If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Atlantic)   Modern Poverty: Almost half of Public School students are now low-income ..... students from low-income families tend to end up parents of low-income families   (theatlantic.com) divider line 67
    More: Fail, income families, families tend, late-2000s recession, Texas District, poverty, families  
•       •       •

3163 clicks; posted to Main » on 18 Oct 2013 at 10:32 AM (40 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2013-10-18 10:35:51 AM
10 votes:
30 years of stagnant wages, combined with rising costs. The top 1% controlling more wealth than any time in our nation's history. An economy designed to create service workers.

Are we supposed to be surprised that people are stuck in poverty?
2013-10-18 10:36:44 AM
7 votes:
If only it was possible to not have kids you can't provide for.
2013-10-18 12:10:02 PM
3 votes:

FarkedOver: Deedeemarz: How is that not cooperation? We all contribute to society and the economy in some way. If the worker doesn't like his role in the system, he can take action to change that role and contribute in some other way. Your statement sounds as if you are implying that we should all be able to sit on our asses having bons bons delievered in some magical way instead of working for what you want...

I'm not advocating for sitting on our asses.  I'm advocating worker control of the means of production and the elimination of the true moocher class, the 1%.


That's a great system for 19th century nation states whose economies are based on workers in factories making widgets.

You really expect an IT helpdesk associate whose job is to troubleshoot software for a financial consultant at a telecom company to "control the means of production"? The production of what? And how would they control it?
2013-10-18 10:53:31 AM
3 votes:
Hey look! All the poorest states are also the states that keep voting AGAINST programs that would help them by voting FOR Republicans.

They may be poor and dumb, but they sure know how to wear pants on their heads!
2013-10-18 10:48:14 AM
3 votes:
The important thing is that we have found someone to blame.
2013-10-18 10:44:49 AM
3 votes:

cefm: It's only in America where we appear to hate poor people and kick them in the teeth at every turn that this is true.


Reciprocal altruism implies that voters will dislike giving money to the poor if, as in the United States, the poor are perceived as lazy. In contrast, Europeans overwhelmingly believe that the poor are poor because they have been unfortunate. This difference in views is part of what is sometimes referred to as "American exceptionalism." Link
2013-10-18 10:40:04 AM
3 votes:
So almost half of public school students are getting a completely free education subsidized by everyone else.  Not our fault they don't take advantage of it.

/Man, can you believe Mr. Teacher?  Making us be on time for class??  That's so stupid.
2013-10-18 10:39:31 AM
3 votes:
The more you give the more they take. Off the cliff we go.
2013-10-18 10:37:41 AM
3 votes:
www.betterthanpants.com If all you do is hope, you won't see any change
2013-10-18 12:21:18 PM
2 votes:
Hmmm... introduce the welfare state that destroys the traditional African-American family and replaces it with dependent single-mothers and an endless string of children abandoned by their fathers, who then perpetuate that lifestyle while (understandably) committing a disportionate amount of crime.  Import poverty with an open-border policy that allows millions of illiterate migrants who are only qualified to perform manual labor into the country, where they work in the black economy that doesn't contribute to the tax-base while they obtain services from the government, such as healthcare and education for the children, thereby lowering the standard of such services for everyone as more people take from the system than put into it.  Then create policies that encourage traditional middle-class jobs such as manufacturing to be transferred overseas because of tax-breaks, less regulations and lower labor costs.

Result: an expanding, dependent and increasingly sense of entitled, lower-class.  Then, sit back and act surprised that any of this surprises you.
2013-10-18 11:59:53 AM
2 votes:

cig-mkr: I blame the manufacturing jobs going overseas, was a time when a person could get a fairly good paying job with just a high school education and a little training.


While you are correct that globalization (US manufacturing workers competing with newly emerging workers escaping subsistence farming overseas) definitely had an impact on the value of labor in this country, also recognize the impact that immigration had on working class wages.

The percentage of the population that is foreign born rose from 4.7% in 1970 to 13% today http://articles.latimes.com/2012/may/11/local/la-me-foreign-born-2012 0 511.

Although there are pros and cons of immigration, don't discount the impact that this huge influx of largely low skill labor had on working class wages over the last 40 years.
2013-10-18 11:23:26 AM
2 votes:
And they grow up to vote Democrat, which means more of them will be on welfare, making more babies, more votes..... pretty cunning plan by Dems, keep the people down and dependent.
2013-10-18 11:21:55 AM
2 votes:
The article says immigrants and poor have higher birthrates, this is why you'd then expect the poor population to climb vs the middle class or wealthy population.

