timschochet said:
Arby the numbers you posted are deeply disturbing. There are different ways to interpret them, IMO:
1. The War on Poverty has made things worse, and therefore we should reconsider and/or reject big government type solutions to these problems.
2. The War on Poverty, despite sounding big, was never properly funded since its inception, the monies were spent unwisely, and Republicans have consistently cut it down over the years rendering it ineffective. Therefore we need to renew our efforts.
3. This has nothing to do with the War on Poverty. Societal factors are at play here which are just too big to overcome no matter what we do.
Which is closest to the truth? I'm asking because honestly I'm not sure.
IMO, all of the above.
1. The "war on poverty" has, in some ways, worsened the situation. It's been said here before, but government assistance programs that are means-tested with significant cutoff points tend to create reverse incentives to work. That is, if a person becomes worse off economically by increasing his income by $500, then there is an incentive to avoid that increase.
2. I'm not really sure what "properly funded" means. "Spent unwisely" is a given.
3. There are definitely societal factors at play, especially if we're defining "societal factors" as "anything other than the war on poverty". That would then include the "war on drugs", which is almost certainly the single biggest factor.