AEIdeas

The public policy blog of the American Enterprise Institute

Subscribe to the blog

Discussion: (28 comments)

  1. Seattle Sam

    You just discovered that people prefer to blame their troubles on things outside of their control rather than things they’ve done to themselves?

  2. Todd Mason

    Funny. Back in June, during a speech on family, O barely mentioned the 1 percent. So does that mean inequality doesn’t count?
    http://www.ijreview.com/2013/06/59606-fathers-day-address-obama-says-family-more-important-than-any-legislation/

    Winship, as usual, wouldn’t know scholarship if he tripped over it. The correlation in mobility must be done with the bottom 20 percent vs everyone else, and Winship needs to sort out which came first: massive underemployment and unemployment or disintegrating families.

    Even if the cause is the first instance, Rs can’t just wish dads into the picture and cut taxes more. Kids in the bottom 20 didn’t choose to be born there.

    1. and Winship needs to sort out which came first: massive underemployment and unemployment or disintegrating families.

      Huh? Are you implying one begat the other?

      Even if the cause is the first instance, Rs can’t just wish dads into the picture and cut taxes more. Kids in the bottom 20 didn’t choose to be born there.

      Liberals like Turd created the crisis via the welfare state and a half century of importing dullards from dysfunctional cultures. It’s been a fantastic policy for churning out Democrat voters and prison construction, ruinous in every other aspect.

      1. Todd Mason

        Ummm, dumb*ss…. Winship’s second regression scatter ploit is supposed to show that single moms create inequality. Given the disdain around here for proper ordering of cause and effect, it is reasonable to ask if the opposite might be true as it relates to single mothers and children living in poverty.

        Anyway you have your view of history. For myself I believe greedheads like you say you got yours so let’s p*ss on the American Dream.

        1. Winship’s second regression scatter ploit is supposed to show that single moms create inequality.

          Of course they do, that’s indisputable. Single motherhood creates more crime, poverty, and general misery than all the tax-cuts for “greedheads” ever legislated. It’s cretins like YOU who gave us this disaster(but D voting bonanza!), yet fight hammer and tong any efforts to roll it back. Only a liberal nitwit could posit that inequality creates family breakdown. There’s zero credible evidence for that.

          For myself I believe greedheads like you say you got yours so let’s p*ss on the American Dream.

          Since when does the American Dream include a lifetime of dependency?

          This is on you and your ilk, Turd:

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RBqjZ0KZCa0

          1. Todd Mason

            The American Dream as translated by Paul is is to each according to his ability — as long as you win the gene pool besides and then we don’t care whether you are able or not.

            Winship is flirting with propaganda when he correlates inequality and mobility by commuting zones rather than a broader measure. First off, how many of the 1 percent actually work? Of those who do, how many live in the well-defined pockets of poverty in America: Appalachia, the Mississippi Delta, the rural Plains? The 1 percent business itself is a straw man. This is straight out capital vs labor. Investors are doing great; blue collar workers are not. What Obama is saying, correctly, is that policy has overemphasized capital, there being trillions of the stuff lying around fallow and underemphasized labor.

            And there are consequences. Does anyone really believe that the down Mainer who thought he would retire at the paper mill is happy to live — barely — off the wife’s paycheck? How many laid off blue collar workers slip into a cycle of bad habits and ill temper that create to single-mother homes?

            So when dumb-*ss teabagger nutcases ignore the real problem, jobs, they are creating the dependency they find so repugnant.

            But you can see in Paul’s post above how the disconnect arises. So let me amend my version of history to identify the culprits. They are racist greedheads who say I got mine; who gives a sh*t about you?

          2. LOL Turd Man unhinged!

            What Obama is saying, correctly, is that policy has overemphasized capital, there being trillions of the stuff lying around fallow and underemphasized labor

            Translation: $6 trillion added to the debt is not nearly enough. I would like to piss even more staggering sums away on boondoggles, cronies, and freeloaders.

            They are racist greedheads who say I got mine; who gives a sh*t about you?

            Ahahahaha! and there it is. “Shut up,” Turd explained.

            Q: What’s a racist?
            A: Someone who’s winning an argument with a liberal.

