Democracy4Sale wrote: The GOP, and the Randroids, have made it clear that they don't give a flip about the people in the bottom 20% of this country...
. . . according to those with guano in their cranium where gray matter ought to be. The rest of us realize that, regardless of intention, it has been demonstrably proven over the last 70 years that federal one-size-fits-none programs do little, if anything, to better the lives of those bottom 20% in the long term and actually result in the majority of the poor becoming poorer and more dependent on government than they once were. As the federal government has become more involved in education, the most likely means of escape from poverty, it has become less effective and obscenely more expensive. That is the opposite the desired outcome, not in harmony with it.
The federal government has been fighting a "war on poverty" since the middle 1960's with little, if any, change in either the percentage of population which lives in what we view as poverty or the degree to which they are impoverished. After 50 years of failure to make any significant impact on the issue you'd think that collectivists would have come up with at least one other plan than throw more money at the problem and hope for the best, but it has become painfully obvious that this is the only solution they seem capable of devising. As Prime Minister Thatcher once remarked, the problem with this approach is that eventually you run out of other people's money to spend.
Time to change the paradigm and try a new approach - the one we've been using has proven itself utterly incapable of getting the job done.
