, , , , ,


Re-examine the welfare solution for poverty. The very first step is to re-institute the real definition of “poverty.” It is “no home-no heat- no food.” That’s poverty.

The Progressives have corrupted the meaning for several reasons, not the least of which is to maximize the vote from recipients of various bogus programs…such as food stamps.

Let’s take a look at three groups included in the poverty statistics.

The working poor are aiding by the Earned Income Tax Credits, of Republican provenance.

There is the bogus category created by the progressives, the “having-not-quite-as-much” poor… many of whom have more accoutrements than the folks supporting them:

“When you walk into the bathroom of the average American home you are a witness to history. It has taken centuries for the toilet and tub to end up in the same room. Those two conveniences, plus shower, washbowl, and running water are a grander collection of comfort and ease than even kings knew before the 20th century.” (Readers Digest) Could any competent person claim that pre-twentieth-century kings be called impoverished? Of course not. So, an American today matches the “comfort and ease” that kings once wished for! That includes every American who, happily falls outside of the “no home-no heat-no food” definition.

Since 89% of the “poor” own a microwave, they have a home.

And the “helpless poor.” Not any amount of monetary aid given will help these poor souls. Case in point: Jeffrey Hillman, the homeless man given new shoes by NYPD Officer Larry DePrimo. Hillman is neither homeless, nor is he scamming the system. “According to the Department of Homeless Services, Hillman has an apartment, paid for through a combination of Section 8 vouchers, Social Security disability and veterans benefits. The housing comes with a wide array of services, including drug, alcohol and mental health treatment.”

One should ask why the Progressives, e.g., Obama has made it his effort to increase those taking from the government?

“…the dramatically larger increase also suggests that part
of the program’s growth is due to conscious policy choices by this administration to ease eligibility rules and expand caseloads…income limits for eligibility have risen twice as fast as inflation since 2007
and are now roughly 10 percent higher than they were when Obama took office.” Casey Mulligan, “The Sharp Increase in the Food Stamps Program,” Economix,

Absorb the information above? Good…here’s the math that
goes with it…and would end the fiscal crisis:

“Yet this year the federal government will spend more than $668 billion on at least 126 different programs to fight poverty. And that does not even begin to count welfare spending by state and local governments, which adds $284 billion to that figure. In total, the United States spends nearly $1 trillion every year to fight poverty. That amounts to $20,610 for every poor person in America, or $61,830 per poor family of three. (Policy Analysis by Cato Institute)

So…90% of the spending is not spent on “poverty.”
The fiscal problem is the Progressive ideology.