The War On Poverty: Lost

[CrusaderFrank]

It was never a war to End poverty, it was a war against the black family and the lower class. It was a war to create a permanent, government dependent underclass and it worked well!

Have to give the Dems create for their success in creating inter-generational government dependents

 

[Camp]

Let me ask this, see if anyone knows...

...when they count the number of Americans below the poverty line, do they factor in the monetary value of the assistance they receive?

No.

The term 'poverty' is itself part of the scam that you support.



7. "For most Americans, the word “poverty” means significant material deprivation, an inability to provide a family with adequate nutritious food, reasonable shelter and clothing. But only a small portion of the more than 40 million people labelled as poor by Census fit that description.

a. The media frequently associate the idea of poverty with being homeless. But less than two percent of the poor are homeless. Only one in ten live in mobile homes. The typical house or apartment of the poor is in good repair and uncrowded; it is actually larger than the average dwelling of non-poor French, Germans or English.

b. The intake of protein, vitamins and minerals by poor children is virtually identical with upper middle class kids.... the overwhelming majority of poor people report they were not hungry even for a single day during the prior year."
The War on Poverty Has Been a Colossal Flop

The scam is your attempting to redefine the meaning of poverty by disregarding what it meant when the term of the " War on Poverty" was originally used. Your above post confirms that the war was won.

 

[NYcarbineer]

So PoliticalChic defines poverty as being homeless, without enough food, for starters.

Therefore, the War on Poverty, which provides housing assistance that can make a poor person not homeless, and food stamps, which can make a person not hungry,

is winning, not losing.

 

[Zander]

Just read that California has 23.4% poverty. It's another Jerry Brown MIRACLE!!

Census Bureau California still has highest U.S. poverty rate The Sacramento Bee

 

[Claudette]

What will it take for folks to realize that, just like the title, big government is a loser?

If you think the war is lost then you must believe that the war must end.

Therefore you must believe that Medicaid, food stamps, housing assistance, EIC, fuel and energy assistance, educational assistance, and all other programs that effectively represent the war on poverty should be ceased.

After that is done, how long before we win the war on poverty, using your plan of no programs for the poor?

Yes.

Yes

It's been "fought" for 50 years and hasn't been defeated. Perhaps a new strategy should be put in place and I have it. If you bleeding hearts think one person deserves what you've earned because you've identified a need, write a check, taken someone grocery shopping, pay their power bill, fund the tuition for their school, and pay the premiums for their healthcare just do it from YOUR own pockets not by reaching into mine.

Yup. If all you bleeding hearts want to take care of the poor them by all means Whip out your checkbooks, wallets and debit cards. YOU take care of them.

Of course you know they will take every dime you want to give them and then some.

Let the poor take care of themselves and stop expecting the taxpayers to bankroll their lives for em.

 

[Conservative65]

Yup. If all you bleeding hearts want to take care of the poor them by all means Whip out your checkbooks, wallets and debit cards. YOU take care of them.

Of course you know they will take every dime you want to give them and then some.

Let the poor take care of themselves and stop expecting the taxpayers to bankroll their lives for em.

Claudette, you and I both know they want. They'll claim they have compassion and don't mind paying taxes to fund such programs. My question to them is if they are as compassionate as they claim, why do they need someone telling them to prove it. Wouldn't they simply do it?

 

[NYcarbineer]

What's your plan to replace Medicaid?

I included that. Since Medicaid is healthcare coverage, I made the suggestion that you pay the premiums for those folks so they can have their own policy. That means it would be replaced by one person that thinks another person deserves his/her money. By providing them with coverage, you prove what you SAY you believe.

Fine, then you can double the share of taxes you pay to cover the cost of the military that I don't support.

When specific words related to the military in Article I, Section 8 are removed you will have an argument. When words like healthcare, food stamps, etc. are added to it, you'll have a point. Until then, I have the Constitution to back up my support for taxes for the military and you simply run your damn mouth about what you want it to say.

There is nothing in the Constitution that mandates a specific level of spending for the military, fucktard.

