This article actually explains a lot. The $17,000,000,000,000 debt keeps
Congress and the President from making rational decisions. It also explains why
the poor keep voting Democrat.
There is no doubt in my mind that when a person is struggling, be it with
financial, emotional, or other difficulties, it is harder to make good
decisions. Maybe we can stop judging the poor and instead offer them a helping
These studies may be usefule, albeit with some flaws and assumptions, but where
is the solutions to the problem? Maybe started a welfare program earlier in the
morning will help, but that still doesn't address all the problem.How can you have a program that helps an individual help themself if you
assume that their mental capacity is strained without doing everything for
them?The only thing I can think of is something that would take
enormous committment, time, and resource which could not be provided by
government programs. Basically, you would have to have an individual dedicated
to pulling the person in poverty along until that person is elevated to a place
where they can succeed in life. Then you would have to track that person and
continue to help them until there is enough evidence that he is self reliant.
Then that person can start paying back the debt that was accumulated in helping
him get to that point.The underlying assumption is that everybody
wants to succeed by the established way that we contribute to society. This is
not 100% true. 100% of anything is not true in this life.
RBB makes a valid point. It says a lot that those in poverty typically vote
Which is why, Christopher B and RBB, that the poorest states like Arkansas,
Mississippi, Louisiana, etc. always vote Democratic...oh wait, looks like that
argument doesn't work so well.
The cycle of poverty begins and ends with government programs that intervene
with the truths of life and its purpose. Anyone proposing government programs
don't have the right to complain. They lost that right by advocating for
the program in the first place. Anarchy is preferable to Socialism! Socialism
has destroyed more human potential than any other 'ism' the world has
ever known by a long ways. Where are the real men in our society?
The cities with the highest welfare recipients are:1.Detroit, MI2.Buffalo, NY3.Cincinnati, OH4.Cleveland, OH5.Miami, FL6.St. Louis, MO7.El Paso, TX8.Milwaukee, WI9.Philadelphia,
PA10.Newark, NJAll run by liberals, therefore it is safe to conclude
liberalism creates welfare dependency.
I don't want to suggest that either party is at fault, because if you were
to look at the rules of welfare both parties helped create, they actually
penalize initiative and any upward movement out of welfare. There is a
hopelessness that comes with the need/dependency of welfare that demeans and
diminishes a person's self worth. The LDS church requires that people
receiving assistance perform some act of service. They also offer classes to
help people gain employment, start businesses, and get higher education. None
of this is part of the government "assistance" programs. Government
welfare almost seems to be geared to create a dependance of the people for the
If poverty depletes brain power then explain why many many Engineers &
Programmers come from India while the US is famous for Investment Bankers?
Re:water rocket"The LDS church requires that people receiving
assistance perform some act of service. They also offer classes to help people
gain employment, start businesses, and get higher education. None of this is
part of the government "assistance" programs."Classes?
What classes? Are they free classes? I know people getting church assistance
and none have attended classes. Act of service? Sometimes.Welfare
was reformed in 1996 in an agreement between a Republican Congress and Pres.
Clinton.The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act started the
Temporary Assistance to Needy Families program, which placed time limits on
welfare assistance and replaced the longstanding Aid to Families with Dependent
Children program. Other changes to the welfare system included stricter
conditions for food stamps eligibility, reductions in immigrant welfare
assistance, and recipient work requirements.Federal requirements
have ensured some measure of uniformity across states, but the block grant
approach has led individual states to distribute federal money in different
ways. Certain states more actively encourage education; others use the money to
help fund private enterprises helping job seekers.The bottom line is
some people will "game" whether it is a church or govt system.
These are some pretty poor conclusions. They are essentially saying that
requiring poor people to do anything is too taxing on them. I think the study is
too limited to make the conclusions that it's making. Another conclusion
that can be made is that what separates the rich from the poor is the ability to
make decisions when under pressure. Anyone who has experienced financial strain
understands that it can be mentally and emotionally taxing on them, but what
determines whether that leads to poverty or not is their ability to make
decisions in that stressed state.