Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: NYT: ‘Painful For A Liberal To Admit, But Conservatives Have A Point’ On Welfare Dependency

Posted 1 year ago on Dec. 9, 2012, 5:57 p.m. EST by money4fear (-5)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

In an eyebrow raising article, liberal New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof offered a startling concession: “This is painful for a liberal to admit, but conservatives have a point when they suggest that America’s safety net can sometimes entangle people in a soul-crushing dependency. Our poverty programs do rescue many people, but other times they backfire.”

Writing from Jackson, Kentucky, Mr. Kristof reported that numerous poor parents in Appalachian hill country are yanking their kids out of literacy classes in order to bag a $689 monthly Supplemental Security Income (S.S.I.) check per kid. The checks continue until the child reaches 18 years of age.

“The kids get taken out of the program because the parents are going to lose the check,” said Billie Oaks, who runs a literacy program here in Breathitt County, a poor part of Kentucky. “It’s heartbreaking.”

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism

6 Comments

6 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by quantumystic (1710) from Memphis, TN 1 year ago

i like how you linked to the article about the article and not the article in question, fucking hack. also let me say that this articles logic is completely asinine. the reasons why these people live in poverty are the real culprit and it is not the government aid. perhaps being paid a living wage would go a long way towards reducing the number of aid recipients. perhaps universal healthcare and free college/job training would help as well. who knows maybe a jobs program would help to.

[+] -4 points by money4fear (-5) 1 year ago

LMAO,or perhaps just cradle to grave food,shelter,transportation,medical,entertainment and a living wage for doing nothing except voting Democrat and funding Union thugs?

Now that's a Utopia I'm sure a Progtard such as yourself would be more than happy to fully endorse.

[-] 3 points by quantumystic (1710) from Memphis, TN 1 year ago

Excerpt from President Roosevelt's January 11, 1944 message to the Congress of the United States on the State of the Union: “ It is our duty now to begin to lay the plans and determine the strategy for the winning of a lasting peace and the establishment of an American standard of living higher than ever before known. We cannot be content, no matter how high that general standard of living may be, if some fraction of our people—whether it be one-third or one-fifth or one-tenth—is ill-fed, ill-clothed, ill-housed, and insecure. This Republic had its beginning, and grew to its present strength, under the protection of certain inalienable political rights—among them the right of free speech, free press, free worship, trial by jury, freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures. They were our rights to life and liberty. As our nation has grown in size and stature, however—as our industrial economy expanded—these political rights proved inadequate to assure us equality in the pursuit of happiness. We have come to a clear realization of the fact that true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. “Necessitous men are not free men.”[3] People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made. In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all—regardless of station, race, or creed. Among these are: The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation; The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation; The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living; The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad; The right of every family to a decent home; The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health; The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment; The right to a good education. All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being. America's own rightful place in the world depends in large part upon how fully these and similar rights have been carried into practice for all our citizens. For unless there is security here at home there cannot be lasting peace in the world.

[-] 1 points by beautifulworld (21444) 1 year ago

Nicholas Kristof is an expert at cultural hegemony. Hint: That is not a compliment.

[-] 0 points by Theeighthpieceuv8 (-32) from Seven Sisters, Wales 1 year ago

Generational dependency... an economic logic that does not require anything of me at all, except the patience to wait on line.

[-] -1 points by money4fear (-5) 1 year ago

The New York Times is by no means changing its ideological stripes. But Mr. Kristof deserves a hat tip for acknowledging what conservatives have known for decades: marriage reduces poverty, and boundless welfare vaporizes human flourishing.