          3. Oh, this was precious:

            So when dumb-*ss teabagger nutcases ignore the real problem, jobs, they are creating the dependency they find so repugnant.

            LOL, it’s the tea partiers forcing Democrat voting idiots to shoot out kids like Pez dispensers.

            You might explain the jobs issue to your pals and President who bottle up low hanging fruit like Keystone while working to pass amnesty for tens of millions of wage crushing illegal immigrants.

          4. Todd Mason

            My bad. Too many times suffering fools over the holidays to deal with Paul equanimously. So, fine, Paul. You aren’t a racist (Yeah, right) You are merely a dumb*ss.

            Here is the AP. http://bigstory.ap.org/article/exclusive-4-5-us-face-near-poverty-no-work-0

            “Poverty is no longer an issue of ‘them’, it’s an issue of ‘us’,” says Mark Rank, a professor at Washington University in St. Louis who calculated the numbers. “Only when poverty is thought of as a mainstream event, rather than a fringe experience that just affects blacks and Hispanics, can we really begin to build broader support for programs that lift people in need.”

            Rank’s analysis is supplemented with figures provided by Tom Hirschl, a professor at Cornell University; John Iceland, a sociology professor at Penn State University; the University of New Hampshire’s Carsey Institute; the Census Bureau; and the Population Reference Bureau.

            Among the findings:

            —For the first time since 1975, the number of white single-mother households who were living in poverty with children surpassed or equaled black ones in the past decade, spurred by job losses and faster rates of out-of-wedlock births among whites. White single-mother families in poverty stood at nearly 1.5 million in 2011, comparable to the number for blacks. Hispanic single-mother families in poverty trailed at 1.2 million.

            I would urge you to follow the link and think for a moment about what globalization and automation means for blue-collar America, but greedheads like you care only about your wallet. So, fine again. Lock them up. That will cost us twice as much as educating them. Then everyone will call you dumb*ss teabagger nutcases.

          5. mesa econoguy

            Turd really is unhinged. Turd quotes –

            “Poverty is no longer an issue of ‘them’, it’s an issue of ‘us’,” says Mark Rank, a professor at Washington University in St. Louis who calculated the numbers. “Only when poverty is thought of as a mainstream event, rather than a fringe experience that just affects blacks and Hispanics, can we really begin to build broader support for programs that lift people in need.”

            This is absolute trash meant to justify dependency expansion, and government dole. Nothing more.

            It is shameful that someone from my alma mater would make such an idiotic statement, though the person quoted is likely from the George Warren Brown School of Social Work, which has a vested interest in creating the very dependency they purportedly fight.

            Oh look, I’m right:

            http://gwbweb.wustl.edu/Faculty/FullTime/Pages/MarkRank.aspx
            “Mark R. Rank is widely recognized as one of the foremost experts and speakers in the country on issues of poverty, inequality, and social justice.”
            Social justice is leftist code for social redistribution, and gateway to socialism.

            The academic fraud who wrote this “study” is in the business of creating (the perception of) more poverty, so he and his friends can “share” their expertise and exert power, via socialist redistribution schemes.

            And if he wants to look for cause of actual US poverty – which isn’t true poverty, by worldwide standards – he need look no further than the policies of the stooge he voted for in the last election.

            You should know better than to trust what you read, Turd.

          6. Todd Mason

            And another lemming weighs in, saying, hey, I hear the water’s fine. From the same AP survey:

            “Going back to the 1980s, never have whites been so pessimistic about their futures, according to the General Social Survey, which is conducted by NORC at the University of Chicago. Just 45 percent say their family will have a good chance of improving their economic position based on the way things are in America.

            The divide is especially evident among those whites who self-identify as working class: 49 percent say they think their children will do better than them, compared with 67 percent of non-whites who consider themselves working class.

            In November, Obama won the votes of just 36 percent of those noncollege whites, the worst performance of any Democratic nominee among that group since 1984.

            Some Democratic analysts have urged renewed efforts to bring working-class whites into the political fold, calling them a potential “decisive swing voter group” if minority and youth turnout level off in future elections.

            “They don’t trust big government, but it doesn’t mean they want no government,” says Republican pollster Ed Goeas, who agrees that working-class whites will remain an important electoral group. “They feel that politicians are giving attention to other people and not them.”

