Sunday, July 22, 2012


US poverty on track to rise to highest since 1960s

Some of us have been saying this for years, pointing out that it is the POLICY of Our Government (and governments around the world) to force into poverty increasing numbers of people in order to satisfy the unending financial demands of the international banksters.

There are no circumstances by which banksters are held to account for their own gambling losses. In all cases, banksters are to be made whole on the backs of the long-suffering People.

This has been the POLICY of the United States and almost all other governments on the face of the Earth since the financial meltdown of 2007 (or 08, depending).

This POLICY has led to massive unemployment throughout the developed economies, higher and ever higher prices for subsistence commodities in the underdeveloped world, leading to more and more desperate conditions for more and more millions of people each and every year.

Our Policy Makers insist that nothing can be done about it. As if this POLICY were somehow a Force of Nature, like an earthquake or tsunami or something, that has to be ridden out, and -- oh well, some people just won't make it. Too bad for them.

Nonsense on stilts.

Even worse are the numerous "studies" by various think tanks which seek to prove that no matter how many people are forced into poverty year by year, it's not all that bad because the poor in America still have refrigerators, glass windows, and many even have automobiles and heated apartments.

Obviously, Poverty isn't what it used to be.

And so long as the poor in America have any modern conveniences and/or a roof over their heads, they aren't really poor even if they go hungry from time to time and their electricity is cut off and there's no heat in their home.

That they have a home of some sort, and there is glass in most of the windows and they have a television -- even if it doesn't work -- should be enough for most people in poverty.

According to the shocking statistics, however, the poverty rate in the United States -- which keeps climbing every year -- is the highest it's been since the advent of the War On Poverty in 1965. More than one in 6 children are now living in poverty, and the number is climbing. Many millions of Americans have been forced out of the labor market, and many of them have never qualified for unemployment insurance benefits. Millions will never work for wages again. Hunger stalks the land as more and more people cannot scratch up enough money for basic food supplies and eligibility for food assistance is tightened. In fact, subsidies that benefit the People are being successively terminated or more and more strictly limited. All of this has had the effect of increasing the poverty rates in America.

All of it is a matter of POLICY. It is not an accident. It is happening by design.

Simultaneously, public education is being destroyed and civil infrastructure is falling to pieces. Again, it is happening as a matter of POLICY, it's not an accident or natural occurrence.

As we have seen over and over again, the government's POLICIES are attuned to the needs and the interests of the rich and their corporations, they have little or nothing to do with the public interest and the needs of the People. Voting does not change this simple fact.

Our government is so divorced from the People and so determined is it to govern contrary to the interests of the People it will seemingly bend over backwards to ensure that POLICIES which directly benefit the People are not enacted, and that POLICIES which benefited the People in the past are reversed.

This post at Filip Spagnoli's blog gives a better statistical picture of what's been going on than I can deliver in narrative form.

On the other hand:


The trouble is, Mr. Obama's POLICIES have had the effect of increasing poverty, hunger and homelessness (among other things) in America every year of his term.

And as a reminder:

Capitalism is the Crisis.



  1. Some of us have been saying this for years, pointing out that it is the POLICY of Our Government (and governments around the world)

    A formulation that doesn't stop being intellectually dishonest no matter how often it gets used.

    Maybe, just, maybe, the power of one of those governments to blow all the other governments sky-high has something to do with the uniformity of policy here?

    (I don't doubt that you appreciate this, but too many people have been bullied into using such rhetoric. ISTM it's a nationalist thing that goes far beyond the right-wing, many moons I saw Canadians bullied into silence on FDL when they complained there about U.S. interference in their politics. IIRC the line was something like "I feel sad for you that you think so little of your country that you delude yourself into thinking that this could happen." I'm quite certain the fellow who wrote that knew full well just how full of it he was; witness the reaction to the CableGate leaks showing how rife such interference was, mostly calls to hang Bradley Manning for pricking their cozy bubble of plausible deniability.)

  2. The problem is that many of those who comment on the strange, seemingly inexplicable actions of governments in response to the financial crisis haven't quite grasped the notion that the current unpleasantness is not due to some force of nature or unfortunate accident but due to policy decisions at the top.

    There is nothing "intellectually dishonest" about pointing it out.

    These policies are dictated by the bankster cartels against the public interest and the public will -- governments are captive to the banksters.

    No, it has nothing to do with "right" and/or "left." It is pure, naked aggressive use of economic power. The social democracies of Europe are as fully in thrall to the banksters as is the most reactionary crypto-fascist government -- or the United States or Canada for that matter.

    The uniformity of policy is due to the fact that the People do not have control of -- they barely have any influence on -- their governments; governments that are being bought and sold like pork bellies.

    And now we have the lovely situation of banksters and their corporate allies openly directing government as in:
    CEOs and Simpson-Bowles 3.0

    The fun never stops. Ah, but we know who some of the culprits are, though!

    So there's that.

  3. ‎"'You're competing against young people in Beijing and Bangalore. They're not hanging out. They're not getting over. They're not playing video games. They're not watching 'Real Housewives.' I'm just saying: It's a two-way street. You've got to earn success,' he said." - Barack H. Obama

  4. The strangest thing to me is that Obama has been pretty straightforward about his policies and intentions all along.

    I often pointed out during the 2008 campaign that he was a "corporatist, imperialist, warmonger slightly to the right of Hillary," given his statements. But for some reason, little of that was noticed in all the hallelujahs and hosannas.

    So. Here we are.

  5. "But for some reason, little of that was noticed in all the hallelujahs and hosannas."

    That's... pretty easy actually. I always said the most Left Wing thing about Barack Obama is the amount of melanin in his skin. His election actually does represent a significant Left Wing achievement, as tainted as it is.

    Not that it makes up for all the damage he did. I was hoping he was selected to save capitalism from itself. Wishful thinking on my part, of course. They still don't get that capitalism is in trouble. (Oh, and I'd love that capitalism is dying, if it's death throes weren't going to take a few generations.)

  6. Obama certainly had ample opportunity to save capitalism from itself, much as FDR did; instead, he turned out to be more Hooverish than Hoover.

    Some redeemer.