Government Roots of Poverty in the US
Politicians Cause Poverty And Debt
Democrat politicians want us to be poor and in debt. Republican politicians don't much care one way or the other. Neither is on the side of the little guy, and when they work together, debt and poverty increase.
What does the government encourage, and what discourage? Debt is encouraged. What is most peoples' biggest tax deduction? The mortgage. We are encouraged to take on more and bigger debt, in order to qualify for a tax break. We wouldn't need that tax break if taxes weren't so damned high in the first place.
What is discouraged and punished? Savings and investments that pay returns. Do your taxes this year? Have any investments? Pay a big tax on any capital gains, don't you? Pay a big tax on dividends too. Politicians are punishing you for trying to stay out of poverty.
What possible value can it be to the government to constantly be punishing those people who look out for the future, plan ahead, save and invest their money so that they can have a more comfortable retirement, and at the same time other people can have jobs created from the invested money? What possible reason can they have?
Sadly, that is too easy to answer. Who is easily controlled? Is it the strong, rich, educated and free man or woman? Or is it the weak, the poor, the uneducated? Clearly, those who want power over their fellow man prefer that the majority be weak and poor, constantly needing 'help' from their betters. It simply is not to the politician's advantage to have the great majority of the people rich, with savings in the bank, and well educated. Politicians are much better off if only their own kind have these advantages.
Need an example? Consider the so-called 'Health Care' bill so recently passed. If it is so wonderful then please tell me why the groups most favored by the Democrats are being allowed to 'opt out'? The unions, one by one are all escaping the new health care laws. They are getting special permission, directly from the President no less, to continue using their old and familiar insurance policies.
Why should they ever want to do that, when the Democrats keep telling us how wonderful, how heavenly life will be for everyone when the law comes into full effect. But, it seems that many, even Democrats, prefer to let other people be under this law while they escape. How odd. How strange.
Let me guess...politicians will not be required to join, since they already have gold-plated plans better than anything any normal middle-class person could afford. They will keep the lush benefits they already have, and not join with us, the rubes out in the flyover sticks.
Just ask, why not? Well, duh. If it were great, they would be the first in line to join. They aren't in line at all, so we know it isn't great. Their cash-machine unions aren't joining either. That is All you really need to know. Those with the choice, are choosing no. Those of us with no choice are already feeling the negative effects.
I work a wage-paying job. Just looking at my Social Security and Medicare payments makes me sick. If I had control of that money it would be invested, or used to buy insurance, or to buy education for my kids. What a joke that I have to pay all the leeches in Washington for the at best potential and minuscule benefits they promise to someday return to me via social security.
Social Security is worse than a joke, it is evil. Promising to protect old folks from poverty. Sounds very nice, very humane. But we all know that the money was never invested, it was just spent. In 2011 Social Security began to go bankrupt, spending more money than it took in. To continue giving benefits, taxes must rise, rise and rise again. It won't help, outflow will be greater than income from now on.
Besides all this, Democrats insist that our kids be given the worst of possible educations, the public schools. Who was the last Democrat president to send his children to a public school? Can't remember, can you?
Public schools are good enough for the rubes, but not for the bosses. I don't blame the kids, but I think bad words in my mind when I consider the parents. They fight school choice tooth and nail, knowing all along that they will never have to worry about where their children study. Public school is good enough for those they want to keep down. Have President Obama's children ever attended a public school?
Don't be fooled by the pretty words. Look deeper. Consider what the long-term effects will be. Nearly every major domestic program the Democrats have succeeded in passing for the last two generations has resulted in poverty for those most affected by it.
Are you Black? Have the Democrats been good for your people? Or have your communities been pushed deeper into debt and ignorance. Look at Detroit, once the Motor City, the industrial capitol of America, home to a large and thriving population of Black families. Once it was the richest city in America. Now, it is a wasteland, large parts even returning to forest! Republicans do not run Detroit, Democrats do. Democrats run DC, Chicago and New Orleans. Is crime low in these cities? Are the schools good? No Hell No! Look at the effects of the programs.
Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.
"I didn't mean to!"
I hear that a lot from my kids. Whenever something happens, one kid is crying and the other is saying "I didn't mean to, it was an accident."
It really doesn't matter what you 'meant' to do, what matters is what you did do. So my daughter may not have meant to hit her sister in the eye with the snow shovel, but she did.
The result is the same whether you meant to do it or not.
Similarly, most politicians say they don't mean to cause the social problems they do, unemployment, poverty, single motherhood and such things. But they do cause them.
The current mess was caused by sub prime lending. Oh my, poor people who couldn't afford loans got them and now can't pay them back. Why did those stupid bankers lend money to people without the habits and values that would make them good credit risks? Why lend to known poor credit risks?
Politics. Banks go in and out of favor as the industry to blame for social problems. For many years now banks have been threatened with lawsuits if fewer than the approved numbers of people in various groups receive loans.
So banks ignore the rules that used to pertain and hand out loans willy-nilly. Money was very cheap and plentiful, and not making the loans meant not only losing money but maybe getting sued for discrimination.
I have yet to hear a Democrat say that the sub-prime mortgage problem was caused by the government. Always pointing fingers at someone else. But as I tell my kids, when you point a finger, there are three fingers pointing back.
Where did the money come from to blow up the bubble? Easy money from the government, easy loans guaranteed by the government. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Neither of these institutions would exist without the government propping them up. The Democrats insisted, right up till the bubble popped, that everything was fine, that we didn't need any reform. Indeed, it was working just as they hoped, trapping more and more people deeper and deeper in debt, tantalizing them into buying ever bigger houses, paying ever larger real estate taxes, to be spent by politicians. And now, we are right where they want us. Poor, in debt, and depending on them.
Judge Them By Their Fruits
To judge by the results of their actions, Democrats hate common people and want the worst for them. Republican politicians just want to be left alone to enrich themselves. What other conclusion can there be? Truly, we know them by their fruits. This fruit is rotten.
*Note: I don't care much for the Republican Party. A bunch of mealy-mouthed losers, in the main, where they aren't just corrupt. But I can't use in a public forum the words the Democrats deserve. My kids might read this someday.