Culture of dependency II

Rudy Canoza

unread,

Dec 20, 2013, 1:57:06 PM12/20/13

to

Profiting From a Childï¿½s Illiteracy
By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF
Published: December 7, 2012

THIS is what poverty sometimes looks like in America: parents here in
Appalachian hill country pulling their children out of literacy classes.
Moms and dads fear that if kids learn to read, they are less likely to
qualify for a monthly check for having an intellectual disability.

Many people in hillside mobile homes here are poor and desperate, and a
$698 monthly check per child from the Supplemental Security Income
program goes a long way ï¿½ and those checks continue until the child
turns 18.

ï¿½The kids get taken out of the program because the parents are going to
lose the check,ï¿½ said Billie Oaks, who runs a literacy program here in
Breathitt County, a poor part of Kentucky. ï¿½Itï¿½s heartbreaking.ï¿½

This is painful for a liberal to admit, but conservatives have a point
when they suggest that Americaï¿½s safety net can sometimes entangle
people in a soul-crushing dependency. Our poverty programs do rescue
many people, but other times they backfire.

Some young people here donï¿½t join the military (a traditional escape
route for poor, rural Americans) because itï¿½s easier to rely on food
stamps and disability payments.

Antipoverty programs also discourage marriage: In a means-tested program
like S.S.I., a woman raising a child may receive a bigger check if she
refrains from marrying that hard-working guy she likes. Yet marriage is
one of the best forces to blunt poverty. In married couple households
only one child in 10 grows up in poverty, while almost half do in
single-mother households.

Most wrenching of all are the parents who think itï¿½s best if a child
stays illiterate, because then the family may be able to claim a
disability check each month.

[more at
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/09/opinion/sunday/kristof-profiting-from-a-childs-illiteracy.html?_r=1&adxnnl=1&pagewanted=all&adxnnlx=1356530415-P1IyRcAZNABd1nwZZrRbGA&]

Rudy Canoza

unread,

Dec 20, 2013, 2:05:32 PM12/20/13

to

There's much more at that article - by a NY Times leftist - that needs
to be gavotted down the the throats of leftists because they don't have
the intellectual honesty to go read the story themselves:

About four decades ago, most of the children S.S.I. covered had
severe physical handicaps or mental retardation that made it
difficult for parents to hold jobs ï¿½ about 1 percent of all poor
children. But now 55 percent of the disabilities it covers are
fuzzier intellectual disabilities short of mental retardation,
where the diagnosis is less clear-cut. More than 1.2 million
children across America ï¿½ a full 8 percent of all low-income
children ï¿½ are now enrolled in S.S.I. as disabled, at an annual
cost of more than $9 billion.

That is a burden on taxpayers, of course, but it can be even
worse for children whose families have a huge stake in their
failing in school. Those kids may never recover: a 2009 study
found that nearly two-thirds of these children make the
transition at age 18 into S.S.I. for the adult disabled. They may
never hold a job in their entire lives and are condemned to a
life of poverty on the dole ï¿½ and thatï¿½s the outcome of a program
intended to fight poverty.

THEREï¿½S no doubt that some families with seriously disabled
children receive a lifeline from S.S.I. But the bottom line is
that we shouldnï¿½t try to fight poverty with a program that
sometimes perpetuates it.

A local school district official, Melanie Stevens, puts it this
way: ï¿½The greatest challenge we face as educators is how to break
that dependency on government. In second grade, they have a
dream. In seventh grade, they have a plan.ï¿½

That's just disgusting, but typical for left-wing dependency
cultivation: by seventh grade, poor dole scroungers have a "plan" for
how to continue to live off the efforts of others.

This is always the problem with every left-wing government "solution":
it is always corrupted.

Billy

unread,

Dec 26, 2013, 4:39:38 PM12/26/13

to

In article <4427c$52b49388$414e828e$29...@EVERESTKC.NET>,
Rudy Canoza <LaLaLa...@philhendrie.con> wrote:

> Profiting From a Child�s Illiteracy

> By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF
> Published: December 7, 2012
>
> THIS is what poverty sometimes looks like in America: parents here in
> Appalachian hill country pulling their children out of literacy classes.
> Moms and dads fear that if kids learn to read, they are less likely to
> qualify for a monthly check for having an intellectual disability.
>
> Many people in hillside mobile homes here are poor and desperate, and a
> $698 monthly check per child from the Supplemental Security Income

