U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-23-2011, 11:00 AM
 
Location: Miami, FL
8,088 posts, read 8,204,414 times
Reputation: 6650

Advertisements

I may be in error but I believe Welfare programs came about in the early 1960s as there were significant numbers of U.S. citizens living at the poverty level.(I found this surprising considering foreign competition was destroyed or rebuilding during the 1940s and 1950s) I believe this was the Great Society program championed by LBJ. Is there any data indicating that the programs begun then have led to those original recipients or their following generation to have been able to move out of poverty level incomes? Or are the succeeding 3rd and 4th generations still at povery and at governement sustenance?

Not referring to SS or New Deal spending.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-23-2011, 11:07 AM
 
Location: Philadelphia
11,945 posts, read 10,993,470 times
Reputation: 8163
Generational poverty is alive and well, there is no denying that. It is a viscious cycle.
But there are countless people who have used the system to their benefit, broken the cycle of poverty and became productive members of society. There are also countless people who have needed assistance temporarily to get them through tough times and later bounced right back.

No welfare system will be without its flaws and people frauding the system but that goes for pretty much anything. Welfare is still a necessary safety net that I do not want to see scrapped.

I would like to see a policy where if you have more children after you begin receiving Welfare, your benefits are maxed out. No more benefit increases for having more children.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2011, 11:18 AM
 
Location: Pluto's Home Town
9,986 posts, read 12,170,058 times
Reputation: 5629
Quote:
Originally Posted by Felix C View Post
I may be in error but I believe Welfare programs came about in the early 1960s as there were significant numbers of U.S. citizens living at the poverty level.(I found this surprising considering foreign competition was destroyed or rebuilding during the 1940s and 1950s) I believe this was the Great Society program championed by LBJ. Is there any data indicating that the programs begun then have led to those original recipients or their following generation to have been able to move out of poverty level incomes? Or are the succeeding 3rd and 4th generations still at povery and at governement sustenance?

Not referring to SS or New Deal spending.
I really don't know, and it is always difficult to make broad assessments over many decades. I suspect that some were assisted. My mother was a single mom with 4 kids and took welfare for a couple years, and she earned an AA in nursing. She worked the rest of her career as a nurse. All of us graduated from college (one with a PhD), and none have taken any public assistance, so it worked for our family.

One confusing thing is that lower income, lower education people tend to have high birth rates, so although the welfare may have helped some, there seems to be more people to help over time. Educated and skilled people (Mormons excepted) have tended toward smaller families, so the welfare component has grown in proportion. I am of the opinion that uneducated, welfare-dependent people should have fewer children. It is not politically correct to say so, but if you cannot support yourself, why bring a bunch of kids into the world. However, I don't think the groups we are talking about think that far ahead. A difficult dilemma, for sure.

Perhaps I am a classist or racist (a liberal racist, consider that), but I worry about the number of poor people with limited abilities and prospects and work ethic growing, even as the most capable people are not reproducing at replacement rates. Not a good trajectory, and if welfare aids it, that may not be good. Oregon tends to have bumper crop of layabouts, and anyone who can fog a mirror can get food stamps. I find it pretty revolting.

Sorry, my ruminations have not addressed your question about individuals. If I can find anything, I'll post back.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2011, 11:34 AM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,765 posts, read 25,912,846 times
Reputation: 12266
Not sure if such data exists, which pin points recipients then and the present of their descendents, but we do know that poverty rate declined substantially for the populace as a whole, and rather dramatically for the elderly, since the 1960s. The rates have settled a bit since the 70s, only going up during economic downturns (early 80s, early 90s and in the 2000s) and settling back to a lower level (mid-80s, mid and late 90s).

So poverty is definitely a lot less of a concern now than it was in the 1950s/60s, much less earlier. I would add, however, that many of these great society welfare programs are helping middle class families from either losing someone dear or them treading into poverty. There are a couple of examples in my extended family.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2011, 12:13 PM
 
31,372 posts, read 33,285,614 times
Reputation: 14916
I think that most people assume that the Great Society consisted of nothing more than a bunch of poverty programs but the reality is it was much more. The Great Society programs produced a slew of civil liberties, educational, environmental, consumer safety, labor, health, arts and cultural, and transportation programs.

