The poverty issue is not who gets blamed. The issue is what choices do policy makers make to help expand economic activity. Romney and his cohorts are all about austerity, like defunding the safety-net programs for the very poor, the disabled, and seniors. The problem is that austerity in a recession makes things worse, not better. In Europe, which the GOP does not understand, harsh austerity policies have made unemployment soar. Cuts in government spending have failed to reduce budget deficits because tax receipts fell. Economic activity and employment levels collapsed. Poverty increased as spending decreased.
President John F. Kennedy said, “If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich.” As one of those few, Romney demonstrates
a profound paucity of the economic and social understanding that is requisite of Presidents. Despite the Republican pabulum to the contrary, this is still a country of great abundance that is slowly emerging from the Great Recession. However, the nation suffers from a rise of poverty that it can ill afford. All of the talk about the middle class ignores the plight of the “many who are poor.”
Poverty is bad for business and Romney should know it. His comments deserve derision because they are false, not because they are gaffes. He raised the poverty issue but has articulated no plan for addressing it, without which the country becomes the Not-So Great Society.
Article comments
1 - jamminsue
Tommy,
You say, The problem is that austerity in a recession makes things worse, not better" Which has been well documented many times over.
Please keep writing!
2 - John Lake
The quotes from Johnson and Kennedy were certainly cogent to the issue. The modern politician, in a trend that expanded exponentially with the George W. Bush administration, is concerned primarily with corporate America. If the corporations prosper, America prospers. As that trend continues, and the population develops numbness toward it, we reach a point where social programs and the needs of the poor and uneducated are more a nuisance than a problem. Law firms these days are solidly conservative, and cherish links to conservative politicians. The rare exception is seen in the case of the young and noble law student who, nearing completion of his studies goes to work at low wage, in non-profits, to help those who suffer. In that regard, we have been fortunate to have a president like Obama. And when such as Obama is well schooled and prepared to meet world crises, we are well blessed.
Johnson and Kennedy, shown in the words you quote, were on a middle course. At least the Republicans might strive for that. Johnson showed wisdom and insight and his words are well remembered.
3 - Jim
Sorry, as a more objective observer I must say, you've missed the entire point. There is only one conclusion which the test of time has reached regarding the various Federally sponsored Safety-net programs, they have utterly failed to achieve the results for which they were designed for.
Regardless of their ability to function, the data is clear, more people are poor now, old people still can't afford to pay their health care. Further the administration and funding of these programs are also flawed and/or unsustainable.
Its time to re-engineer government support for the ideal behind these failures, and to stop the demonizing those offer the political will to take on the task
4 - Igor
3-Jim: do you have an argument to support "...they have utterly failed to achieve the results for which they were designed [for]."?
Or are you just repeating rightist cant from the republican echo chamber?
Why waste our time with cheap propaganda?