> program goes a long way � and those checks continue until the child
> turns 18.
>
> �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.�

>
> 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.
>

> Some young people here don�t join the military (a traditional escape
> route for poor, rural Americans) because it�s easier to rely on food

> stamps and disability payments.
>
> Antipoverty programs also discourage marriage: In a means-tested program
> like S.S.I., a woman raising a child may receive a bigger check if she
> refrains from marrying that hard-working guy she likes. Yet marriage is
> one of the best forces to blunt poverty. In married couple households
> only one child in 10 grows up in poverty, while almost half do in
> single-mother households.
>

> Most wrenching of all are the parents who think it�s best if a child

> stays illiterate, because then the family may be able to claim a
> disability check each month.
>
> [more at
> http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/09/opinion/sunday/kristof-profiting-from-a-chil
> ds-illiteracy.html?_r=1&adxnnl=1&pagewanted=all&adxnnlx=1356530415-P1IyRcAZNAB
> d1nwZZrRbGA&]

Good article, be sure to read all of it.

"I don�t want to suggest that America�s antipoverty programs are a
total failure. On the contrary, they are making a significant
difference. Nearly all homes here in the Appalachian hill country now
have electricity and running water, and people aren�t starving.

Our political system has created a particularly robust safety net for
the elderly, focused on Social Security and Medicare � because the
elderly vote. This safety net has brought down the poverty rate among
the elderly from about 35 percent in 1959 to under 9 percent today."

THERE�S no doubt that some families with seriously disabled children
receive a lifeline from S.S.I. But the bottom line is that we shouldn�t

try to fight poverty with a program that sometimes perpetuates it.

Obviously, if we have money for welfare, we have money to create jobs
like the WPA for example. What threatens the U.S. more, al Queda, or the
lack of an educated work force? Money needs to be transferred from our
boated military to our underfunded schools.

In 2007, trillions of dollars were transferred from America's middle
class to the the wealthiest of Americans. Now that Wall Street has
recovered, it's time for that money to return to Main Street.

<http://alangraysonemails.tumblr.com/post/64719421164/the-tea-party-no-mo
re-popular-than-the-klan>

<http://www.gallup.com/poll/160373/democrats-racially-diverse-republicans
-mostly-white.aspx>
Democrats Racially Diverse; Republicans Mostly White

Extinction isn't just for Dinosaurs anymore, join the "Guardians of
Privilege" on there Lemming's Run to Oblivion.

Tea,
the new Kool Aid
--
Remember Rachel Corrie
<http://www.rachelcorrie.org/>

Welcome to the New America.
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hA736oK9FPg>

Rudy Canoza

unread,

Dec 26, 2013, 4:58:12 PM12/26/13

to

On 12/26/2013 1:39 PM, Billy wrote:
> In article <4427c$52b49388$414e828e$29...@EVERESTKC.NET>,
> Rudy Canoza <LaLaLa...@philhendrie.con> wrote:
>

>> Profiting From a Childï¿½s Illiteracy

>> By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF
>> Published: December 7, 2012
>>
>> THIS is what poverty sometimes looks like in America: parents here in
>> Appalachian hill country pulling their children out of literacy classes.
>> Moms and dads fear that if kids learn to read, they are less likely to
>> qualify for a monthly check for having an intellectual disability.
>>
>> Many people in hillside mobile homes here are poor and desperate, and a
>> $698 monthly check per child from the Supplemental Security Income

>> program goes a long way ï¿½ and those checks continue until the child
>> turns 18.
>>
>> ï¿½The kids get taken out of the program because the parents are going to
>> lose the check,ï¿½ said Billie Oaks, who runs a literacy program here in
>> Breathitt County, a poor part of Kentucky. ï¿½Itï¿½s heartbreaking.ï¿½

>>
>> This is painful for a liberal to admit, but conservatives have a point

>> when they suggest that Americaï¿½s safety net can sometimes entangle

>> people in a soul-crushing dependency. Our poverty programs do rescue
>> many people, but other times they backfire.
>>

>> Some young people here donï¿½t join the military (a traditional escape
>> route for poor, rural Americans) because itï¿½s easier to rely on food

>> stamps and disability payments.
>>
>> Antipoverty programs also discourage marriage: In a means-tested program
>> like S.S.I., a woman raising a child may receive a bigger check if she
>> refrains from marrying that hard-working guy she likes. Yet marriage is
>> one of the best forces to blunt poverty. In married couple households
>> only one child in 10 grows up in poverty, while almost half do in
>> single-mother households.
>>