            That leaves open the question of whom to blame, but idiots like Paul and Mesa will solve that question with more supply side BS (i.e. continuing to ignore the working class.)

          7. mesa econoguy

            Clearly Turd, what we need is the Affordable Jobs Growth Act, and a giant bureaucracy to administer it (and a website!).

            What you need is an enema, and a brain transplant, or removal of what’s left of your existing one.

          8. Turdster,

            So your own citation from the faculty loungers demonstrates single-motherhood is indeed the fast track to poverty, as anyone with common sense would realize if they thought about it for half a minute. So WTF are you arguing about?

            I chuckled quite forthrightly when I read this crap: “Only when poverty is thought of as a mainstream event, rather than a fringe experience that just affects blacks and Hispanics, can we really begin to build broader support for programs that lift people in need.”

            Translation: Only when we normalize dysfunction( a conscious, decades long agenda of the Left) will the majority support yet more government programs to try and undo the damage of…government programs.

            It’s people like you who got us into this mess with programs that subsidize the destructive behavior of the people with poorest future-time orientation and impulse control. For the past half century, the liberals are guilty of running nothing less than a reverse eugenics project that led directly to the destruction of formerly great cities like Detroit and Camden.

            So, fine, Paul. You aren’t a racist (Yeah, right)

            “You aren’t a racist, but yes you are!” I love it! Your liberal masters have taught you well, Turd Man.

            I would urge you to follow the link and think for a moment about what globalization and automation means for blue-collar America, but greedheads like you care only about your wallet.

            And I couldn’t give a shit less for your opinion considering you liberals demand amnesty for millions and millions of impoverished, not particularly bright, illegal immigrants from severely messed up countries. Can’t do much to stop globalization and automation, nor should we, but we could do a lot to crack down on the supply of low wage(but Democrat votin’ !) illegals and their anchor babies.

            So, fine again. Lock them up. That will cost us twice as much as educating them.

            I can only assume you are talking about criminals. Oh my, you’re so virtuous with the taxpayers’ money that I think I’m going to pass out from the waft of overwhelming moral superiority. Yes, I’m sure you’ll be offering to pay the tuition of the thug who plays the knockout game on your noggin as you lay there in a pool of your own filth.

          9. mesa econoguy

            LMAO

            Turd regularly enjoys his own filth Paul, which he displays regularly here.

            The fact he willingly believes this manufactured academic horseshit is both astonishing, but so easily predictable.

            His stupidity is truly remarkable, and well beyond the pale.

            Happy New Year
            http://thepeoplescube.com/peoples-blog/happy-2014-the-sixth-glorious-year-of-the-five-year-plan-t12736.html

          10. Turd-o,

            That leaves open the question of whom to blame, but idiots like Paul and Mesa will solve that question with more supply side BS (i.e. continuing to ignore the working class.)

            LOL. What we really need is another massive infrastructure bill, right Turd?

            SCANDAL: LESS THAN 7% OF TRILLION-DOLLAR ‘STIMULUS’ SPENT ON INFRASTRUCTURE

          11. Mesa,

            Good catch on the “social justice” douchebags. Always a dead giveaway. The left loves to append the word “justice” to any kind of activity where resources can be transferred from producers to freeloaders.

            One thing I find interesting is that the Left completely twisted the origins of “social justice” in the same way they inverted the meaning of “liberal.”

            According to Jonah Goldberg:

            “In 1840, the theologian Luigi Taparelli d’Azeglio came up with the concept of social justice as a way to defend civil society from the ever-increasing intrusions of the state. Social justice, according to Taparelli, was the legitimate realm of justice beyond formal legal justice. Since then, the term has become completely inverted: “Social justice” has become an abracadabra phrase granting the state access to every nook and cranny of life. The only way for social justice to make sense is if you operate from the assumption that the invisible hand of the market should be amputated and replaced with the very visible hand of the state. In other words, each explicit demand for social justice carries with it the implicit but necessary requirement that the state do the fixing. And a society dedicated to the pursuit of perfect social justice must gradually move more and more decisions under the command of the state, until it is the sole moral agent.