Great Society - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2011, 12:40 PM
 
Location: NC
10,002 posts, read 9,358,117 times
Reputation: 3074
Quote:
Originally Posted by Felix C View Post
I may be in error but I believe Welfare programs came about in the early 1960s as there were significant numbers of U.S. citizens living at the poverty level.(I found this surprising considering foreign competition was destroyed or rebuilding during the 1940s and 1950s) I believe this was the Great Society program championed by LBJ. Is there any data indicating that the programs begun then have led to those original recipients or their following generation to have been able to move out of poverty level incomes? Or are the succeeding 3rd and 4th generations still at povery and at governement sustenance?

Not referring to SS or New Deal spending.
I don't think you can really discuss the one without the other. The anti-poverty programs of the great society are just an expansion of the new deal.

As to whether they have been successful I think some have been wildly successful and others have been unsuccessful. For example I think the community college system has been one of the greatest anti-poverty programs ever created.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2011, 12:54 PM
 
Location: Long Island, NY
19,713 posts, read 12,192,986 times
Reputation: 5615
Quote:
Originally Posted by Felix C View Post
I may be in error but I believe Welfare programs came about in the early 1960s as there were significant numbers of U.S. citizens living at the poverty level.(I found this surprising considering foreign competition was destroyed or rebuilding during the 1940s and 1950s) I believe this was the Great Society program championed by LBJ. Is there any data indicating that the programs begun then have led to those original recipients or their following generation to have been able to move out of poverty level incomes? Or are the succeeding 3rd and 4th generations still at povery and at governement sustenance?

Not referring to SS or New Deal spending.
A pic is worth 1,000 txt.



Thank goodness that we have these programs today, or there would be riots in the streets.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2011, 02:02 PM
 
Location: Pluto's Home Town
9,986 posts, read 12,170,058 times
Reputation: 5629
Interesting graph. I sure do think that as bad as things are, most people do have food to eat, and a degree of hope for their future, so are not running amok looting,robbing,etc.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2011, 02:15 PM
 
12,634 posts, read 18,270,187 times
Reputation: 6546
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiddlehead View Post
I really don't know, and it is always difficult to make broad assessments over many decades. I suspect that some were assisted. My mother was a single mom with 4 kids and took welfare for a couple years, and she earned an AA in nursing. She worked the rest of her career as a nurse. All of us graduated from college (one with a PhD), and none have taken any public assistance, so it worked for our family.

One confusing thing is that lower income, lower education people tend to have high birth rates, so although the welfare may have helped some, there seems to be more people to help over time. Educated and skilled people (Mormons excepted) have tended toward smaller families, so the welfare component has grown in proportion. I am of the opinion that uneducated, welfare-dependent people should have fewer children. It is not politically correct to say so, but if you cannot support yourself, why bring a bunch of kids into the world. However, I don't think the groups we are talking about think that far ahead. A difficult dilemma, for sure.

Perhaps I am a classist or racist (a liberal racist, consider that), but I worry about the number of poor people with limited abilities and prospects and work ethic growing, even as the most capable people are not reproducing at replacement rates. Not a good trajectory, and if welfare aids it, that may not be good. Oregon tends to have bumper crop of layabouts, and anyone who can fog a mirror can get food stamps. I find it pretty revolting.

Sorry, my ruminations have not addressed your question about individuals. If I can find anything, I'll post back.
A very reasonable post.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2011, 02:23 PM
 
Location: southern california
58,897 posts, read 77,748,980 times
Reputation: 52577
it has accomplished in 50 years with the assistance of K12 and some rotten parenting what no one person could ever do on their own.
we created a large group of people that are utterly unemployable. if they ever got a job, they would be fired 1st day on the job. no matter how much credentials, how much training, how much job programs; they will never never never work, and u cant make them.
the skunk juice attitude is carefully cultivated over many years by teachers, social workers and parents that teach them it is appropriate to yell at people 3 times as smart as u, your superiors, curse them, even assault them, and defy all rules and refuse to make yourself useful in any way. genuine ape behavior.
25% of the welfare clients resist this nightmare programming and leave welfare pretty quick and become useful members of the world of employed people and stay that way.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2020, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top