>> Most wrenching of all are the parents who think itï¿½s best if a child

>> stays illiterate, because then the family may be able to claim a
>> disability check each month.
>>
>> [more at
>> http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/09/opinion/sunday/kristof-profiting-from-a-chil
>> ds-illiteracy.html?_r=1&adxnnl=1&pagewanted=all&adxnnlx=1356530415-P1IyRcAZNAB
>> d1nwZZrRbGA&]
>
> Good article, be sure to read all of it.
>

> "I donï¿½t want to suggest that Americaï¿½s antipoverty programs are a
> total failure.

I did read all of it. The author nonetheless concludes that there is a
*LOT* that is wrong with America's so-called "antipoverty" programs,
including the fact that they promote a disgusting and corrosive sense of
dependency.

You really are a particularly fuckwitted little leftist stooge, "Billy".
I don't suppose it would occur to you to use a nickname that doesn't
make you sound like a clueless juvenile, would you?

spamthespammer

unread,

Dec 26, 2013, 5:01:30 PM12/26/13

to

On 12/26/2013 1:39 PM, Billy wrote:

========================================================
TOPIC HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THESE NEWSGROUPS - DROP DEAD
========================================================

Billy

unread,

Dec 26, 2013, 5:03:05 PM12/26/13

to

In article <601d9$52b49246$414e828e$15...@EVERESTKC.NET>,

Rudy Canoza <LaLaLa...@philhendrie.con> wrote:

> On 12/20/2013 10:57 AM, Rudy Canoza wrote:

> > Profiting From a Child�s Illiteracy

> > By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF
> > Published: December 7, 2012
> >
> > THIS is what poverty sometimes looks like in America: parents here in
> > Appalachian hill country pulling their children out of literacy classes.
> > Moms and dads fear that if kids learn to read, they are less likely to
> > qualify for a monthly check for having an intellectual disability.
> >
> > Many people in hillside mobile homes here are poor and desperate, and a
> > $698 monthly check per child from the Supplemental Security Income

> > program goes a long way � and those checks continue until the child
> > turns 18.
> >
> > �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.�

> >
> > 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.
> >

> > Some young people here don�t join the military (a traditional escape
> > route for poor, rural Americans) because it�s easier to rely on food

> > stamps and disability payments.
> >
> > Antipoverty programs also discourage marriage: In a means-tested program
> > like S.S.I., a woman raising a child may receive a bigger check if she
> > refrains from marrying that hard-working guy she likes. Yet marriage is
> > one of the best forces to blunt poverty. In married couple households
> > only one child in 10 grows up in poverty, while almost half do in
> > single-mother households.
> >

> > Most wrenching of all are the parents who think it�s best if a child

> > stays illiterate, because then the family may be able to claim a
> > disability check each month.
> >
> > [more at
> > http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/09/opinion/sunday/kristof-profiting-from-a-ch
> > ilds-illiteracy.html?_r=1&adxnnl=1&pagewanted=all&adxnnlx=1356530415-P1IyRcA
> > ZNABd1nwZZrRbGA&]
> >
>
> There's much more at that article - by a NY Times leftist - that needs
> to be gavotted down the the throats of leftists because they don't have
> the intellectual honesty to go read the story themselves:
>
> About four decades ago, most of the children S.S.I. covered had
> severe physical handicaps or mental retardation that made it

> difficult for parents to hold jobs � about 1 percent of all poor

> children. But now 55 percent of the disabilities it covers are
> fuzzier intellectual disabilities short of mental retardation,
> where the diagnosis is less clear-cut. More than 1.2 million

> children across America � a full 8 percent of all low-income
> children � are now enrolled in S.S.I. as disabled, at an annual

> cost of more than $9 billion.
>
> That is a burden on taxpayers, of course, but it can be even
> worse for children whose families have a huge stake in their
> failing in school. Those kids may never recover: a 2009 study
> found that nearly two-thirds of these children make the
> transition at age 18 into S.S.I. for the adult disabled. They may
> never hold a job in their entire lives and are condemned to a

> life of poverty on the dole � and that�s the outcome of a program
> intended to fight poverty.
>
> THERE�S no doubt that some families with seriously disabled

> children receive a lifeline from S.S.I. But the bottom line is

> that we shouldn�t try to fight poverty with a program that

> sometimes perpetuates it.
>
> A local school district official, Melanie Stevens, puts it this

> way: �The greatest challenge we face as educators is how to break

> that dependency on government. In second grade, they have a

> dream. In seventh grade, they have a plan.�

>
> That's just disgusting, but typical for left-wing dependency
> cultivation: by seventh grade, poor dole scroungers have a "plan" for
> how to continue to live off the efforts of others.

