Wake Up, America! Wake Up! PLEASE!!

Status
Not open for further replies.
America's poor becoming more destitute under Trump: U.N. expert




By Stephanie Nebehay,Reuters

GENEVA (Reuters) - Poverty in the United States is extensive and deepening under the Trump administration whose policies seem aimed at removing the safety net from millions of poor people, while rewarding the rich, a U.N. human rights investigator has found.
Philip Alston, U.N. special rapporteur on extreme poverty, called on U.S. authorities to provide solid social protection and address underlying problems, rather than "punishing and imprisoning the poor".

While welfare benefits and access to health insurance are being slashed, President Donald Trump's tax reform has awarded "financial windfalls" to the mega-rich and large companies, further increasing inequality, he said in a report.
U.S. policies since President Lyndon Johnson's war on poverty in the 1960s have been "neglectful at best," he said.
"But the policies pursued over the past year seem deliberately designed to remove basic protections from the poorest, punish those who are not in employment and make even basic health care into a privilege to be earned rather than a right of citizenship," Alston said.


Almost 41 million people or 12.7 percent live in poverty, 18.5 million in extreme poverty, and children account for one in three poor, he said. The United States has the highest youth poverty rate among industrialized countries, he added.



Its citizens live shorter and sicker lives compared to those living in all other rich democracies, eradicable tropical diseases are increasingly prevalent and it has the world's highest incarceration rate ... and the highest obesity levels in the developed world," Alston said.
However, the data from the U.S. Census Bureau he cited covers only the period through 2016, and he gave no comparative figures on the extent of poverty before and after Trump came into office in January 2017.

The Australian, a veteran U.N. rights expert and New York University law professor, will present his report to the United Nations Human Rights Council later this month.

It is based on his mission in December to several U.S. states, including rural Alabama, a slum in downtown Los Angeles, California, and the U.S. territory of Puerto Rico.

A U.S. official in Geneva, asked for comment, told Reuters: "The Trump Administration has made it a priority to provide economic opportunity for all Americans."
"SHAMEFUL STATISTICS"

Citing "shameful statistics" linked to entrenched racial discrimination, Alston said that African Americans are 2.5 times more likely than whites to live in poverty and their unemployment rate is more than double. Women, Hispanics, immigrants, and indigenous people also suffer high rates.
At least 550,000 people are homeless in America, he said.

"The tax reform will worsen this situation and ensure that the United States remains the most unequal society in the developed world," Alston said. "The planned dramatic cuts in welfare will essentially shred crucial dimensions of a safety net that is already full of holes."



The tax overhaul, which sailed through the Republican-controlled U.S. Congress in December, permanently cut the top corporate rate to 21 percent from 35 percent. Tax cuts for individuals, however, are temporary and expire after 2025.
Trump has said they will lead to more take-home pay for workers and has touted bonuses some workers received from their employers as evidence the law is working.

Alston dismissed allegations of widespread fraud in the welfare system and criticized the U.S. criminal justice system. It sets large bail bonds for a defendant seeking to go free pending trial, meaning wealthy suspects can afford bail while the poor remain in custody, often losing their jobs, he said.

"There is no magic recipe for eliminating extreme poverty and each level of government must make its own good-faith decisions. At the end of the day, however, particularly in a rich country like the United States, the persistence of extreme poverty is a political choice made by those in power," he said.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/americas-poor-becoming-more-destitute-under-trump-u-110313048.html
 
Reagan is directly responsible for destroying the Middle Class of America, and I am not the only one who thinks so. A number of political analysts have written on this very subject.

James Joiner on allvoices.com calls him "the destroyer of main street" and "the ******* of this nightmare we are living.

He goes on to state of the Republicans: "They call themselves the party of Ronald Reagan! That scares the hell out of me because Reagan was the ******* of the war mongering high Deficit compassionate Conservatives that gave Birth to much war present and future unless Obama can turn around the disaster they created around the world with their war mongering!" (http://www.allvoices.com/contribute...in-street-and-a-ronald-reagan-jr-i-agree-with).

Pablo Mayhew, a columnist on rawstory.com goes so far as to refer to Reagan as a criminal no better than his Republican predecessor, Richard Nixon. He relates Reagan's role in the Iran-Contra affair in which Reagan pled "forgetfulness" when pressed about it.

