In 1964 LBJ passed the Civil Rights Act. There were few safety net expenditures at that time. Provisions of this civil rights act forbade discrimination on the basis of sex, as well as race in hiring, promoting, and firing. The program was intended to help many minorities improve their lot in life by opening more doors for jobs. Note, a requirement for literacy tests as a prerequisite to voting was also eliminated. Adjusted for inflation $25 to $30 trillion has been spent on the safety net, called the war on poverty. But statistics suggest all the tax dollars spent have not really helped, as more have become dependent upon the government for help. When enough funding is provided a large number of the otherwise poor population is lifted out of statistical poverty. The government numbers then look better, as if poverty is on the decline.
In ‘equity’ the Democrats seek to continue to increase the size of the ‘safety net,’ appealing to those on the dole to vote them into power so they can do just that. It involves transferring wealth. Many of the poor in America enjoy good food, have housing, large screen televisions, cell phones and service, the internet, have computers, and buy video games. Many are more than capable of working, but they choose not to. They are not as poor as they would be without the Federal Government. Try to cut their ‘entitlements’ and a large voting bloc becomes the resistance. Obama added to this resistance with the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare). And if you recall Democrats cared less about reading the bill, knowing what it would do for their base. But is poverty in America on a decline, or actually being masked by liberal government continuing to spend on social insurance entitlement programs.
What can lift people out of the basement of a productive society? Education. Work. Family. Incentives. Ownership. I also believe that faith is important as well. The most impoverished today are single-parent families, especially in black and hispanic communities. And those not working are also among the most impoverished. Since the advent of civil rights legislation it has been all about the money transfer, not the true needs. Do the Democrats want Americans to be poorer and more dependent upon government, which the Alinsky Rules for Radicals would suggest?
When Kamala Harris campaigned to be the nominee for President in 2020 she commented that, “Equitable treatment means we all end up in the same place.” This is not a direct quote, but the essence of her thinking. She is not alone with this ideological position, but it is clearly erroneous in terms of human behavior and desires. This idea has become more of a penchant by Democrats, socialist in their orientation, for ‘equity’ throughout society. Equity calls for equal outcomes, equal treatment, without any regard for achievement. Equity engendered a redefinition of ‘diversity’ to be that of characteristics and not thinking or ability. ‘Equity’ simply means there are persons than do more while others do less to obtain the same results. Within society there are marginalized groups as well as elevated, or over-achievers, who with the framework of the progressive Democrat political directives should share equally. It is obvious what this suggests; those that have succeeded must provide for those that have not. It also means lower quality standards and productivity.
My question is this. “Where is the incentive to do well?”
As an aside. Charity has a place and can help lift persons out of poverty. The government disdains religious charities claiming they are in the business of conversion. Charity, however, provides the opportunity for the caring and the wealthy to give voluntarily. When government chooses to become the charity it is not as efficient as the non-profit or the religious, due principally to bureaucratic administrative expenses.
Autocratic societies do not want their populace educated, as the educated would be a threat. Autocratic societies do not like religion, as the autocrats want to be the gods and have none other higher than them. In Islamic societies the rules are made by men, not women, and not God, as their Scripture (the Quran) demonstrates. In Christian societies God is a threat to leadership, providing common sense laws of ethics and morality that may not be to the liking of those in government. And elite political leadership dislike thinking of themselves as sinners, preferring their own truth and actions as self-righteous.
In America Democrats prefer society be less educated, poor, family minimized, and less godly, all to the benefit of creating a base of voters that will grant them power. Biden spoke recently saying, “There is no such thing as someone else’s children. Our nation’s children are all our children.” This mirrored the words of a noted education figure, and suggests parent’s are not the one’s to raise their kids well, but government.
For power and control the elite liberal politicians will return entitlements. The numbers prove it. ‘Equity’ is a ruse, more harmful than productive to those that want to have purpose and make something of themselves. Our nations’ current welfare system dis-incentivizes more than encourages. It divides more than unifies. Even ‘racism’ is a political tool. If never discussed or publicized by the main stream media it would not exist. In an exchange with Mike Wallace, Morgan Freeman, responding to his question, “How are we going to get rid of racism?”, said succinctly, “Stop talking about it.”
Welfare discourages work. Welfare, as ‘equity,’ encourages dependency, and indolence, as well as divisiveness when entitlements are viewed more as a right (health care, guaranteed income) and opponents resist granting more. To those that work for a living, achieve financial independence, dependency and increasing dependency, as well as ‘equity,’ is not fair.
Our civil rights and welfare programs are not effective. The people on poverty have not been lowered, disguised maybe, but not lowered. We need to re-examine our welfare programs, as well as the liberal mindset, which has occupied our education system as a plague on our children, impacting their intelligence, their patriotism and love of God and Country. As in welfare when experiences occur early in life the outcomes can effect the adult too. Too many of our educated adults have become ‘woke’ and lack the common sense, the acumen, and the wisdom needed to grasp proper ethical and moral behavior. They actually need God and family more than our Federal Government. Biblical values far exceed in providing guidance to live a worthy life; and from a book of few pages when compared to the vast stores of legislation and laws composed by America’s political minds and legislatures. Family, unified and loving, is the foundation for individuals upon which learning is properly directed, skills taught, and work ethics established.