<http://thinkbynumbers.org/government-spending/corporate-welfare/corporat
e-welfare-statistics-vs-social-welfare-statistics/>
The common usage definition of social welfare includes welfare checks
and food stamps. Welfare checks are supplied through a federal program
called Temporary Aid for Needy Families. Total welfare spending of this
nature was about $63 billion in 2002. For some perspective, that�s about
3 percent of the total federal budget.

Definition: corporate welfare
n. Financial aid, such as a subsidy, provided by a government to
corporations or other businesses.

The Cato Institute estimated that, in 2002, $93 billion were devoted to
corporate welfare. This is approximately 5 percent of the federal budget.

To clarify what is and isn�t corporate welfare, a �no-bid� Iraq contract
for the prestigious Halliburton, would not be considered corporate
welfare because the government technically directly receives some good
or service in exchange for this expenditure. Based on the Pentagon's
Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) finding of $1.4 billion of
overcharging and fraud, I suppose the primary service they provide could
be considered to be repeatedly violating the American taxpayer. On the
other hand, the $15 billion in subsidies contained in the Energy Policy
Act of 2005, to the oil, gas, and coal industries, would be considered
corporate welfare because no goods or services are directly returned to
the government in exchange for these expenditures.

Tax breaks targeted to benefit specific corporations could also be
considered a form of welfare. Tax loopholes force other businesses and
individual taxpayers without the same political clout to pick up the
slack and sacrifice a greater share of their hard-earned money to
decrease the financial burden on these corporations. However, to
simplify matters, we�ve only included financial handouts to companies in
our working definition of corporate welfare.

Moreover, when the poor get money, they spend it, which helps the
economy. When the rich get it, they just sit on it, which only helps
them.

>
> This is always the problem with every left-wing government "solution":
> it is always corrupted.

There isn't a left wing in government. There is only a right wing, and a
far, far right wing.

<http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2012/02/how-much-do-we-spend-nonwo
rking-poor>

And isn't it interesting that the states that recieve the most from
Federal tax dollars do the most complaining about redistribution of
wealth?
<http://visualeconomics.creditloan.com/united-states-federal-tax-dollars/
>

And isn't interesting that those states have been the most racist?

And isn't it interesting that the US Census declared that in 2010 15.1%
of the general population lived in poverty:
9.9% of all non-Hispanic white persons
12.1% of all Asian persons
26.6% of all Hispanic persons (of any race)
27.4% of all black persons.

Isn't it interesting that the demographic with the smallest percentage
of poverty wants to do away with it for others.

Verrrrrrrrrry interesting.

Rudy Canoza

unread,

Dec 26, 2013, 5:09:49 PM12/26/13

to

On 12/26/2013 2:03 PM, Billy wrote:
> In article <601d9$52b49246$414e828e$15...@EVERESTKC.NET>,
> Rudy Canoza <LaLaLa...@philhendrie.con> wrote:
>
>> On 12/20/2013 10:57 AM, Rudy Canoza wrote:

>>> Profiting From a Childï¿½s Illiteracy

>>> By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF
>>> Published: December 7, 2012
>>>
>>> THIS is what poverty sometimes looks like in America: parents here in
>>> Appalachian hill country pulling their children out of literacy classes.
>>> Moms and dads fear that if kids learn to read, they are less likely to
>>> qualify for a monthly check for having an intellectual disability.
>>>
>>> Many people in hillside mobile homes here are poor and desperate, and a
>>> $698 monthly check per child from the Supplemental Security Income

>>> program goes a long way ï¿½ and those checks continue until the child
>>> turns 18.
>>>
>>> ï¿½The kids get taken out of the program because the parents are going to
>>> lose the check,ï¿½ said Billie Oaks, who runs a literacy program here in
>>> Breathitt County, a poor part of Kentucky. ï¿½Itï¿½s heartbreaking.ï¿½