The implication is clear.  People without much going on in their lives will have more kids, it's one thing they can do and control.  A flat broke guy can have sex with as many women as possible and get many of them pregnant, and in that way he's 'successful' at something.   He's leaving a legacy just as much as the guy working in a professional career.

That, in my opinion, is the reason the country can't afford to turn its back on parts of its own population.  When the system locks a group of people out of the mainstream and they are left out there to do their own thing, they will.  It may not be what society wants, needs, or expects though.
2013-10-18 11:18:00 AM
2 votes:

Debeo Summa Credo: Fact 1: Stupid people tend to be poorer than smart people

Fact 2: stupid people are more likely to have stupid kids than smart people

Fact 3: stupid kids grow up to be stupid adults that, surprise surprise, tend to be poorer than smart adults.

Why is any of this in any way surprising?


The surprising thing is your facts aren't even really true.

People with 140 IQ scores (a score of 100 is average) missed payments and maxed-out their credit cards more often than their lower IQ counterparts. They went bankrupt at a rate, 14.1%, close to the rate of people with an IQ of 80, 15.2%. "Only among people slightly above-average does an increasing IQ score lead to a reduced chance of financial distress," says the study. "The survey provides no data to explain why this occurs," but Zagorsky offers these explanations for High IQ types getting into financial hot water:

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/tech/science/columnist/vergano/2007-0 8- 12-smart-not-rich_N.htm
2013-10-18 11:17:54 AM
2 votes:
I grew up with a criminal alcoholic mom, went days at a time w/out a meal, spent some time living in a broken down Oldsmobile. I went to some crappy schools, but had to be self-motivated and was always challenging myself in math/science. Somehow, I now have 1st world problems (build vs. buy outdoor pizza oven for the upcoming kitchen & pool)

I feel like I got in (generationally) before that door shut, and the stream of class climbers in the 90s has slowed to a trickle. It's very awkward being the only one in my extended family to transcend poverty, but I am thankful, and I try to be generous.
2013-10-18 11:09:23 AM
2 votes:
Fact 1: Stupid people tend to be poorer than smart people

Fact 2: stupid people are more likely to have stupid kids than smart people

Fact 3: stupid kids grow up to be stupid adults that, surprise surprise, tend to be poorer than smart adults.

Why is any of this in any way surprising?
2013-10-18 11:01:18 AM
2 votes:

uber humper: FarkedOver: uber humper: If you believe that shiat, you've bought yourself a wasted life. If you want to help society, learn some skills and pitch into the economy -- otherwise, you're a drag

Well reasoned argument.  I applaud you.

I'll pitch you some food, someday.  Be nice.


Pitching into the economy, as you have said I should do, what does that mean? That we should work harder even though our wages have flat lined.  We should work longer so we can have more take home pay to keep our heads above water.  Capitalism is bullshiat.  Cooperation is the only way we can and the only way we will succeed as a planet.  Get used to it.

i.imgur.com
2013-10-18 10:54:49 AM
2 votes:
i.qkme.me
2013-10-18 10:44:20 AM
2 votes:
All of these happenings are merely sowing the seeds for socialist revolution in America. It will happen because there will be no other choice.

"Give us a child for 8 years and it will be a Bolshevik forever."
-Lenin
2013-10-18 10:42:34 AM
2 votes:

Tom_Slick: Get rid of NCLB and maybe we can get some decent public schools again.


What? The reason we have NCLB is because the public schools weren't doing well, especially with low income students.
2013-10-18 10:41:50 AM
2 votes:
In America, that is.  Being "low income" as young parents of a young child is not unusual or unexpected.  Young people are the ones having kids (they're fertile after all) and young people are unlikely to be fully established in their careers yet - they are much more likely to have lower incomes, even if they're on a good career trajectory.  Furthermore, having a young child can frequently mean reduced work hours for one or both parents or even one parent not in the workforce at all which really craters income.

In the rest of the civilized modern industrialized wealthy countries of the world, this is just normal, and there's no reason to believe that the child will be starving, unhealthy, uneducated or deprived access to the tools needed to grow up to be successful.  The parents either, for that matter.