I'm not surprised you don't know that.

I never said there was. What I did say is the military is a delegated power and what you support isn't. I'm not surprised some retarded bleeding heart didn't know that.

If it wasn't it would have been challenged in court and ruled unconstitutional. Do you have any idea how our government works?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Let me ask this, see if anyone knows...

...when they count the number of Americans below the poverty line, do they factor in the monetary value of the assistance they receive?

So no one knows the answer to this?

If a person is under the poverty line based on his own means, but help from the government raises him above the poverty line,

that counts as a victory in the war on poverty, not a defeat.

 

[Conservative65]

I included that. Since Medicaid is healthcare coverage, I made the suggestion that you pay the premiums for those folks so they can have their own policy. That means it would be replaced by one person that thinks another person deserves his/her money. By providing them with coverage, you prove what you SAY you believe.

Fine, then you can double the share of taxes you pay to cover the cost of the military that I don't support.

When specific words related to the military in Article I, Section 8 are removed you will have an argument. When words like healthcare, food stamps, etc. are added to it, you'll have a point. Until then, I have the Constitution to back up my support for taxes for the military and you simply run your damn mouth about what you want it to say.

There is nothing in the Constitution that mandates a specific level of spending for the military, fucktard.

I'm not surprised you don't know that.

I never said there was. What I did say is the military is a delegated power and what you support isn't. I'm not surprised some retarded bleeding heart didn't know that.

If it wasn't it would have been challenged in court and ruled unconstitutional. Do you have any idea how our government works?

I also have an idea about what is and what isn't in the Constitution. You do not. You simply think one person owes another person something in life. Consider yourself lucky you don't rely on someone like me to help you. I'd look, laugh, walk right over you, and watch to do without for one reason and one reason only. You think it's owed.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Fine, then you can double the share of taxes you pay to cover the cost of the military that I don't support.

When specific words related to the military in Article I, Section 8 are removed you will have an argument. When words like healthcare, food stamps, etc. are added to it, you'll have a point. Until then, I have the Constitution to back up my support for taxes for the military and you simply run your damn mouth about what you want it to say.

There is nothing in the Constitution that mandates a specific level of spending for the military, fucktard.

I'm not surprised you don't know that.

I never said there was. What I did say is the military is a delegated power and what you support isn't. I'm not surprised some retarded bleeding heart didn't know that.

If it wasn't it would have been challenged in court and ruled unconstitutional. Do you have any idea how our government works?

I also have an idea about what is and what isn't in the Constitution. You do not. You simply think one person owes another person something in life. Consider yourself lucky you don't rely on someone like me to help you. I'd look, laugh, walk right over you, and watch to do without for one reason and one reason only. You think it's owed.

The People decide. The People have decided. When you get enough People to support your extremist views, then you can decide.

THAT is how the government works.

 

[Camp]

Fine, then you can double the share of taxes you pay to cover the cost of the military that I don't support.

When specific words related to the military in Article I, Section 8 are removed you will have an argument. When words like healthcare, food stamps, etc. are added to it, you'll have a point. Until then, I have the Constitution to back up my support for taxes for the military and you simply run your damn mouth about what you want it to say.

There is nothing in the Constitution that mandates a specific level of spending for the military, fucktard.

I'm not surprised you don't know that.

I never said there was. What I did say is the military is a delegated power and what you support isn't. I'm not surprised some retarded bleeding heart didn't know that.

If it wasn't it would have been challenged in court and ruled unconstitutional. Do you have any idea how our government works?

I also have an idea about what is and what isn't in the Constitution. You do not. You simply think one person owes another person something in life. Consider yourself lucky you don't rely on someone like me to help you. I'd look, laugh, walk right over you, and watch to do without for one reason and one reason only. You think it's owed.

The topic of this thread was made because the War on Poverty is having it's 50 year anniversary. That means that for a half a century the American people have supported it. Republicans and Democrats alike. And BTW, you don't decide what is constitutional and what is not. If you believe in the constitution you would understand that SCOTUS decides that. SCOTUS has routinely ruled the programs that are used to fight poverty are constitutional. 5O years worth of SCOTUS decisions have disagreed with you and your opinions.