Mayhew concludes with these words: " as one great writer has contended, that Richard Nixon broke the heart of the American Dream, then Reagan broke its back Now.... the American Dream is clearly down for the count." (http://www.rawstory.com/exclusives/mayhew/reagan_destroyed_american_dream.htm)

And listen to what Thom Hartmann, prominent television and radio talk show host and commentator, had to say about the devastation today on our economy that was the direct result, he reports, of Reaganomics when he appeared as a guest on Dateline just prior to Obama taking office.

"when Reagan came into office we were the largest exporter of manufacturing goods and the largest importer of raw materials on the planet. And, the largest creditor--more people owed us money than anybody else in the world. Now, just 28 years later, we're the largest importer of finished goods, manufactured goods; the largest exporter of raw materials--which is kind of the definition of a third-world nation -- and we're the most in-debt of any country in the world. This is the absolute consequence of Reaganomics." (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/thom-hartmann/thom-hartmann-defends-the_b_150964.html)

These graphs bear out exactly what all these people have been saying about Reagan being directly responsible for destroying America and the Middle Class. In looking at these pay particulular attention to 1981, the year Reagan took office.

Obviously, George H. Bush, Clinton, and Gorge W could have reversed this trend; instead, they, for the most part became keepers and harbingers of it.
working people's share of the benefits from increased productivity took a sudden turn down:
This resulted in intense concentration of wealth at the top:
And ****** working people to spend down savings to get by:


Which ****** working people to go into debt: (total household debt aspercentage of GDP)

"Conservative policies transformed the United States from the largest creditor nation to the largest debtor nation in just a few years, and it has only gotten worse since then: " So avows the author who researched the subject and collected the graphs. (http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2010062415/reagan-revolution-home-roost-charts)

You can find all kinds of books and articles praising Reagan, but what I have presented are the cold, hard facts about what the man did to our economy with his Reaganomics. For those who would like to read more on this subject, go to:

Reagan Revolution Home To Roost: America Drowning In Debt
Reagan Revolution Home To Roost: America IsCrumbling
Finance, Mine, Oil & Debt Disasters: THIS Is Deregulation


I partially agree. Reagan's failure is directly attributable to his compromising with liberals. By contrast, when Bill Clinton was ****** to compromise with sound fiscal policy put forth by real conservatives, we saw conservative fiscal policies, and their results for the first time in most people's lives.

Reagan's largest successes were foreign policy. A policy being copied by Trump by the way.

You would have though both Republicans and Democrats would have learned that a policy actually worked. But they are pretty much the same.

Unfortunately we have had very few fiscal conservatives, or civil libertarians. It always entertains me when Democrats melt down over Republicasn, never recognizing they are largely the same.

But things are pretty simple. Some policies have been documented as being always successful, and some have been documented as always failing.

Past doesn't prove future, but it sure will make a lot of posts on here fun to look back on in another couple of years. When certain things become very, very clear. At that point we can base the argument on results -v- results.
 
In actual result? Almost exactly the same. In words? Not so much.

I view the world in tangible events. You apparently view the world based on words and promises.

Comedy bronze indeed.
 
In actual result? Almost exactly the same. In words? Not so much.

I view the world in tangible events. You apparently view the world based on words and promises.

Comedy bronze indeed.

What are your tangible results? It isn't North Korea denuclearizing. What has Russia stopped doing? And we already know Germany and other NATO allies pledged to increase spending 4 years before Trump took office. So tell me all about the tangible results you speak of?

Maybe you mean taking children away from their parents and then not being able to reunite them following a court order?
 
Tangible results take some time. North Korea has not tested, or fired a missile. Nor a nuke.That is a tangible result. And this is pretty early on. All prior Presidents had much, much longer to produce anything tangible. All failed miserably.

Your second paragraph is misplaced. This has been going on a long time. There has been no real change in policy here.

Again, you seem to be driven by emotion and words, rather than actions and results.
 
That isn't a tangible result. You don't need to test when R&D is complete. The promise was complete denuclearization .

I know you are trying to be demeaning by claiming I am being "emotional". But it is just a fact. And I like your" Bu..Bu..But other presidents did it too!!!" bit of whining.
 
And I have said repeatedly, do you really expect a fully developed outcome in this short of a period of time? Because that is disingenuous, and unreasonable.

