War on poverty: Still being waged 50 years later

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Fan Base Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 18, 2014 7:05 a.m.

    It's time to try something new. Why not just give cash payments as a match to income? More money would get to those who need it.

  • Majordad Garland, UT
    Jan. 17, 2014 5:26 p.m.

    "Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."
    Albert Einstein

    I think it's time to try something else, like what worked some 230 years ago by our founding fathers.

  • DVD Taylorsville, 00
    Jan. 17, 2014 5:21 p.m.

    To see how things can look without government help or intervention in the form of taxation and regulation, look at Bangladesh and Somalia. Those are places fairly free of intervention, where you can choose to pay almost nothing for work and where there are few regulations. And as a result, most people have nothing and everyone is dirt poor. You never know if that next meal is going to poison you and you really have no other choices in work or what's available to buy.

  • Sasha Pachev Provo, UT
    Jan. 17, 2014 1:46 p.m.

    The war on poverty reminds me of trying to solve a quadratic equation such as x^2-6x+5=0 like this: x^2=6x-5 or x(x-6)=-5. Both approaches lead nowhere, you need to notice that x^2-6x+9 = (x-3)^2 and then the solution is obvious. You cannot attack the symptom, you need to hit the root cause. In this case, the root cause is the disintegration of the family, If we do not address it, we can spend a lot of time and money on the equivalent of x(x-6)=-5 approach.

  • TLFinSLC Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 17, 2014 12:27 p.m.

    Poverty issues are not going to be solved until there is more incentive for people to work. You can't just give someone money, food, and housing and say they are out of poverty... as long as they are receiving handouts they will always be considered as being in poverty. Getting out of poverty requires working for ones own money, managing that money, and putting some into assets and savings. Current welfare tactics do not accomplish any of that.

  • Red Pepper Hot Pepper Cedar Hills, UT
    Jan. 17, 2014 10:58 a.m.

    I am 100% sure I need help people who required to meet their basic need. Key word here BASIC. I am afraid that the "War on Poverty" is not winning because: Too much wellfare which leads to bigger government and higher overall tax rate, will (and aleady showed) leads to lower productivity rate for USA as a whole, which then leads to lower competition power over the world then higher unemployeement inside USA. Therefore, may we conclude that more wellfare government program is NOT the answer for "War on Poverty"?

  • caljimw Orem, UT
    Jan. 17, 2014 10:29 a.m.

    If the figures in the article are correct, in 1964, when President Johnson committed to the war on poverty, America's population was about 195 million, with 19%, about 37 million Americans, living below the poverty level. Today, with a US Population of about 310 million, the nations poor number 46,500,000, about 15% of the total population. Is it a measure of success that the percentage has decreased, or a measure of failure that after fifty years we have an additional 7.5 million men, women and children living in poverty?
    Should not the question be: "What, if anything, have we learned that could help decrease the levels of poverty?" Surely, in fifty years of experience, we should have learned something.

  • Esquire Springville, UT
    Jan. 17, 2014 9:16 a.m.

    Christ said the the poor will always be with us. But he did not say we should stop trying to help. The conservative approach is to do little or nothing. I reject that. The war on poverty will never end, and had we done nothing, things would have been worse. There were some who rose out of their poverty, and those success stories make it worth it. And I don't see any discussion about how programs and efforts were reduced, gutted or eliminated along the way. For example, Reagan cut programs for the mentally ill, and the homeless population dramatically increased. So, the war on poverty was not fought well, and the right wing has to take most of the fault for that. One other thing. Statistics show two things. The poverty level is falling around the world compared to the past. Second, reducing income disparity is a key factor in reducing poverty, and again, Republican policies are the worst thing to address the problems of people. The GOP is actually about serving the rich, those who already have, at the expense of the majority and especially the poor.

  • Brave Sir Robin San Diego, CA
    Jan. 17, 2014 8:50 a.m.

    In the 50 years of the war on poverty, there are only two constants: Government has constantly grown the welfare program, and constantly raised the minimum wage. During that time the poverty issues in our country have only gotten worse. Draw your own conclusions from that.

  • Thid Barker Victor, ID
    Jan. 17, 2014 8:28 a.m.

    Government welfare does not lift people out of poverty, it practically guarantees a permanent underclass of poverty because it does nothing to fix the reasons people are poor; addictions, no marketable jobs skills, having children out of wedlock, and yes, in some cases, laziness. The numbers do not lie!

  • What in Tucket? Provo, UT
    Jan. 17, 2014 7:32 a.m.

    The best war on poverty is a job. This administration seems bent on preventing any improvement in the economy. We are swimming in red tape, and the usual Democratic tax and spend method of governing.

  • Liberal Ted Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 17, 2014 6:03 a.m.

    We have robbed Trillions from taxpayers to fight this war, using an unwinnable tactic. When I bring this up with left wing friends, typically their first response is "Well do we just let everyone die?". Of course not. Even conservatives, don't like seeing people die, especially when there is something that can be done about it.

    Had we used that money to create zero to a very low interest loan ratio for low income people They could use the loans to go to school, start up a business, or if they came up with another idea we could be open to that. We could provide Work Force Services with people that can train, give free classes and teach how a business operates or just offer loans to certain degrees that are in demand.

    No free ride. If you have children, single etc. No problem. I would purchase farms that these people can stay at. They can work a minimal amount of hours each day, as long as they getting their education or starting up their business. Give a deadline. Provide daycare.

    If we can get people off of welfare, then we're winning the war. .