It's only in America where we appear to hate poor people and kick them in the teeth at every turn that this is true.  Assistance for food, rent, education, childcare is pathetic.  If you're working poor and you have a kid, you're farked.  If you're in a good career but raising a kid by yourself you're pretty farked too for that matter.
2013-10-18 10:38:56 AM
2 votes:
I blame No Child Left Behind, public schools now teach to the test, their only concerns are attendance and the test.  Private schools (the good ones not the derpy creationist Christian schools) are actually still teaching like Public schools did 30 years ago, so if parents have the means and opportunity they are pulling their kids out.

Get rid of NCLB and maybe we can get some decent public schools again.
2013-10-18 08:58:00 AM
2 votes:
I was a low income child...slowly making it up the ladder.
2013-10-18 03:53:52 PM
1 votes:

Dusk-You-n-Me: Otto_E_Rodika: Then, sit back and act surprised that any of this surprises you.

What surprises me is your focus on black families receiving welfare, as if they're the only ones who do.


He mentioned illegal immigrants. Just what we need now, amnesty
2013-10-18 02:27:41 PM
1 votes:
I think what it boils down to for a lot of Farkers is that by assigning a negative characterization to those who live in poverty (e.g. they're all drug addicts, they're all lazy, they're all abusing the system, they're all irresponsible jagwads) then we can dismiss them as getting the life they deserve, rather than having to expend any kind of energy, mental or otherwise in an effort to help them out of their poverty via hiring them, volunteering time for something like Habitat for Humanity or, God forbid, paying a couple dollars more in tax to pay for subsidized daycare, healthcare, safe schooling for children and adults.

I have a good friend who is a research scientist working on treatments and possibly cures for lung cancer.  Unfortunately, she's found that it's one of the least funded and publicized cancers.  The work to get an ongoing grant for lung cancer is fifty times harder than a grant for breast cancer, because in their minds, the public has decided "People who get lung cancer must have been smokers and so they deserve this punishment".

We're so focused on punishing those who violate our sunshiny view of life that those who truly need our help because life just dealt them the shiattiest hand possible slip through the cracks.  Personally, if some of my tax dollars go to help a young widow with three children and no family to help, who needs a place to live and a better education to get a higher paying job, then I'm willing to let the ever elusive 'welfare queen' who dares to buy an air conditioner with her check get by without a public lashing.  Why are we so concerned with the perpetually poor getting a few extra pennies when the billionaires are fleecing the entire country by the second every day?
2013-10-18 12:51:13 PM
1 votes:

Thunderpipes: Free housing, free phone, free food, free cash.... Why would anyone want to stop being poor? It is hard work.


I've long thought that we ought to try an experiment in some locale: in return for our supporting you, you have to come sit in a room for 40 hours a week. That's all you need to do, just be present. We'll treat it like a job where you get vacation and sick days and holidays, but you otherwise can't leave without getting docked on your "pay". I'll bet you'd see quite a drop in people applying for benefits.
2013-10-18 12:16:34 PM
1 votes:
We sent our daughter to public school for kindergarten and first grade. My wife took a job as a substitute teacher at the same school. The behavior and discipline problems she saw starting in third grade and continuing on up to fifth grade convinced us to home school.

Sorry, but public schools are becoming a dumping ground for dysfunctional children. The competent children get ignored while the teacher tries to get hellions to pass the standardized tests. I'm really sorry I pulled my well-behaved, fairly bright, pleasant child out of public school. But as her parent my responsibility is to provide HER with the best education I can - and that was never going to happen in a public school. Private school was a little out of our reach financially, so we went with home school. So far its working out great.
2013-10-18 12:16:26 PM
1 votes:

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: You really expect an IT helpdesk associate whose job is to troubleshoot software for a financial consultant at a telecom company to "control the means of production"? The production of what? And how would they control it?


Socialism is not just for industrial workers.  It's for all workers of all countries every where.  The product is the software.  The software, like machines, needs repairs and needs people who understand it and how to operate it.  Your lack of vision in how to incorporate office workers within a socialist system is not my problem, but your own short sightedness.
2013-10-18 12:07:19 PM
1 votes:
By the way, whoever put that statue of Lenin there is an artistic genius.

Found art? Junk art? Performance art? Who cares?

