid evaporation of the middle class, is to give even bigger tax breaks
to the wealthiest Americans and corporations.Do you see why so many
Americans think today's GOP has gone completely off the rails?
Is there a sale somewhere on op ed pieces written by conservative lobby groups?
There sure seems to be a lot of them popping up.
The article is not talking about the recent past( past 50 years-duh!). Also,
recent studies show that welfare Queens are not as prevalent as previously
thought. The article says that deeper studies,and/ or better research is needed
to find and understand underlying causes. I believe that more than government
should be involved. It is in the interest of business and industry to be
involved, as well.The investigation into this problem could lead to connections
that could help the overall economy, benefiting all. Time to get really serious
without partisan shiboleths.
# 1: '‘50 years later, War on Poverty is hurting work and
marriage’ - Title Counter: * 'Cut-off of
jobless aid would lower economic growth' - By Paul Wiseman - AP - Published
by DSNews - 11/30/10 'Budget office says $1 spent on jobless
aid generates $1.90 in economic growth' – article
Marriage: *'Marriage an important key to AVOIDING poverty'
- By Jennifer A. Marshall, The Heritage Foundation - Published by DSnews -
10/17/10 Waiting until marriage to have children is the second of
three "golden rules" for avoiding poverty that researchers identified
over the years: (1) graduate from high school; (2) marry before having children;
and (3) get a job.Actually, being married is even more significant than
graduating from high school for avoiding poverty. Robert Rector, a senior
research fellow at The Heritage Foundation, shows this in a new paper,
"Marriage: America's No. 1 Weapon Against Child Poverty." Utah is currently spending $ 2 million against marriage equality.
So easy to disprove conservative opinions with conservative studies.
Now, do we stop trying to end poverty? Stop food stamps, unemployment? What would Jesus do…?
there are more people on food stamps that ever under Barack...it is at an all
time high and yet the poverty numbers are also at an all time high under Barack.
Something obviously isn't working. Maybe handouts don't solve the
problem?? Just something liberals might want to consider. Give a man a fish and
he eats for a day...teach a man to fish and he has fish for a lifetime. All the
government fish in the world won't solve poverty ...and in fact only prove
to make it worse since people are less able to take care of themselves.
So, at the end of the article it talks about welfare reform enacted in 1996--
which included reforms such as work/training requirements and limits on the
length of time one could receive cash assistance. The article then mentions
that the requirements have been weakened. It leaves out that UT's Gov.
Herbert requested more state flexibility, which Obama granted, for implementing
the program. The increased flexibility then became a 2012 campaign
issue where Republicans claimed Obama was "gutting welfare reform." According to Factcheck:"The Obama administration cited
the Utah letter when it announced its new policy on July 12. The policy provides
exactly the kind of flexibility Utah was seeking."
Patriot: "there are more people on food stamps that ever under Barack...it
is at an all time high and yet the poverty numbers are also at an all time high
under Barack. Something obviously isn't working."You think
that, just maybe, the most severe economic recession since the Great Depression
could have had something to do with that?
I think it's interesting that people seem to want to put up straw man
arguments to knock down on both sides of the issue. That's easy ... and,
sorry y'all, that's lame. The article starts out:Fifty
years ago, President Lyndon B. Johnson delivered his famous “War on
Poverty” speech. Johnson’s purpose was “not only to relieve
the symptom of poverty, but to cure it and, above all, to prevent it.”Focus people! That's the goal for liberal and conservative alike
is it not? I believe anyone proposing that it isn't the goal of both sides
is ignoring the true majority position with a straw man to attempt to bolster
their ideological opinion. How about we talk about how to achieve
Johnson's goal? No one seems to disagree we haven't achieved that
goal. So, how do we prevent the causes of poverty? Sadly, the answer is,
that's a tough row to hoe. The solutions are there but require a lot of
effort. Many would rather argue about the gnat of "symptom alleviation"
while swallowing (ignoring) the camel of "prevention".
Great article. Could have been taken from a page of the LDS welfare handbook:
help people until they can get on their own feet.
No need to worry folks. Nancy Pelosi said that Obamacare was going
to provide the freedom to millions who now have health care who didn't to
start businesses and create new jobs. Unemployment and and poverty will soon be
solved; and she said it with a straight face.
Pagan - "What would Jesus do?"First, Jesus would not hold a
gun to my head and take money that I worked for and give it to someone else;
which I would then recent and the recipient feel entitled to. Instead, He would
teach me about the benevolence of willingly giving to those in need; which will
fill my heart with joy and the recipient with gratitude.Forced
charity is not charity and never will be!
It is sad how many people are economic illiterates. The unemployment
compensation and welfare programs are fundamentally flawed. Look at Europe.
These programs create a permanent underclass of dependents.These
programs need to be recast along the lines of "give a man a fish/teach a man
to fish".Then there is the dude who after a year was cut off and
church welfare because he would not do his part in finding a job. They made
interview appointments, they hauled him to job interviews, they tried to teach
him how to look for a job. All to no avail. He would not act like he wanted a
job. A couple of weeks after being cut off he called the Bishop and angrily
told him "I don't need you, I found me my own job!"When
I was out of work I had to move 1,200 miles to find a job. I know people who
will not move across the street to find a job. Many long term unemployed need
to be reintroduced to the consequences of poor choices.
Every assertion in this piece can be refuted by peer review ed studies from non
Yep, new amazing rhetoric from DN posters.Farmers should get
subsidies for their private business but poor people Should NOT get food stamps
to help them not starve because that would make them starve....And
Jesus is a conservative t-party type. All in one day, how do you do
it? Before church or after church? During?
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments