by Jack Lee
Since 1966 through 2008 the federal government has spent 15 trillion dollars on poverty programs. Local governments have spent another 2 trillion. The federal government is currently spending 1 trillion per year on poverty programs. It’s only fair to point out that the spending has been cyclical depending on the nation’s economy, that means more spending during recessionary periods. And I’ll even go so far as to say some of the spending has actually been worthwhile. However, to judge success you have to look at the big picture and the net effect on poverty is: (drum roll please) We have more poverty!
Attention President Obama….This is what comes from shifting the wealth. You take 17 trillion out of the economy and piss most of it away – what good could come from that? Just imagine if that 17 trillion was returned to the taxpayers? Would receiving a rebate check for a $100,000 help you fight poverty?
The Democrats answer to the failed spending is to spend more, but then this is nothing new, is it? Nah, the democrats answer to everything is to spend more. Despite the enormous dollars poured into public education and the disappointing results, Democrats want more spending, even when it’s been proven by private schools you can get better results with less money when you deviate from the standard government model.
When it comes to healthcare, the Obama administration wants us to increase our spending through a one size fits all healthcare system, cost estimates for this enormous program have more than doubled in the last 12 months and more money may be required. It promises to be another case of paying more and getting less, but everyone will be included.
Rarely do we find good examples where the Democrats want to attack waste, fraud and abuse by do nothing programs, especially poverty programs. This is a little off track bu take for instance trial lawyers and class action lawsuits. They have driven up the cost of doing business in America and reduced our chances for success. This hurts everyone and some drug and medical device companies that did nothing wrong were put out of business on minimal trial evidence because lawyers ruined their reputations and not once have our Democrat legislators produced any reform to fix this injustice.
Far too many times we find examples costly cronyism (protectionism) by Dems and their favorite donors. Almost no calls for reform have come forward from them. Democrats just want more the money and more power. But, to be painfully honest, sometimes Republicans have been guilty of the same thing too, they are far from perfect, but they are still light years ahead of the Dems.
When discussing the Democratic Party or adherents thereto, you are using proper nouns, and proper nouns in English are capitalized.
A person would think that you are not adherent of democracy … and not only on this point, neither.
Earlier today on Fox was the CEO of Solar3D explaining how and why his company is fiscally solvent and growing. They lease not buy their facilities, hire experts and only the necessary staff.
In the back ground was a picture of Solyndra with a For Sale sign in front of the building WE bought.
Proof capitalism can and will work if given a chance if not forced to compete with government subsidized opponents.
Solar3D – Breakthrough 3-Dimensional Solar Cell Technology solar3d.com
Libby, that’s all you got from what I had to say? That’s it, just a capitalization problem? You had no comment about government spending on wasteful, feel-good projects, that do little or nothing except buy votes. Well, guess that explains (in part) why we’re in trouble, voters are not paying attention or they are watching the wrong things.
Great article Jack!!! Thank you for helping to continually spread common sense 🙂
Thanks John I appreciate the nice comment.
“Libby, that’s all you got from what I had to say?”
There is, alas, nothing of substance to quibble. You crab, as you repeatedly do, about funding a decent quality of life for the poor … in spirit, or otherwise.
Tough noogies.
There are always the Caymans … if you have the bucks. By all means, take yourself off.
But you won’t do that. You’d lose your Medicare. So, what’s your quibble … again?