New Video Shows the War on Poverty Is a Failure

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

The Center for Freedom and Prosperity has released another “Economics 101″ video, and this one has a very powerful message about the federal government’s so-called War on Poverty.

As explained by Hadley Heath of the Independent Women’s Forum, the various income redistribution schemes being imposed by Washington are bad for taxpayers – and bad for poor people.

The video has a plethora of useful information, but the data on the poverty rate is particularly compelling. Prior to the War on Poverty, the United States was getting more prosperous with each passing year and there were dramatic reductions in the level of destitution.

But once the federal government got involved in the mid-1960s, the good news evaporated. Indeed, the poverty rate has basically stagnated for the past 40-plus years, usually hovering around 13 percent depending on economic conditions.

Another remarkable finding in the video is that poor people in America rarely suffer from material deprivation. Indeed, they have wide access to consumer goods that used to be considered luxuries – and they also have more housing space than the average European (and with Europe falling apart, the comparisons presumably will become even more noteworthy).

The most important message of the video, however, is that small government and economic freedom are the best answers for poverty.

As Hadley explains, poor people can be liberated to live meaningful, self-reliant lives if we can reduce the heavy burden of the federal government.

Last but not least, the video doesn’t address every issue in great detail, and there are three additional points that should be added to any discussion of poverty.

1.

The biggest beneficiaries of the current system are the army of bureaucrats

that

receive very comfortable salaries

administering various programs.

2. The Obama Administration is looking to

re-define poverty in a way that would expand the welfare state

and

increase the burden of redistribution programs

.

3. The

welfare reform legislation of the 1990s was a small step in the right direction

because it eliminated a federal entitlement and shifted responsibility back to the state level. This success story

should be replicated for programs such as Medicaid

.

This last point is worth emphasizing because it is also one of the core messages of the video. The federal government has done a terrible job dealing with poverty. The time has come to get Washington out of the racket of income redistribution.

http://biggovernment.com/dmitchell/2011/10/04/new-video-shows-the-war-on-poverty-is-a-failure/#more-342320

[Danno 1,228]

The Poverty Pimp Index (“public welfare” bureaucrats per 100,000 residents)

New Hampshire 360

Alaska 302

New York 290

Maine 280

Wisconsin 277

Pennsylvania 277

DC 277

Minnesota 266

New Jersey 255

Ohio 255

Kansas 121

Idaho 120

Georgia 118

Texas 113

South Carolina 104

Nevada 99

Mississippi 96

Indiana 95

Florida 92

Hawaii 86

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

The Poverty Pimp Index (“public welfare” bureaucrats per 100,000 residents)

New Hampshire 360

Alaska 302

New York 290

Maine 280

Wisconsin 277

Pennsylvania 277

DC 277

Minnesota 266

New Jersey 255

Ohio 255

Kansas 121

Idaho 120

Georgia 118

Texas 113

South Carolina 104

Nevada 99

Mississippi 96

Indiana 95

Florida 92

Hawaii 86

If the Alaskan natives were taken out of the picture, Alaska would be at or near the bottom of that list. As it is they get every free government handout available given to them.

[Captain Oates 911]

The war on my poverty is all but won

My bumper sticker says :

I have upped my income

So up yours !

[slim 1,530]

The easy fix is to cut government out of everything.

[Saddle Bronc 124]

War on Poverty, started by LBJ was already known to be failure in mid-1980's--nothing's changed on that front.

[Danno 1,228]

Liberals are never judged by the result if their efforts but rather by their -well meaning intentions.

[Saddle Bronc 124]

Liberals are never judged by the result if their efforts but rather by their -well meaning intentions...

...and oft credited with well-meaning intentions when their actual intentions were anything but (as in LBJ's case).

[Captain Oates 911]

There are well meaning intentions that are known - and well meaning intentions that are not known - and unknowable well meaning intentions - and well meaning intentions whose category wasn't known and still isn't because they belonged to a category that wasn't known until it was later - and then it was ignored

Kneeling on your neck and water boarding you has never been known to have well meaning intentions behind it - but only so far as the boardee is concerned - the operator might be a sadist who means to satisfy himself in which case his well meaning intentions are inwardly directed, or they may be well meaning towards his employer's desires.

In fact all well meaning intentions are ultimately selfish (eg getting into heaven)and therefore not as well meaning as they could be if they weren't

Hope that clears up the question of well meaning intentions as it relates to both liberals and right wing sadists

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Th eold video also showed it was a failure. The poverty rate shows it is a failure. Is someone expecting a different answer?

Voter registration shows it is a success. More dependent, oppressed Democrats than ever. The perfect racist plan. Dems are so much smarter than they were in the 50's, I will give them that much