Stop Donating to the Homeless
- Thread starter Padawanbater2
- Start date
heckler73
Well-Known Member
Clever...but at the same time, it is somewhat surprising the basic elements of which he spoke about regarding externalities has to be so dumbed-down, as it were, so people of influence might understand it. Perhaps that is a testament to how compartmentalized or stratified society has truly become? Is there really that large of a gap in cognizance where it has become a situation of haves & have nots with a detached layer of haves & have yachts ?
I was going to bring up a point about that in the GAI/UBI thread; the system as it stands only serves to lose ~30% of outlays to administration costs, while creating a system of perpetual destitution whose only measurable product is crime.
In essence, poverty breeds crime...Some conservatives (in the classical sense) may be titillated by such an outcome, since it feeds their ideological biases regarding human nature, giving them rationale for their perverse legislative responses.
But that's an aside. What does Weingart do which is different? Are there other agencies offering similar services?
We offer training in basic skills: Resume workshops, mock interviews, and job search techniques. Then clients are placed in specialized training in one of five vocational tracks: custodial, forklift operator, SRV-SAFE (food service), security guard and pest control, and work toward a state-issued certificate or license. Weingart also contracts with companies needing vocational employees to place trained personnel into jobs
http://www.investinla.org/
I was going to bring up a point about that in the GAI/UBI thread; the system as it stands only serves to lose ~30% of outlays to administration costs, while creating a system of perpetual destitution whose only measurable product is crime.
In essence, poverty breeds crime...Some conservatives (in the classical sense) may be titillated by such an outcome, since it feeds their ideological biases regarding human nature, giving them rationale for their perverse legislative responses.
But that's an aside. What does Weingart do which is different? Are there other agencies offering similar services?
We offer training in basic skills: Resume workshops, mock interviews, and job search techniques. Then clients are placed in specialized training in one of five vocational tracks: custodial, forklift operator, SRV-SAFE (food service), security guard and pest control, and work toward a state-issued certificate or license. Weingart also contracts with companies needing vocational employees to place trained personnel into jobs
http://www.investinla.org/
ginwilly
Well-Known Member
Funny thing is Heckler, if you watch the Kennedy/Nixon debates in '60, you can see which track our country chose. Nixon called for exactly what Weingart is doing, Kennedy made the impassioned plea that the richest country in the world can afford to feed these folk. Our war on poverty took the course of feed that man, not teach that man how to feed himself.
Not sure why you chose to bash the conservatives in your post regarding this, we have been doing it the liberal way for 50 years now and it's obviously not working. Weingart is following the conservative advice from Nixon way back when.
Our war on poverty has created over 100 government agencies yet the poverty level hasn't changed much.
You can see the poverty rates were declining before we waged war, what the expected results of that "war" would be vs the actual rates.
It would take a very headstrong idealistic person to look at the data and say we are doing it right or even well.
Inb4 someone posts something claiming they know what poverty rates would be if we had tried a different course, it's unknowable and unprovable, but there are some so entrenched in ideology that they will use anything in their power to keep the status quo (that is not working).
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
What is the source of the graph?
If it's legitimate, I'd ask what happened around 1970 to make the poverty rate stagnate? I'm sure there are a few supreme court cases that changed the entire climate, interestingly enough the increase in the rate of poverty seemingly coincides with the increase in corporate campaign contributions, albeit maybe a few years before.. Maybe that says something..
If it's legitimate, I'd ask what happened around 1970 to make the poverty rate stagnate? I'm sure there are a few supreme court cases that changed the entire climate, interestingly enough the increase in the rate of poverty seemingly coincides with the increase in corporate campaign contributions, albeit maybe a few years before.. Maybe that says something..
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
if you cut out the war on poverty programs tonight, the poverty rate would be double by tomorrow.
i'd say it's working.
ginwilly
Well-Known Member
I've seen those graphs so many times I just googled graph of US poverty and had thousands to choose from that looked just like it. Sorry man.
If you look a little closer, it was 65' when it flatlined (or stopped it's projection), that was the year we started our "war poverty".
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
What if you simultaneously implemented the UBI?
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
heckler73
Well-Known Member
Because I find their perspective on progress and methods for addressing the dynamic issues of life to be most distasteful. I would've thought that was obvious by now.
Conservative thinkers view humans as inherently imperfect, with a great potential for evil and a limited capacity to use their reasoning abilities. To maintain civilized values against the ever present tendencies of evil, laws need to be respected and vigorously enforced by the government, and respect for those in positions of authority must be maintained.
--Mintz et al. Politics, Power and the Common Good 2e, pg.107
http://conservativeforum.org/
I do appreciate your input re: Nixon, though. It gives me something to consider and research. Thanks.
ginwilly
Well-Known Member
The debates are on youtube I think if you want to watch. We had to watch in a poli-sci class in 3 parts discussing each. The odd yet not surprising thing is if you look at polls who won the debate, the tv viewers rated it basically a draw, the radio listeners gave it to Nixon in a landslide.
Not saying we Americans are shallow people, but it proves how much looks have an effect on elections.
heckler73
Well-Known Member
Perhaps the people who listened on radio were mostly Luddites? Do you think the audience understood everything being discussed, as well? The question put forth to Nixon (debate 1) about which of his policies were adopted by Eisenhower was a stumbler. However, people listening--I can imagine--would not comprehend the visible discomfort Nixon was under.
What happened after the two candidates took the stage is a familiar tale. Nixon, pale and underweight from a recent hospitalization, appeared sickly and sweaty, while Kennedy appeared calm and confident. As the story goes, those who listened to the debate on the radio thought Nixon had won. But those listeners were in the minority. By 1960, 88% of American households had televisions — up from just 11% the decade before.
http://content.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2021078,00.html
I suspect there is some accidental bias in the narrative you subscribe to.
Nixon's summary: Russia, growth, Kennedy believes in Government as economic tool against Reds and that's not as good as Dick's secret plan, Obamacare bad except for aged 65+.
Kennedy's closing: Spooked by Russians, Republicans don't like Social Security, fluffy platitudes.
brilliant!
bravo!
standing ovation!
make no mistake: investors are merely high level gamblers..they won't invest in something they perceive to have no control in:
humankind