We have the results we have. What I posted is happening. For you to say it is not tangible is to say it didn't, or isn't happening. I can't help you with denial.

We'll get more results as time goes on. Try to stay rooted in reality, not the way you want things to be. Being rooted in reality made it much easier for me to tolerate the last several Presidents. All failures on a monumental scale. Both sides of the aisle.
 
Denial! Again, comedy bronze from you. I don't deny that testing has stopped. I just don't believe it means NK is denuclearizing like you. Your bar is pretty low.

But hey, at least you admit that Trump has no real results to speak of. You sound like you can indeed see the future. Stay rooted in that reality you speak of.

Monumental failures! Getting better. Comedy silver.
 
We can both check back from time to time and see how things are progressing. Unfortunately for you, it's isn't going to take a lot to outperform the past administration, and an argument can already be made, based on tangible results, that it already has.

You can make your argument based on whatever you'd like. But in life there is a scoreboard, just as in college football. Results versus wishful thinking. Some measures of score are wins and losses, income, quality of life, success, failure, ad infinitium. One thing that is universally discounted from the scoreboard are things people say, which are divergent to what is actually happening, or reality. e.g. "I know the final score was 42-14, but we beat them in every area of the game, and the officials....."
 
Brilliant, insightful response, full of substance.

And yes, already happened. And no, not just according to me, but according to a wide variety of experts on each side. And yes, too soon to evaluate. For reasonable people rooted in reality anyway. But no, not too soon to evaluate the past 15-20 years. Because they actually happened, and are documented, complete with consequences and results. Which is real. Unlike opinions, which are opinions.

Stay focused.
 
Odd, that you say it is too soon to evaluate in one sentence but proclaim Trump has indeed done more in the next. Which is it?

And you realize that the "past 15-20 years" is not germane to the conversation and is a poorly built straw man, right? 2014 - 2017 perhaps.

Stay focus indeed.
 
I never said what you stated. I said an argument could be made. Actually an argument has already been made. That's the post your replying to correct?

Straw man? Are you suggesting when the debate is largely about Trump's results to date, which are limited due to time on job, as compared to past results, that comparing results to results is not valid?

How exactly do we compare results, and how exactly is the past 15-20 of results not germane if we are comparing results?

Interesting logical construction.
 
"And yes, already happened." That is a quote from you.

So again I ask, is it too soon to evaluate or not?

How does one compare results of policies that were instituted for different outcomes? "That spoon doesn't cut meat nearly as well as a knife."

Apparently you don't understand logic...
 
Did Trump not just send $200 to Ukraine? What did Obama send? It was not military related. Now you want me to go backwards, and answer again things I've already answered, and answered with links posted? O.K., I just did.

You're not doing well. I know you want it to be otherwise so badly, but wanting it to be another way, and the way it actually is are two different things.

You see, what I posted actually happened. What you post, largely anyway, are things you suspect might happen, or hope to happen. Or things that have happened, and your take is different than anyone else's take, even in the face of insurmountable evidence to the contrary.

I understand logic just fine. This is why you never answered my point about straw man. Which, interestingly enough, is yet another example of something that actually happened, versus words posted on a message board.

The way things really are, as documented, versus what someone on a message boards wants, rewriting and revising history in the process.
 
I am not reading through all of your posts.

Interesting how you don't answer my question.

So you got the one thing. Cudos.

So you post what actually happened. Cool. What does it mean that NK hasn't tested recently? Is NK denuclearized? Do you know? That was the promise. Trump gave up joint military exercises with SK. That absolutely happened.

Didn't answer your question? You flinging bullshit to see what sticks. How do you compare 2 different policies that have different goals? Answer that. I doubt you will.
 
Same goal. You're conflating. This statement is pretty telling, and it is as close to honesty and reality as you have gotten:

I am not reading through all of your posts.

You should edit it to say, I'm not reading anything that is in any way different than my worldview. I really don't want truth and facts, especially if they are divergent from my extreme partisan views. I am a partisan, and it is more comfortable for me to be a partisan, than it is for me to make the smallest attempt to see the other side. My side is always right, and the other side is always wrong.

Good luck.
 
Please spare me the sanctimony.

But I noticed you dodged my question about comparing apples to oranges. Since you give up, want to go back to the dictator conversation?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top