It is as lovely, brilliant, funny, smart, subversive as a Banksy painting.
2013-10-18 11:44:56 AM
1 votes:
The more excuses you make for your failure, the harder you will fail. The more power you attribute to external forces, the less you keep for yourself.

/Sell drugs, I can at least respect a dealer.
2013-10-18 11:43:59 AM
1 votes:

Headso: Debeo Summa Credo: Headso: Debeo Summa Credo: Fact 1: Stupid people tend to be poorer than smart people

Fact 2: stupid people are more likely to have stupid kids than smart people

Fact 3: stupid kids grow up to be stupid adults that, surprise surprise, tend to be poorer than smart adults.

Why is any of this in any way surprising?

The surprising thing is your facts aren't even really true.

People with 140 IQ scores (a score of 100 is average) missed payments and maxed-out their credit cards more often than their lower IQ counterparts. They went bankrupt at a rate, 14.1%, close to the rate of people with an IQ of 80, 15.2%. "Only among people slightly above-average does an increasing IQ score lead to a reduced chance of financial distress," says the study. "The survey provides no data to explain why this occurs," but Zagorsky offers these explanations for High IQ types getting into financial hot water:

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/tech/science/columnist/vergano/2007-0 8- 12-smart-not-rich_N.htm

Are you seriously trying to argue that smarter people don't tend to make more money than less intelligent people?

the study is making the argument that intelligence and wealth are not  Debeo Summa Credo: Headso: Debeo Summa Credo: Fact 1: Stupid people tend to be poorer than smart people

Fact 2: stupid people are more likely to have stupid kids than smart people

Fact 3: stupid kids grow up to be stupid adults that, surprise surprise, tend to be poorer than smart adults.

Why is any of this in any way surprising?

The surprising thing is your facts aren't even really true.

People with 140 IQ scores (a score of 100 is average) missed payments and maxed-out their credit cards more often than their lower IQ counterparts. They went bankrupt at a rate, 14.1%, close to the rate of people with an IQ of 80, 15.2%. "Only among people slightly above-average does an increasing IQ score lead to a reduced chance of financial distress," says the study. "The survey provides no dat ...


A few points:

1)  The study you cite supports the notion that higher IQ results in higher income:
The results confirmed research by other scholars that show people with higher IQ scores tend to earn higher incomes. In this study, each point increase in IQ scores was associated with $202 to $616 more income per year.
This means the average income difference between a person with an IQ score in the normal range (100) and someone in the top 2 percent of society (130) is currently between $6,000 and $18,500 a year
.

That's a significant delta in a a country in which average income was $45k in 2007 (the year the study was published).  I did say 'poorer' in my first point, so perhaps I should have said 'earn more'.  After all, that's how poverty levels are determined - not what you have but what you make.

2)  Other studies have said otherwise re wealth: http://www.cnbc.com/id/100637179

3)  Neither here nor there, but I thought IQ wasn't a relevant indicator of intelligence anyway?   At least that's what I've read on fark.
2013-10-18 11:40:12 AM
1 votes:
This seems like a meaningless statistic to me.

The poverty line is determined by what people have.  If everyone has less, the poverty line should be lowered.  Claiming there is an objective poverty line is crazy....and I can tell you from first hand experience there are people on welfare in the US who live better than working class people in other countries.

//400 sq ft. apartment
//No cable TV
//No car
//No a/c
//EU
2013-10-18 11:37:39 AM
1 votes:

Yeah_Right: Koodz: uber humper: Slaves2Darkness: uber humper: [www.betterthanpants.com image 704x272] If all you do is hope, you won't see any change

It's working great for the Blue states, but hey those Red states that refuse to give "Government Handouts" seem to be falling further and further behind. It's almost like in the 21st century we need our government to help us achieve success. That the "land of opportunity" is increasingly the "land of need an education".

I look at the map in the article and it corresponds very closely with how much aid states give to the poor. Those states that have liberal welfare policies have lowered poverty rates, high education rates, and better economies then states that don't.


I agree about the education but we need to find a better way to handle welfare.

China just dropped our credit rating because we are financing debt with more debt.  There is a tipping point on how much we can spend. The gov is currently paying 2% on the debt, once that goes up to more realistic numbers, the welfare is gonna take huge a hit. It;s not sustainable.  And the rich don't have enough money to tax.

It's a good thing welfare is the only item on the budget we could possibly be wasting money on.