        2. Todd Mason

          The idiots doth protest too much methinks.
          (Hint. idiots, Shakespeare.)

      2. Its obvious that Harry Binswanger was thinking of clowns like todd when he penned the following two columns at Forbes:

        Obama To Americans: You Don’t Deserve To Be Free

        Give Back? Yes, It’s Time For The 99% To Give Back To The 1%

  3. How ironic. Obama has done more than any other president to raise effective marginal tax rates on the bottom quintile, and to boost their marriage penalty. The ACA adds to both of these tragic forces.

  4. Benjamin Cole

    I want stable, two-parent families, and even more than that, I want stable, two-parent families within an extended family. That is the ideal.

    However, if we accept pure, free-market capitalism as the ideal, then government has no role at all in what way people choose to live, not in “helping” families, nor trying to blunt how families may be destroyed by pure, unalloyed capitalism.

    Capitalism is an amoral (note, not immoral) system, cares little if families prosper or not. That is not the point of capitalism.

    Ironically, what seems to happen as people get wealthier, they choose to get away from their families, and even abandon their families to the remaining spouse. That has become the norm.

    If you ask me, this is possibly long-term disaster. But, in fact, incomes rise and now the crime rate is communing down. Maybe an amoral, non-family-centric capitalistic society is the “best” way.

    After gay marriage, capitalist democracy may embrace polygamy and prostitution, both of which make eminent sense within the capitalist framework.

    1. JasperPants

      “Capitalism is amoral”.

      I disagree. The free market variety of Capitalism is moral because it is based on cooperation between individuals free from coercion. Said cooperation, or “trade” also happens to make both parties better off.

    2. I want stable, two-parent families, and even more than that, I want stable, two-parent families within an extended family. That is the ideal.

      For everyone? You have proof of this? America itself contradicts your assertion. While America has had a long tradition of strong nuclear families, the extended family has been incredibly weak, with ties all but non-existant between cousins. And those nuclear families disappear once the children reach adulthood, with children leaving, often for good (i.e., never seeing family members again), since travel was such a hardship till recently. Even with cheap easy travel, many people don’t keep strong ties to family members, especially once they’ve started their own family.

      then government has no role at all in what way people choose to live, not in “helping” families, nor trying to blunt how families may be destroyed by pure, unalloyed capitalism.

      This is an incredibly surreal statement.

      First and foremost, using the police state to forcibly take from one group of people to give to another, then call it “help” is to be disconnected to reality. This type of bad reasoning ignores costs and only analyzes benefits. It’s fraudulent thinking.

      Secondly, can you point to a single family that has been “destroyed by pure, unalloyed capitalism”. Pretty much everyone who has been effected by the breakdown of the family and live in American poverty (real poverty doesn’t exist in the US), has been directly affected by poorly designed government programs that incentivize disintegrating families and living dependently on government programs.

      Capitalism is an amoral

      A system of social structure designed so that nearly all interactions and trades are voluntary, rather than forced by government fiat, is “amoral”. Seriously?

      Ironically, what seems to happen as people get wealthier, they choose to get away from their families

      Why is this ironic? Do you think this happens in a vacuum? Why do you think it’s a good idea for people to associate with people they don’t want to associate with? Do you think the government should force people to associate with people they don’t want to associate with and violate the first amendment?

      If you ask me, this is possibly long-term disaster.

      No one did ask you. And the answer you provide is very, very wrong.

      Your last statement is just as out of touch with the rest of your comment.

      1. Benjamin Cole

        You misunderstood some of my commentary.
        Under free markets, polygamy and prostitution would flourish. This is an amoral outcome. Gambling and drug houses would line city streets.
        Some would find such outcomes immoral. Capitalism cares not a whit if such outcomes are immoral or not.

        1. Under free markets, polygamy and prostitution would flourish“…

          Did you think of that inane nonsense all on your own or did todd help you out?

  5. http://www.economics21.org/commentary/income-inequality-problem-overblown

    The charts are interesting. 39% of the bottom quintile own their own homes. There’s more that shows the problem to be far more complicated than a soundbite.

