|
|
|
When I was coming of age in the 1960s, the Johnson Administration launched what was called "the War on Poverty." As part of its Great Society initiative, the "War" established many governmental programs such as Medicaid and Medicare, food stamps and aid to education. And, according to one statistic, poverty in the United States declined from 22 percent to 12 percent from 1963-1970 -- the greatest positive change ever recorded in such a short period of time. However, it seems that the trend has been going in the other direction, especially recently, according to Media Freedom Int'l.:
"More than 15 million Americans are unemployed, homelessness has increased by 50 percent in some cities, and 38 million people are receiving food stamps, more than at any time in the program's almost 50-year history. The rise in poverty rates from 2009 show the biggest year-to-year increase in recorded history. An additional 5.7 million people were officially poor in 2009. That would bring the total number of people with incomes below the federal poverty threshold to more than 45 million. The poverty rate will hit 15 percent -- up from 13.2 percent in 2008.
I attended a rally on Wednesday that began at City Hall Park and ended near Wall Street, in which I would estimate over 1,000 people participated, including high school students, college activists, teacher union members and those of other unions. At the rally, a number of speakers expressed their frustration with the budget cuts proposed both by the Bloomberg and Cuomo Administrations. Speakers included Kevin Harrington of the Transit Workers Union, Charles Barron and Robert Jackson of the City Council, and education and human rights supporters, as well as homeless people.
|
|
|
|
In the nearly two years that I have been covering rallies on educational issues, this was one of the largest and most broadly represented by black, Latino, white, union, parent, teacher and student groups. Now, over 45 years after the "War on Poverty" was initiated by a President raised in the political philosophy of the New Deal, we are faced with a "For the Few Deal" -- what I would call a full-fledged "War on the Poor." Certainly, the budget cuts that are being targeted right now on the city, state and national levels are aimed at reducing and dismantling programs that have a disproportionate impact on those who can least afford to lose them.
There were many examples of the costs of this "War" that were cited by the speakers, such as Harrington, who described the Wall Street financiers as "Barbarians at the Gates" and urged the crowd to demand that "the rich pay for their crisis." And Geoff Kurtz, the head of the college teachers' union Professional Staff Congress (PSC) at Borough of Manhattan Community College exhorted the rally members to "stand together... We, the people, are under attack... since the wealthy are not acting responsibly by undermining the 'public good.'"
This brought to mind the preamble to the U.S. Constitution, which states:
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
I believe that insuring "domestic tranquility" and promoting "the general welfare" of our society did not mean destroying them. That seems to be the objective of the governors of a number of states including Wisconsin, Ohio, Michigan, New Jersey and New York who impose "fiscal austerity" on the poor and ignore the need for the social justice of "shared sacrifice" for those who can most afford to make it.
With such "class warfare" chants as "Tax the Rich," school-aged activists, middle-aged unionists and semi-retired teachers such as I marched, accompanied by a motor cycle escort of New York's finest toward Wall Street. And as we marched, I wondered at how effective such demonstrations can be. There have been a number I've attended that addressed the issues of charter school incursions into district schools, budget cuts for educational programs, increases in class size, the demand to remove Chancellor Black, the need for greater support for "special needs" students and a host of other issues. These seem to me to be imperative issues needing to be addressed if, as Mayor Bloomberg has often declared in the past, the NYC schools have experienced a "positive transformation." In my opinion, the Bloomberg Administration has been conducting its own "war on the poor" in the guise of "educational reform."
Yet how long can a "war on the poor" be waged before that war is expanded to include the working class, the middle class and, finally, all but those who have led this war against establishing an economically just society? I recently talked with an acquaintance who works in the financial industry on Wall Street. I presented many of the arguments I often give on my blogs for a need to realize that our present economic system is geared into driving this planet into oblivion, at least for the human race. I was surprised that he agreed with all my premises but explained that the people he deals with are as addicted to this form of economic banditry as are addicts to drugs or liquor. How many rallies, demonstrations, petitions and conferences -- many of which are no longer reported in the local media, as if they never happened -- is it going to take before the political establishment declares a cease fire in this war? Another 1960's national demonstration? Another Egypt? Another Libya?
Michelle Rhee: Why StudentsFirst Supports Teachers' Right to Collective Bargaining
Brock Cohen: School Budget Cuts No Excuse For Mediocrity
~F.A. Hayek
When voting for Governor, President and State Offices in 2012, Indiana and National voters
need to add this to the list of why these people cannot be considered "moderate" in any language.
Mike Pence plans to run for Governor and Mitch Daniels is making his way as a "moderate"
to run for President. A Tea Party guy is planning to run against Senate Republican Dick Lugar, and
Joe Donnelly, a Democrat, is throwing his hat into that ring.