 

[Conservative65]

When specific words related to the military in Article I, Section 8 are removed you will have an argument. When words like healthcare, food stamps, etc. are added to it, you'll have a point. Until then, I have the Constitution to back up my support for taxes for the military and you simply run your damn mouth about what you want it to say.

There is nothing in the Constitution that mandates a specific level of spending for the military, fucktard.

I'm not surprised you don't know that.

I never said there was. What I did say is the military is a delegated power and what you support isn't. I'm not surprised some retarded bleeding heart didn't know that.

If it wasn't it would have been challenged in court and ruled unconstitutional. Do you have any idea how our government works?

I also have an idea about what is and what isn't in the Constitution. You do not. You simply think one person owes another person something in life. Consider yourself lucky you don't rely on someone like me to help you. I'd look, laugh, walk right over you, and watch to do without for one reason and one reason only. You think it's owed.

The topic of this thread was made because the War on Poverty is having it's 50 year anniversary. That means that for a half a century the American people have supported it. Republicans and Democrats alike. And BTW, you don't decide what is constitutional and what is not. If you believe in the constitution you would understand that SCOTUS decides that. SCOTUS has routinely ruled the programs that are used to fight poverty are constitutional. 5O years worth of SCOTUS decisions have disagreed with you and your opinions.

Like I said, be lucky your survival doesn't rely on my help. You sound like one that has relied on another person's hard work.

I guess this country will always have two types of people. Those that EARN a living and those that vote for one.

 

[Camp]

There is nothing in the Constitution that mandates a specific level of spending for the military, fucktard.

I'm not surprised you don't know that.

I never said there was. What I did say is the military is a delegated power and what you support isn't. I'm not surprised some retarded bleeding heart didn't know that.

If it wasn't it would have been challenged in court and ruled unconstitutional. Do you have any idea how our government works?

I also have an idea about what is and what isn't in the Constitution. You do not. You simply think one person owes another person something in life. Consider yourself lucky you don't rely on someone like me to help you. I'd look, laugh, walk right over you, and watch to do without for one reason and one reason only. You think it's owed.

The topic of this thread was made because the War on Poverty is having it's 50 year anniversary. That means that for a half a century the American people have supported it. Republicans and Democrats alike. And BTW, you don't decide what is constitutional and what is not. If you believe in the constitution you would understand that SCOTUS decides that. SCOTUS has routinely ruled the programs that are used to fight poverty are constitutional. 5O years worth of SCOTUS decisions have disagreed with you and your opinions.

Like I said, be lucky your survival doesn't rely on my help. You sound like one that has relied on another person's hard work.

I guess this country will always have two types of people. Those that EARN a living and those that vote for one.

The American people have made the teachings of Christianity, and specifically the the teachings of Jesus in relationship to the poor as a cultural doctrine. It is no longer just a religious attitude and belief. It has transformed to a non religious doctrine practiced by the vast majority of Americans no matter what religious sect they belong to. Your politics and opinions put you outside of American culture. Talking points to disparage American culture are kind of silly and show a rejection of the culture adapted by generations of Americans.

 

[Conservative65]

I never said there was. What I did say is the military is a delegated power and what you support isn't. I'm not surprised some retarded bleeding heart didn't know that.

If it wasn't it would have been challenged in court and ruled unconstitutional. Do you have any idea how our government works?

I also have an idea about what is and what isn't in the Constitution. You do not. You simply think one person owes another person something in life. Consider yourself lucky you don't rely on someone like me to help you. I'd look, laugh, walk right over you, and watch to do without for one reason and one reason only. You think it's owed.

The topic of this thread was made because the War on Poverty is having it's 50 year anniversary. That means that for a half a century the American people have supported it. Republicans and Democrats alike. And BTW, you don't decide what is constitutional and what is not. If you believe in the constitution you would understand that SCOTUS decides that. SCOTUS has routinely ruled the programs that are used to fight poverty are constitutional. 5O years worth of SCOTUS decisions have disagreed with you and your opinions.

