I’ve always been highly skeptical that welfare reform would do much to alter the “culture of poverty” We have plenty of historical examples of masses of poor children with few resources. Rarely did they buckle-down and pull themselves up by their boot straps. More commonly they just died from malnutrition and exposure.
I don’t see any reason to think that human beings have changed in some radical and fundamental way.
At the same time, however, I didn’t think the effort to limit benefits to the poor was serious. It was propped-up by a strong economy, but I assumed the benefits would come back over time and or if economy worsened. The march of history is to expand the dole, not contract it.
Yet, there is some evidence that this is not in fact happening. I haven’t looked at the issue in depth but these charts and the stories that I hear through the policy network are in agreement. The safety net is not offsetting the rise in poverty.
2 comments
Comments feed for this article
Tuesday ~ August 23rd, 2011 at 3:08 pm
Curmudgeon
I think human nature has changed in the past 30 years: empathy has completely collapsed and is now a dead letter in the anglosphere.
The idea of the poor dying of exposure and malnutrition used to be considered morally wrong and therefore worthy of public action. These days, however, the body politic is quite happy with the idea of the young, poor, and disabled (but not the old) dying in the streets.
The so-called arc of history does not necessarily lead towards greater human welfare.
Tuesday ~ August 30th, 2011 at 1:28 pm
Debit
Our politics within the last several decades has become more senselessly and excessively ideological, while shying away from practical (real-life) issues. Yes, our country has become increasingly delusional, which shows up in each election year: Lot more attention over ideological issues like abortion, gun control, tax cuts, but much less attention over poverty, shrinking middle class, and education.