In America my understanding has always been that ‘equality’ is a starting point. Just as on a race track, for a human or a thoroughbred, before the gun is fired everyone is at the same point. But at the end, when the tape is crossed there are winners, laggards and those that finish last. The Democrats want the roses given to the winner to then be shared, with all participants getting equal treatment. First, second, third place does not really matter. And if it did then any claim to victory would be suppressed as not to traumatize those that were not competitive. Training, practice, and increased knowhow would be unnecessary.
Traces of such distributive malice are exhibited in Critical Race Theory, the 1619 Project, DEI programs (Diversity, Equity, Inclusion), and ESG valuations (for Environment, Social, Governance). It is the participation trophy that matters to liberals. Unfortunately there will always be those that have the ideas, are self-motivated, regardless of character (gender, race, sexual orientation), and can execute to achieve their dreams or their goals.
The Treasury Department has a 25 member Advisory Committee on Racial Equity, formed to boost its ‘equity efforts.’
Are Democrats attempting to reduce society to naught but underachievers, creating a dependent society which relies fully upon the government for any benefits to include income, healthcare, and living standards? If so my note of caution to those so politically inclined - you will soon run out of money. Just look to California.
A Biden administration rule is set to take effect soon that will create mortgage ‘equity’ having good credit borrowers pay a higher interest rate than poor credit borrowers. Thus forcing people with good credit to subsidize high-risk mortgages.
Many Democrats say the future of their Party may reside in California, in the suit worn by the current Governor, Gavin Newsom. A man with good looks does not mean a person of integrity or capable of running the Federal Government. He was the mayor of San Francisco, a city which today few visit and when they do they return with regrets. That City has fallen from grace as a tourist mecca. It’s streets are filthy, drugs are rampant, people are leaving for safer localities, businesses are subject to unchecked criminals, sidewalks have become homesteads for addicts and the homeless, and residents fear for their safety. As governor of the State the whole of California is becoming more like San Francisco, just consider LA. Newsom is not a leader that governs, but a politician that promises and cannot deliver. The elected politicians, and yes, they were elected by voters, pass legislation that favors the marginalized, as if that is a good deed, but to the detriment of the productive elements of society. And the State’s debt is massive, with spending out of control. In California the poor are becoming poorer, a component of the plan of the Rules for Radicals, while programs to help the poor are but window dressing for the elitist Democrat office holders. The producers are looking for the exit. Like Portland, Oregon where cartoons portray the City as bankrupt with closures and ‘going out of business’ signs for the whole of a once beautiful city.
Voters are lacking information, less discerning, losing interest, subjected from youth to liberal ideology paving the way for ‘wokism,’ pummeled by main stream media ideologues if they even read or watch news, and non-objective. They lack the ability to filter facts from lies and fiction. And they elect the likes of Newsom and Biden.
Legislation was passed in 2022, to be implemented by 2025, requiring CA utilities (SoCal Edison, PG&E, San Diego G&E) to establish flat-rate monthly utility bills according to income, $15 for low-income households to $85 for households reporting more that $180K, and so on, for the same service. If usage is less that forecast reductions to the monthly requirements are possible. This is wealth transference, in ‘equity’, and more marxist/socialist than democratic.
Democrats vocalize a great deal about “breaking the chains of poverty” and pass laws appealing to those they consider oppressed, racially and otherwise. But in reality what are they doing, as today in the name of the Green New Deal, or Electric Vehicles, or curbs on fossil fuel exploration, Biden hampering America’s oil independence, a focus on eliminating gas-stoves, discontinuing the sale of inexpensive light bulbs, and defunding the police, they are making the poor, poorer, increasing the percentage of poverty. Excess spending during Covid and, after that crisis passed (including all the created elements), essentially paying people not to work, has been inflationary, negatively impacting the entire economy here and worldwide. And paying to not work is a disincentive creating a large dependency class of citizens, dependent upon their parents and the government. Who benefits? Neither the parent nor the dependent benefits.
If I told you over 60 million people were in poverty in 2021, would you believe me? That compares to the 1964 figure of 36 million. It is difficult to determine the actual number, but in all likelihood it is higher, as government reporting can be confusing. However, with government supplements (safety net money paid to the poor) that number, officially, is reduced to about 26 million. The supplements are a significant cost to those that actually pay taxes. Of the 322 million total US population, about 34 million were lifted out of poverty (taken off the official government count) using tax dollars. For food stamps alone (SNAP and WIC) $187.5 billion was spent in 2021.
The politicians are the beneficiaries. They have more power and can continue to increase the size of government by forming departments, agencies and ad hoc committees, with Czars, to help the needy. By helping the needy, and increasing the numerical base of those in need, they help themselves. They want the votes and will find a way to pay for them using tax-payor money. Even Biden thinks Federal Revenues belong to the government and not to the People. But it is our money, at least money earned by the productive percentage of society. But as the productive part shrinks and the non-productive side increases, dependency increases, and a vote for the government as provider increases. Democrats, socialists, Marxists, and Communists become the victors. The elite among them retain control. The poor never really get what they were promised. All of society becomes the losers. Equity prevails. Dependency increases.