I know that this line is supposed to be our call to action:
"Yet how long can a "war on the poor" be waged before that war is expanded to include the working class, the middle class and, finally, all but those who have led this war against establishing an economically just society? I recently talked with an acquaintance who works in the financial industry on Wall Street."
But if we cannot muster any outrage when we see what is happening to those less privileged than we are, then we really deserve what we (don't) get when it's our turn in the barrel.
preach politics. Christianity is supposed to teach about loving God, morals,
and loving your neighbor, which precludes endorsing capitalism on steroids.
In a perfect world Capitalism would work if people were perfect. We do not
live in a perfect world with perfect people, so Capitalism must have rules or
the imperfect people will trash it. Same goes for any form of government or
non-government, with imperfect people you must have rules and regulations.
I don't expect to see perfection very soon.
The idea that poor people don't have incentive to work is slightly correct--once you are employed, your government help ends--yet your conditions and the place you live don't change with a job. But also, drug dealers, bootleggers, thieves, and other "black market" entrepreneurs are generally poor--and these people have aspriations to live in mansions, drive fancy cars--and supplement their government help with these illegal activities--so these people are working, but in a destructive black market. '
'If the incentives we such, that welfare was structured to give people incentives for positive actions, then it would decrease dependency on the state (tax-payer) and reduce poverty. Simply, structure incentives to be progressively---such that finding a job, AND going to school would give you a larger "subsidy"--if you ensured your child went to school AND received good grades--you would have a slightly larger incentives--these incentives can be either in the form of a subsidy, or a tax break/credit for those working.
Naomi Kline sums up things nicely in this book. I believe some in control have enacted this Shock Doctrine policy where they have created this fake crisis. Notice when the republicans went in back in January, there was no mention of breaking up unions, etc. Now there is this huge crisis, a crisis they have manufactured to distract the public while they introduce back-door legislation that goes against the public's best interests. Reactions were quick in Wisconsin, but other places seemed to go into shock. That is when the republicans struck. They have had this planned out for years. I have no doubt in this. No matter how much we disagree with their version of events, these are some smart people who work very hard at convincing us to vote against our very best interests. I think it is up there with treason to sell your country down the river to make a buck. However, the poor and the middle class must start working together or face the brunt of the republican machete for the coming years.
With a little critical thinking the actions of these elected officials could have been foretold, but no critical thought seems to have been involved prior to voting.
Sadly it appears that the public looks to their elected officials from their chosen party for the facts, unquestionably believing most everything that is said. In general, politicians—no matter the party—have a tendency to misuse and manipulate the facts and figures, playing on the hopes and fears of the people, to advance their self-serving agenda. As a result people are not only misinformed, they are manipulated!
Obviously people in society can’t rely on others to provide understanding they need to be self-sufficient in this regard! Hence the need for an educational system that will develop in people, joy in learning, the ability to think critically and to be far more discerning in consuming information—as well as in choosing their public servants—could not be clearer. A society of the people, for the people and by the people necessitates a discerning public. Unfortunately the current system is not so designed.
So what is the likelihood that politicians and their anointed experts will actually envision and enact a system of education that would prepare people to critically assess information provided and claims made by public officials?
http://www.forprogressnotgrowth.com/2011/03/31/democracys-viability-depends-on-education/
Here is an example that my friend was relaying just yesterday:
Her girl friend I will call Tammy divorced her husband. He moved to another town and does not work, why, I don't know. She moved into assisted housing and worked. She was partially laid off so received partial unemployment. She reported her income not her gross income. This was a mistake and when caught, Tammy was fined the extra payments times 5 and disallowed from drawing subsequent unemployment. Now her income is below the level for this particular housing project and she must now move out with her 2 kids.
What is the point of charging her 5 times? Now we have a homeless family, two traumatized children and a woman who is lost, crying and confused. Does that make you feel good as a citizen of the United States? Do you feel you accomplished something? Do you think this woman is a better woman for our lesson?
If she were a zygote many people would be out protesting to protect her and her offspring, but she is a living breathing person. Where is the compassion and road for her to follow so that she can take care of her family.
If properly instructed/motivated, they will look to earn on their own.
Additionally, those on a constant "hand out" were probably put there due to poor economic situations. I'm not saying everyone can be saved either.
people to ignore them. He was referring to the fact that health and circumstances of birth will
always play a part in this. He always, always said you are to care for the poor.
Also your statement "the more one is given, the more one expects to be given" is just
another platitude to soothe the soul of people who are selfish.
What it looks like is they will be happy only when we work 16 hours a day, 7days a week for just enough to keep from starving. This will get rid of a lot of us pesky old people also.
YES! We need to go back to the 60's! We need a national movement!