Like I said, be lucky your survival doesn't rely on my help. You sound like one that has relied on another person's hard work.

I guess this country will always have two types of people. Those that EARN a living and those that vote for one.

The American people have made the teachings of Christianity, and specifically the the teachings of Jesus in relationship to the poor as a cultural doctrine. It is no longer just a religious attitude and belief. It has transformed to a non religious doctrine practiced by the vast majority of Americans no matter what religious sect they belong to. Your politics and opinions put you outside of American culture. Talking points to disparage American culture are kind of silly and show a rejection of the culture adapted by generations of Americans.

None of Jesus' teachings involves having the government mandate anything related to social programs. My teachings are in line with those of Jesus. He taught to help because you wanted to not because the government told you to. Since you believe mandates are OK, you do not follow the teachings of Jesus and, therefore, are outside theh culture of this country. When you can show me any evidence where Jesus had the government mandate for social welfare programs, do so.

 

[PoliticalChic]

When specific words related to the military in Article I, Section 8 are removed you will have an argument. When words like healthcare, food stamps, etc. are added to it, you'll have a point. Until then, I have the Constitution to back up my support for taxes for the military and you simply run your damn mouth about what you want it to say.

There is nothing in the Constitution that mandates a specific level of spending for the military, fucktard.

I'm not surprised you don't know that.

I never said there was. What I did say is the military is a delegated power and what you support isn't. I'm not surprised some retarded bleeding heart didn't know that.

If it wasn't it would have been challenged in court and ruled unconstitutional. Do you have any idea how our government works?

I also have an idea about what is and what isn't in the Constitution. You do not. You simply think one person owes another person something in life. Consider yourself lucky you don't rely on someone like me to help you. I'd look, laugh, walk right over you, and watch to do without for one reason and one reason only. You think it's owed.

The People decide. The People have decided. When you get enough People to support your extremist views, then you can decide.

THAT is how the government works.

This outlook is exactly what one would expect of you.


" Princeton philosopher Richard Rorty noted the change in authorship of morality: “The West has cobbled together, in the course of the last two hundred years, a specifically secularist moral tradition — one that regards the free consensus of the citizens of a democratic society, rather then the Divine Will, as the source of moral imperatives.” Last Words from Richard Rorty The Progressive

While Rorty considered this a great advance, consider how this fits the actions of Nazi Germany, in tune with its free consensus.

 

[Camp]

Somehow I knew the Nazi's would show up.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Somehow I knew the Nazi's would show up.

Well, in that case, let's certainly put on the very short list of things you know.

That brings the list up to....what...three? four?

 

[Camp]

Somehow I knew the Nazi's would show up.

Well, in that case, let's certainly put on the very short list of things you know.

That brings the list up to....what...three? four?

You brought up Nazi's in a thread about the War on Poverty. I figured you would have put the blame squarely where it belongs. FDR started all that help the poor stuff.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Somehow I knew the Nazi's would show up.

Well, in that case, let's certainly put on the very short list of things you know.

That brings the list up to....what...three? four?

You brought up Nazi's in a thread about the War on Poverty. I figured you would have put the blame squarely where it belongs. FDR started all that help the poor stuff.

No, you moron...this is what I brought up: "...secularist moral tradition — one that regards the free consensus of the citizens of a democratic society, rather then the Divine Will, as the source of moral imperatives."

It refers to what guides the consensus.

 

[Camp]

Somehow I knew the Nazi's would show up.

Well, in that case, let's certainly put on the very short list of things you know.

That brings the list up to....what...three? four?

You brought up Nazi's in a thread about the War on Poverty. I figured you would have put the blame squarely where it belongs. FDR started all that help the poor stuff.

No, you moron...this is what I brought up: "...secularist moral tradition — one that regards the free consensus of the citizens of a democratic society, rather then the Divine Will, as the source of moral imperatives."

It refers to what guides the consensus.

But you couldn't help but reference it to Nazi's which is not a good example of a democratic society.