I wonder if we cut defense spending to only 25% of the budget and contented ourselves with only having the most expensive military in the world instead of the galaxy how much welfare and tax cuts we could afford...

I keep hearing this argument over and over - but those that make this suggestion seem to forget one thing: how many people will be put out of work by cutting defense spending by X%...? And how about all those people who depend upon those workers getting a paycheck?

Dislike the military all you want ... but they actually employ (directly and indirectly) millions of people who produce something. And that's not even taking into account the multitude of civilian products that have been created as a result of items that were originally produced by the manufa ...


The problem with many military projects is that they provide no further benefit once the paycheck's gone out. A Hellfire missile costs around $100,000 to $150,000. Someone got paid to build it, great, but munitions by definition are single use. Predator 2 drones can hold up to 14 of these, so that's 1.4 to 2.1 million dollars that will never benefit us again once used. That same amount of money could go a long way in a public school system, or hell, even used to repair roads and bridges back home.
2013-10-18 11:36:52 AM
1 votes:

Debeo Summa Credo: Fact 1: Stupid people tend to be poorer than smart people

Fact 2: stupid people are more likely to have stupid kids than smart people

Fact 3: stupid kids grow up to be stupid adults that, surprise surprise, tend to be poorer than smart adults.

Why is any of this in any way surprising?


Because you're using a bunch of "tends to" statements to draw an absolute conclusion that sensible people reject.
2013-10-18 11:35:33 AM
1 votes:

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: meat0918: tricycleracer: meat0918: tricycleracer: It's expensive to be poor in America.

More than once I've heard the sentiment "I'm too poor to shop at Walmart, because that shiat falls apart all the time, and I cannot afford to be replacing stuff all the time"

Check out the rent-to-own tire industry.

1.  Need tires to get to work or you'll lose your job.
2.  Get rent to own tires since you can't afford an all cash deal.
3.  Pay 10x what the tires actually cost.

Rent to own TIRES?!?!!??!??!

I'm.......

goddamnit, wtf?

I think he may be confusing rent to own "tires" (which I've never heard of) with rent to own wheels, ie 22" rims. Rent to own rim stores are everywhere.


Nope, tires.
http://www.gorimco.com/
http://www.rentawheel.com/How-it-Works
2013-10-18 11:34:48 AM
1 votes:

Phinn: Capitalism is cooperation. It's the voluntary exchange of property for mutual benefit.


The worker isn't voluntarily selling his/her labor. The worker has no choice but to sell their labor or they do not eat.  That is not cooperation.
2013-10-18 11:33:19 AM
1 votes:

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: meat0918: tricycleracer: meat0918: tricycleracer: It's expensive to be poor in America.

More than once I've heard the sentiment "I'm too poor to shop at Walmart, because that shiat falls apart all the time, and I cannot afford to be replacing stuff all the time"

Check out the rent-to-own tire industry.

1.  Need tires to get to work or you'll lose your job.
2.  Get rent to own tires since you can't afford an all cash deal.
3.  Pay 10x what the tires actually cost.

Rent to own TIRES?!?!!??!??!

I'm.......

goddamnit, wtf?

I think he may be confusing rent to own "tires" (which I've never heard of) with rent to own wheels, ie 22" rims. Rent to own rim stores are everywhere.


Nope.  Plain old boring passenger car tires in regular sizes:   High prices are driving more motorists to rent tires
2013-10-18 11:29:19 AM
1 votes:

Yeah_Right: how many people will be put out of work by cutting defense spending by X%...? And how about all those people who depend upon those workers getting a paycheck?

Dislike the military all you want ... but they actually employ (directly and indirectly) millions of people who produce something.


Defense spending is capital intensive, not labor intensive. If creating jobs is the goal, there are more effective ways to spend that money.
2013-10-18 11:26:59 AM
1 votes:

Dusk-You-n-Me: Thunderpipes: And they grow up to vote Democrat, which means more of them will be on welfare, making more babies, more votes..... pretty cunning plan by Dems, keep the people down and dependent.

Smart take.


For his logic to be even remotely true, that would mean the South is a bastion of Democratic politicians....
2013-10-18 11:22:33 AM
1 votes:
uber humper: (1) If you don't have skills, a communist society won't want you either. (2) The US is still one of the easiest countries to start a business and work for yourself.