    As for family breakdown – ridding us of marriage and the kinship structure it creates is a decades long goal of the left. Marx and Engels made it clear that the institution is the greatest impedicment to their utopian fantasies and must be abolished. Redefining marriage to accommodate homosexuals and the other types of “marriages” that will follow will fulfill their dreams.

  6. Obama may or may not care about family breakdown but it certainly does not pay for him to do anything about it: Married people with kids are solidly Republican, single people and especially single parents are Democratic mainstays.

    Even if the president could do something about family breakdown, it seems a little hard to believe he would do something so damaging to his party’s prospects.

  7. rj chicago

    Reason O doesn’t give a rat’s you know what about the family – he never really had one to begin with and so wants his experience to be the ‘reality’ for the United States in general. This guy is evil to the core folks. No better place to start than the nuclear family.

  8. NSA and JNLWD are partnering with Virginia State Police and local police implanting people with biochips. Read “A Note on Uberveillance” by M. G. and Katina Michael. it enables Uberveillance. “In its ultimate form, überveillance has to do with more than automatic identification technologies that we carry with us. It has to do with under-the-skin technology that is embedded in the body, such as microchip implants; it is that which cuts into the flesh – a charagma (mark). Think of it as Big Brother on the inside looking out.” Newport News Police and Virginia State Police had a doctor implant me w/o my knowledge and consent with a biochip. A U. S. Attorney for the NSA/DOJ pretended to be my attorney. It enables torture and thought monitoring. They use it as a sensor and pulse energy projectiles at you. I had a heart attack. It enables voice to skull communication. See LRAD white papers or audio spotlight by Holosonics. Law enforcement believes we will only be safe if they know where we are at all times, what we are doing and what we are thinking! See Safeguards in a World of Ambient Intelligence by Springer page 9. See Mental Health and Terrorism by Amin Gadit. He states, “Of late, there are reports of a new and dreadful invention of weapons of violence that are called Bioelectromagnetic Weapons. According to the description by an Institute of Science in Society, these weapons operate at the speed of light, can kill, torture and enslave without making physical appearance. It further adds that voices and visions, daydreams and nightmares are the most astonishing manifestations of this weapon system, it is also capable of crippling the human subject by limiting his/her normal range of movement, causing acute pain the equivalent of major organ failure or even death and interferes with normal functions of human senses. It can cause difficulty with breathing and induce seizures besides damage to the tissues and organs. Through this form of terrorism, it is possible to persuade subjects that their mind is being read; their intellectual property is being plundered and can even motivate suicide or murder. Pulsed Energy projectiles (PEPs) are another form of weaponry that is used to paralyze a victim with pain. According to Peter Philips, a scientist from USA, circumstances may soon arrive in which anti-war or human right protestors suddenly feel a burning sensation akin to touching a hot skillet over their entire body. Simultaneously they may hear terrifying nauseating screaming, which while not produced externally, fills their brains with overwhelming disruption. This new invention is dreadful addition to the armamentarium of weapons of abuse and torture. Manifestations of the effects of these occult weapons can mimic mental ill health and add further to the misery of the victims.” See Bio Initiative Report 2012. See Forbes and search Brandon Raub. Law enforcement tases citizens into “excited delirium” (see at nij org) to make them act in ways they normally would not. I believe they are directly responsible for the Virginia Tech massacre. There are 3 reasons to have it implanted 1) mental health, 2) criminal record, and 3) infectious disease. If you don’t meet any of those requirements like me, they’ll falsify your records. All the mass shootings are the work of law enforcement. They want to take away your right to bear arms and make America a police state. People aren’t suddenly going crazy, they’re being tortured. I also believe the biochip to be responsible for PTSD. Read Brian Castner’s book “A Long Walk”. I have the same ambiguous pains, twitches, heart attack, night mares, day mares, gurgling, etc. I never served in the war. What do we have in common? The biochip. Suicide is one way to get relief. Virginia’s suicide rate is higher than the national average and the military suicide rate is unacceptable! You can check your upper right buttock, upper right shoulder. They are just under the skin. I have been in excruciating pain for six years due to corruption in Virginia.

Comments are closed.

Sort By:

Refine Content:

Scholar

Additional Keywords:

Refine Results

or to save searches.

Open
Refine Content