Eliminating those under 18 years of age from the poverty numbers, that leaves 50 million registered (potentially) voters receiving supplements from the government, or dependent upon government entitlements (‘safety net’). 65% of the total eligible-to-vote population (256 million) was registered in 2020, or 168.1 million. if that same percentage applies (65%), the number on welfare that are registered is estimated at 32.5 million. That pool of voters depends on the government for cash for food stamps, energy assistance, workman’s compensation, unemployment insurance, housing, social security supplements, child tax-credits, unearned income tax credits, and more, to include social security for those eligible. To a Democrat this pool is their base, those to whom they appeal for voters. They would prefer it continues to grow. And tax-payers are being asked yearly to help the poor more.
From a government report, “A strong safety net, in combination with … social investments, is needed to alleviate material deprivation, to ensure that vulnerable individuals can attain economic self-sufficiency for themselves and their children, and to pave the way for even more progress for the nation over the next 50 years.” * Yet progress is suspect.
From the Economic Policy Institute [A liberal (some say, ‘left-wing’) think tank supported by George Soros and economist Robert Reich, in a Working Economics Blog (Sept. 13, 2022)], When ‘racism’ is suggested as a bias, a barrier, to expanding social insurance programs, the Institute says “research shows… Americans consistently overestimate the share of Black people (and other minorities) supported by government programs, leading white Americans in particular to oppose many forms of social insurance.” Such BS is a constant mantra of the left. Their response claims resistance to further spending, more increases to the safety net, becomes a matter of “choosing austerity over effective poverty reduction.” What is forgotten is that non-cash programs are needed and would be most effective. Yet such programs do not fit with the objectives of the elitist power hungry liberal political cabal.
Consider this. In the 1960’s 87% of black families were two parent household. Today that number is 25%. In the 60’s 40% of blacks had their own businesses, and today that is less than 7%. Working helps, and those not working are among the poorest. In the last 35 years those considered poor yet ‘not working’ had increased from 27.4% (1985) to 33.7% in 2014 and higher today. The Civil rights Movement had an impact on the godly too. In 2020 church membership was 47%, down more than 20% from 2000. In the 40s it was over 70%. In 1960 nationwide church membership was 63.3% (having actually grown from 57% in 1950). Education levels have increased as a percentage of those graduating high school and colleges, yet poverty is increasing too. However the quality of education has declined, as standards for testing and graduation requirements have been lowered. Why is that? “Poverty, especially when deep or experienced early in life, is associated with poorer cognitive development, school readiness, academic achievement, educational attainment and future employment outcomes….”(pg. 38) * So even the government suggests education is essential, yet the liberals are constantly trying to change the landscape of education by not heralding those that excel or reward and incentivize achievement; this being done in the name of ‘equity.’
The decline in the level of knowledge, reading and writing, in education today is reflected in modifications being made to grading systems. Colleges are making it a choice for applicants to take entrance exams (ACT or SAT), thus acceptance will be on characteristics, not ability (government defined diversity). What that does for the quality of graduates and how businesses then select future employees is a concern. The same is taking place in medicine, MCAT’s are not required for medical schools. You may never know whether a future doctor is fully prepared or qualified, but he will have a degree. Make sure a physician you rely upon today is younger than you so as to not out live them.
Our systems of education are morphing into equity based outcomes. This will diminish quality and make, as Kamala desires, future stars shine less brightly. The brightest will be dimmed to that of the lowest standard.
While the goal of safety net programs is to provide citizens with a minimum standard of living until they can earn their financial independence, it is seemingly oriented primarily towards wealth transfer and not actually helping lift all boats, or equipping people with the education, self-esteem and incentives needed to achieve, be motivated, and earn their financial independence. What the government is failing to do is “to teach a man to fish.”
The government has a liberal bent even when conservatives are at the helm, due to an entrenched government service worker base, difficult to cull, and focused on maintaining their departments and budgets. That makes it difficult to change the mindset of those that actually write the Bills.
What the liberal regime has been doing historically is helping the impoverished endure being poor. Only the self-motivated have a chance, yet systematically liberals are even trying by their rhetoric and actions, the main stream media at fault as well, to constrain the self-motivated.
Beware the extent to which the pendulum swings in the direction of a majority dependent society who will always vote for their welfare, not their purpose. Why work? Why worry?
by
Thomas W. Balderston
Author and Blogger
And for more on the safety net ($1.215 trillion spent in 2022) visit FederalSafetyNet.com.
* Quote from: Poverty in the United States: 50-Year Trends and Safety Net Impacts, March 2016, by By Ajay Chaudry, Christopher Wimer, Suzanne Macartney, Lauren Frohlich, Colin Campbell, Kendall Swenson, Don Oellerich, and Susan Hauan in the Office of Human Services Policy, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
No comments:
Post a Comment