(3) If all you do is drink vodka and listen to music
, (4) instead of learning, you are a drag on wherever you are. What are people like that good for? (5) Knowledge is practically free. You're on the Internet, use it!


(1) Bullshiat.  They will teach you the skills.  Most socialist revolutions happened in areas that didn't have an industrial presence.  They had to teach peasants the skills to operate the machinery.

(2) That must be why most business fail in their first year of operation! So easy even an idiot can do it!

(3) Nothing wrong with either of those activities.

(4) I'm not advocating that we stop learning..... But you can believe that if you wish.

(5) Thank you internet for all the knowledge! Truly the internet is a capitalist success story... ohhh wait it was a government funded project by DARPA.... woops.
2013-10-18 11:18:51 AM
1 votes:

Headso: GameSprocket: The Muthaship: If only it was possible to not have kids you can't provide for.

So, since we have established the difficulty in moving up the social ladder, you are really saying that only those who are from good families should ever be able to reproduce? Maybe we can just sterilize the poor, but then we would only have one generation Wal-Mart employees. Can't have that!

Yep, in this thread poor people in America are too poor to have kids.  In the next thread he will be saying that the American poor have it better than ever and they aren't really poor. Then a thread about the war on poverty will come up and he will say it was a total failure because we have so many poor people. These guys are all over the place with their talkingpoints, don't expect a coherent answer.


Fun additional fact, the well educated tend to have less kids. Solution? Provide quality education to all.
2013-10-18 11:18:36 AM
1 votes:

patrick767: If we'd stop using mostly local funding for public schools, we'd go a long way toward solving our horribly inequitable public school system. Of course I doubt that will ever happen in most states. The suburbanites with the money have power and a vested interest in making sure their kids have the best funded public schools (if they don't send their kids to private schools). Fark those poor people in the inner city.


They have been doing that for decades in NJ. It is called an Abbott School District, they take money from all over NJ to fund their schools, not just local revenue. They receive the most money per student in the state with wealthier districts getting sometimes 5k less per student. Last I checked Camden was at 22k per student.

It hasn't helped.

The culture of baby daddies and single parents and 4 year olds hanging out on street corners at 2am is probably more to blame than revenue.
2013-10-18 11:18:24 AM
1 votes:
I blame the manufacturing jobs going overseas, was a time when a person could get a fairly good paying job with just a high school education and a little training.
2013-10-18 11:16:49 AM
1 votes:

patrick767: If we'd stop using mostly local funding for public schools, we'd go a long way toward solving our horribly inequitable public school system. Of course I doubt that will ever happen in most states. The suburbanites with the money have power and a vested interest in making sure their kids have the best funded public schools (if they don't send their kids to private schools). Fark those poor people in the inner city.


There was a PBS show a few years back on education and poverty that showed money spent in inner cities and very poor rural areas did not go as far as the same amount spent in more affluent areas. Teachers cost more to keep, books and supplies were more difficult to attain per student for the same price, administrative salaries were through the roof, the tech equipment fell into disrepair more quickly. Money is a problem, but there are culture and community issues that may have more of an impact overall on education that needs to be addressed first.
2013-10-18 11:15:40 AM
1 votes:

Headso: I thought 99.6% of poor people own a refrigerator and poor people aren't really poor so they should get some skin in the game and pay more in taxes?


Technically they don't own the refrigerator.  Poor people are more inclined to rent and a refrigerator is provided to the tenant by the landlord.  I think the proper way to say it would be 99.6% of poor people have access to a refrigerator.
2013-10-18 11:13:53 AM
1 votes:

2xcited: Hey waity a minute, did not LBJ and the Democrats say that spending on the Great Society, and declaring "War on Poverty," would eliminate this problem!  Sixteen trillion later I am still reading articles like this and listening to ads about one in eight children are hungry.  Holy Shiat and now we turned over Healthcare to these Bozo's.




It might have, except some bozos like Reagan, Bush, W Bush had pretty much dismantled all of that. Oh they also set up systems like vouchers and charter schools. Guess who can't go to those? Poor people.
2013-10-18 11:12:43 AM
1 votes:

uber humper: Slaves2Darkness: uber humper: [www.betterthanpants.com image 704x272] If all you do is hope, you won't see any change

It's working great for the Blue states, but hey those Red states that refuse to give "Government Handouts" seem to be falling further and further behind. It's almost like in the 21st century we need our government to help us achieve success. That the "land of opportunity" is increasingly the "land of need an education".

