War on Poverty

The Flimflam Man’s war on the ‘war on poverty’ exposed as a fraud

by

EddieMunsterThe GOP’s alleged boy genius, Ayn Rand fanboy Rep. Paul Ryan, the “zombie-eyed granny starver from the state of Wisconsin,” is a classic example of being blinded by ideology.

The Flimflam Man, as Paul Krugman dubbed him, has said since his failed 2012 vice presidential bid that he is working on the issue of poverty — which really means that he is working on writing a revisionist history of the “war on poverty.”  See, The War on Poverty: 50 Years Later | Budget.House.Gov (.pdf). Professor Krugman laid waste to this report in The Hammock Fallacy.

With the recent unrest in Baltimore, the Sunday morning bobblehead shows this past Sunday wanted to talk about the issue of poverty, so naturally the media villagers invited The Flimflam Man to talk about poverty, because he is the GOP’s alleged boy genius, and he says that Baltimore is stuck in ‘poverty trap’ and The war on poverty ‘not getting the results we need.

Ryan appeared on CBS’ “Face The Nation” and said that ““After a 50-year war on poverty and trillions of dollars spent, we still have the same poverty rates – 45 million people in poverty.” The Washington Post’s Fact Checker Glenn Kessler examines Paul Ryan’s slick use of poverty rates to declare the ‘war on poverty’ a failure:

There was [Paul Ryan] on one show saying the war on poverty launched by President Lyndon B. Johnson had left the nation with “the same poverty rates” and 45 million people in poverty. And, then, there was a [Chris Van Hollen] saying that without that effort, 40 million more Americans would be in poverty.

This is a classic example of how politicians pick the best statistic to make their case. But the case for Van Hollen’s stat is stronger. Let’s take a look.

Read more

Fruity or Oaky? Rambling Thoughts on White People Problems

by

by Pamela Powers Hannley

My coffee table book is too large for my coffee table.

My Internet connection is too slow.

My dishwasher doesn’t really get the dishes clean.

iPads should have a USB connection.

I can’t remember all of my passwords.

Will Wall Street gambling hurt by 401K’s performance?

My car is annoying. The on-board computer tells me when to add air to the tires, when someone’s seatbelt is undone, and when it needs to go to the shop for service.

I hate it when I find a good recipe on the Internet and then can’t find it again.

Cable TV is too expensive for what your get. NetFlix is the way to go– or just plug the laptop into the flat screen TV.

I give my dog a daily dab of Greek yogurt with her dog food because she farts too much.

Self-Actualization, White People Problems, & the War on the Poor

by

640px-Maslow's_Hierarchy_of_Needs.svgby Pamela Powers Hannley

As one year comes to a close and another begins, people often look back at events to reflect and perhaps resolve to improve their lives or change their behaviors in the coming year. In 2013, the Do-Nothing-at-All Congress— led by the nose by Teapublicans– continued its war on the poor– fighting for cuts to food stamps and unemployment and fighting for austerity for the 99%, while disingenuously padding the pockets of their corporate benefactors.

As Abraham Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs teaches us, people must satisfy their basic needs before they can become fully self-actualized, before they can reach their full potential. To put this simply, if you don't have food, water, and shelter, your time, energy and resources will be spent obtaining those basic needs. Until you have security and the necessities of life, you will not have the luxury to worry about trifles– Christmas gifts, video game releases, wine selections, fancy coffee, designer-label clothes, insignificant social snubs, political differences– in other words, "white people problems".

Since our country is governed by the  Congressional millionaire's club, it's no wonder that they can't relate to the poor (or even the struggling middle class).

In Light of Local Poverty, Tucson Needs Creative Direction & Progressive Economic Ideas

by

Development33-sig-sm72by Pamlea Powers Hannley

Business friendly? Tucson’s been there, done that, … and got the t-shirt at Goodwill. As former City Councilwoman Molly McKasson said, we put all of our eggs in the development basket and look where it got us.

Twenty percent of Tucsonans are living in poverty.

Thirty percent of Tucson children are living in poverty.

Fifty-two percent of Tucson children live in a one-parent household.

Seventy-one percent of Tucson Unified School District students qualify for free or reduced-price lunch. (Statistics from the Arizona Daily Star.)

How did we get here?

The Back Story on Tucson’s Poverty Rate

In a November 2011 “What If?” article published just a few days before the last mayoral election, former Arizona Daily Star reporter Josh Brodesky interviewed activist, writer, and artist McKasson and mused about how Tucson would be different today if she had beaten former Mayor Bob Walkup back in their 1999 match-up.

I remember that election well. Walkup– a former Hughes Aircraft executive and former head of the Greater Tucson Economic Council– was the quintessential business candidate. Bankrolled by Tucson’s business community, Walkup’s campaign successfully painted McKasson as a flighty hippie artist whose no-growth, tree-hugging, water-conserving policies would be bad for Tucson (ie, bad for business and bad for growth). Meanwhile, Walkup was championed as a business savvy savior who successfully ran a business, and, therefore, (of course!) could successfully run a city.

As mayor, the glad-handing, ribbon-cutting Walkup promoted business development, Rio Nuevo, and ill-conceived, taxpayer-funded private projects like the downtown hotel (which went down in flames, thank goodness). Except for his pro-business, pro-growth cheerleading, Walkup was a do-nothing mayor who depended upon defense funding, the occasional TREO call center moving to Tucson, and housing boom construction jobs to bolster Tucson’s chronically low-wage tourist economy. The Tucson Weekly’s endorsement of McKasson (here) eerily  predicts what happened to Tucson under three terms of Walkup. Read it and more background and new ideas after the jump.

Breaking News: Farm Bill Defeated 234-195, AZ Dems Split

by

by Pamela Powers Hannley

The Farm Bill– which included $20 Billion in cuts to food stamps– went down in flames in the US House of Representatives this morning. The vote was 234-195, with 62 Republicans voting "no", and 24 Democrats voting for it, according to the Huffington Post.

The roll call vote (after the jump) reveals that Arizona Congressional Democraic Representatives Ron Barber and Kyrsten Sinema voted "yes" (with the Republicans), while Representatives Ann Kirkpatirck, Raul Grijalva, and Ed Pastor voted "no". (On the Arizona Republican side, Paul Gosar voted the party line, while Matt Salmon, Trent Franks, and David Schweikert voted "no".)

More details and the roll call after the jump.