I look at the map in the article and it corresponds very closely with how much aid states give to the poor. Those states that have liberal welfare policies have lowered poverty rates, high education rates, and better economies then states that don't.


I agree about the education but we need to find a better way to handle welfare.

China just dropped our credit rating because we are financing debt with more debt.  There is a tipping point on how much we can spend. The gov is currently paying 2% on the debt, once that goes up to more realistic numbers, the welfare is gonna take huge a hit. It;s not sustainable.  And the rich don't have enough money to tax.


It's a good thing welfare is the only item on the budget we could possibly be wasting money on.

I wonder if we cut defense spending to only 25% of the budget and contented ourselves with only having the most expensive military in the world instead of the galaxy how much welfare and tax cuts we could afford...
2013-10-18 11:11:05 AM
1 votes:

Debeo Summa Credo: Fact 1: Stupid people tend to be poorer than smart people

Fact 2: stupid people are more likely to have stupid kids than smart people

Fact 3: stupid kids grow up to be stupid adults that, surprise surprise, tend to be poorer than smart adults.


Fact 4: Stupid people tend to be conservative.

Why is any of this in any way surprising?

You forgot one.  FTFY.
2013-10-18 11:05:11 AM
1 votes:
Hey waity a minute, did not LBJ and the Democrats say that spending on the Great Society, and declaring "War on Poverty," would eliminate this problem!  Sixteen trillion later I am still reading articles like this and listening to ads about one in eight children are hungry.  Holy Shiat and now we turned over Healthcare to these Bozo's.
2013-10-18 11:02:25 AM
1 votes:

hitlersbrain: We have to wait for the one thing that seems to ever solves our problems... technology. I'm not sure why it is taking so long to integrate fun computer games kids will love to play into education. I imagine there is a lot of push back from the stale educational establishment that will keep insisting that education be tedious and horrible.


The education system trains us for the tedious and horrible-ness that is working.  That is educations function. Prepare us to be good little workers.
2013-10-18 10:56:32 AM
1 votes:

GameSprocket: The Muthaship: If only it was possible to not have kids you can't provide for.

So, since we have established the difficulty in moving up the social ladder, you are really saying that only those who are from good families should ever be able to reproduce? Maybe we can just sterilize the poor, but then we would only have one generation Wal-Mart employees. Can't have that!


On the contrary.  It's how England became the first country in the history of the world, basically, to not be a gigantic cauldron of misery.

http://infoproc.blogspot.com/2011/08/demography-and-fast-evolution.h tm l
2013-10-18 10:55:36 AM
1 votes:

GameSprocket: The Muthaship: If only it was possible to not have kids you can't provide for.

So, since we have established the difficulty in moving up the social ladder, you are really saying that only those who are from good families should ever be able to reproduce? Maybe we can just sterilize the poor, but then we would only have one generation Wal-Mart employees. Can't have that!


People who make bad decisions tend to a) be poor, and b) be less responsible with birth control?
2013-10-18 10:53:44 AM
1 votes:

stuhayes2010: This was predicted when I took anthropology in 1995.  I remember thinking it was kind of ridiculous and wouldn't happen.  Well, sadly, I was wrong.


We're barreling towards our fifth consecutive decade of stagnant wages with virtually all gains in income going to the the richest echelons of the economy while costs have continued to rise. An increase in poor people is unavoidable.
2013-10-18 10:53:19 AM
1 votes:
Zero tolerance and teaching to the test, combined with other asinine policies assures that anyone who cares about their children will either send them to private school or home school them.
2013-10-18 10:52:20 AM
1 votes:

Ned Stark: DrewCurtisJr: Tom_Slick: Get rid of NCLB and maybe we can get some decent public schools again.

What? The reason we have NCLB is because the public schools weren't doing well, especially with low income students.

Its a nessecary but not sufficient condition.


You want to make the schools decent again? Bring back corporal punishment.
2013-10-18 10:51:52 AM
1 votes:

uber humper: Barry Lyndon's Annuity Cheque: Clearly the solution to this is to use education dollars on vouchers.

Vouchers are for a different problem. Where did that come from?


Thread yesterday where southern states were gutting their education budgets in dollar-for-dollar vouchers for religious schools, one-liner snark.
2013-10-18 10:51:35 AM
1 votes:

Slaves2Darkness: uber humper: [www.betterthanpants.com image 704x272] If all you do is hope, you won't see any change

It's working great for the Blue states, but hey those Red states that refuse to give "Government Handouts" seem to be falling further and further behind. It's almost like in the 21st century we need our government to help us achieve success. That the "land of opportunity" is increasingly the "land of need an education".

I look at the map in the article and it corresponds very closely with how much aid states give to the poor. Those states that have liberal welfare policies have lowered poverty rates, high education rates, and better economies then states that don't.



I agree about the education but we need to find a better way to handle welfare.

China just dropped our credit rating because we are financing debt with more debt.  There is a tipping point on how much we can spend. The gov is currently paying 2% on the debt, once that goes up to more realistic numbers, the welfare is gonna take huge a hit. It;s not sustainable.  And the rich don't have enough money to tax.
2013-10-18 10:49:42 AM
1 votes:

Headso: GameSprocket: The Muthaship: If only it was possible to not have kids you can't provide for.

So, since we have established the difficulty in moving up the social ladder, you are really saying that only those who are from good families should ever be able to reproduce? Maybe we can just sterilize the poor, but then we would only have one generation Wal-Mart employees. Can't have that!

Yep, in this thread poor people in America are too poor to have kids.  In the next thread he will be saying that the American poor have it better than ever and they aren't really poor. Then a thread about the war on poverty will come up and he will say it was a total failure because we have so many poor people. These guys are all over the place with their talkingpoints, don't expect a coherent answer.


If there was a War on Poverty why haven't their leaders been hung for treason and their minions sent to Gitmo?
2013-10-18 10:47:34 AM
1 votes:

GameSprocket: The Muthaship: If only it was possible to not have kids you can't provide for.

So, since we have established the difficulty in moving up the social ladder, you are really saying that only those who are from good families should ever be able to reproduce? Maybe we can just sterilize the poor, but then we would only have one generation Wal-Mart employees. Can't have that!


Yep, in this thread poor people in America are too poor to have kids.  In the next thread he will be saying that the American poor have it better than ever and they aren't really poor. Then a thread about the war on poverty will come up and he will say it was a total failure because we have so many poor people. These guys are all over the place with their talkingpoints, don't expect a coherent answer.
2013-10-18 10:47:04 AM
1 votes:
But rich people are doing great. So there's that.
2013-10-18 10:45:01 AM
1 votes:

DrewCurtisJr: Tom_Slick: Get rid of NCLB and maybe we can get some decent public schools again.

What? The reason we have NCLB is because the public schools weren't doing well, especially with low income students.


Is it the low incomes or the students that are the problem?
Hint: Read TFA.

Testing isn't the solution to poor.
2013-10-18 10:43:55 AM
1 votes:

uber humper: [www.betterthanpants.com image 704x272] If all you do is hope, you won't see any change


It's working great for the Blue states, but hey those Red states that refuse to give "Government Handouts" seem to be falling further and further behind. It's almost like in the 21st century we need our government to help us achieve success. That the "land of opportunity" is increasingly the "land of need an education".

I look at the map in the article and it corresponds very closely with how much aid states give to the poor. Those states that have liberal welfare policies have lowered poverty rates, high education rates, and better economies then states that don't.
2013-10-18 10:42:36 AM
1 votes:

uber humper: [www.betterthanpants.com image 704x272] If all you do is hope, you won't see any change


This process of decline began more than 50 years ago, at the end of the Eisenhower presidency.
2013-10-18 10:40:56 AM
1 votes:

BobCumbers: The more you give the more they take. Off the cliff we go.


Are you talking about cutting taxes for job creators?
2013-10-18 10:38:46 AM
1 votes:

The Muthaship: If only it was possible to not have kids you can't provide for.


hey now we can't punish poor women for having sex!  that's sexist!  why do you hate women?

/what some people on fark really believe.
2013-10-18 10:37:05 AM
1 votes:
The leading cause of poverty is...*drum roll*...POVERTY!  Who could have guessed that a system which requires a suffering underclass will tend to perpetuate that underclass?
2013-10-18 10:36:13 AM
1 votes:
Land of opportunity to do exactly what your parents did and nothing else.
 
Displayed 67 of 67 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report