>>>
>>> This is painful for a liberal to admit, but conservatives have a point

>>> when they suggest that Americaï¿½s safety net can sometimes entangle

>>> people in a soul-crushing dependency. Our poverty programs do rescue
>>> many people, but other times they backfire.
>>>

>>> Some young people here donï¿½t join the military (a traditional escape
>>> route for poor, rural Americans) because itï¿½s easier to rely on food

>>> stamps and disability payments.
>>>
>>> Antipoverty programs also discourage marriage: In a means-tested program
>>> like S.S.I., a woman raising a child may receive a bigger check if she
>>> refrains from marrying that hard-working guy she likes. Yet marriage is
>>> one of the best forces to blunt poverty. In married couple households
>>> only one child in 10 grows up in poverty, while almost half do in
>>> single-mother households.
>>>

>>> Most wrenching of all are the parents who think itï¿½s best if a child

>>> stays illiterate, because then the family may be able to claim a
>>> disability check each month.
>>>
>>> [more at
>>> http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/09/opinion/sunday/kristof-profiting-from-a-ch
>>> ilds-illiteracy.html?_r=1&adxnnl=1&pagewanted=all&adxnnlx=1356530415-P1IyRcA
>>> ZNABd1nwZZrRbGA&]
>>>
>>
>> There's much more at that article - by a NY Times leftist - that needs
>> to be gavotted down the the throats of leftists because they don't have
>> the intellectual honesty to go read the story themselves:
>>
>> About four decades ago, most of the children S.S.I. covered had
>> severe physical handicaps or mental retardation that made it

>> difficult for parents to hold jobs ï¿½ about 1 percent of all poor

>> children. But now 55 percent of the disabilities it covers are
>> fuzzier intellectual disabilities short of mental retardation,
>> where the diagnosis is less clear-cut. More than 1.2 million

>> children across America ï¿½ a full 8 percent of all low-income
>> children ï¿½ are now enrolled in S.S.I. as disabled, at an annual

>> cost of more than $9 billion.
>>
>> That is a burden on taxpayers, of course, but it can be even
>> worse for children whose families have a huge stake in their
>> failing in school. Those kids may never recover: a 2009 study
>> found that nearly two-thirds of these children make the
>> transition at age 18 into S.S.I. for the adult disabled. They may
>> never hold a job in their entire lives and are condemned to a

>> life of poverty on the dole ï¿½ and thatï¿½s the outcome of a program
>> intended to fight poverty.
>>
>> THEREï¿½S no doubt that some families with seriously disabled

>> children receive a lifeline from S.S.I. But the bottom line is

>> that we shouldnï¿½t try to fight poverty with a program that

>> sometimes perpetuates it.
>>
>> A local school district official, Melanie Stevens, puts it this

>> way: ï¿½The greatest challenge we face as educators is how to break

>> that dependency on government. In second grade, they have a

>> dream. In seventh grade, they have a plan.ï¿½

>>
>> That's just disgusting, but typical for left-wing dependency
>> cultivation: by seventh grade, poor dole scroungers have a "plan" for
>> how to continue to live off the efforts of others.
>
> <http://thinkbynumbers.org/government-spending/corporate-welfare/corporat
> e-welfare-statistics-vs-social-welfare-statistics/>
> The common usage definition of social welfare includes welfare checks
> and food stamps.

Those programs are bad and wrong, in large part because they encourage
dependency and an entitlement mentality.

Message has been deleted

The Daring Dufas

unread,

Dec 26, 2013, 9:10:14 PM12/26/13

to

On 12/26/2013 4:03 PM, Demented Racist Silly Billy wrote:
> In article <601d9$52b49246$414e828e$15...@EVERESTKC.NET>,
> Rudy Canoza <LaLaLa...@philhendrie.con> wrote:
>

Poor Billy, Negro American and professional victim of anything he can
blame on Caucasians. ^_^

Kill Whitey!

TDD

The Daring Dufas

unread,

Dec 26, 2013, 9:12:18 PM12/26/13

to

On 12/26/2013 3:39 PM, Demented Racist Silly Billy wrote:
> In article <4427c$52b49388$414e828e$29...@EVERESTKC.NET>,
> Rudy Canoza <LaLaLa...@philhendrie.con> wrote:
>

Rudy Canoza

unread,

Dec 26, 2013, 10:38:46 PM12/26/13

to

On 12/26/2013 7:20 PM, Baxter wrote:
> Rudy Canoza <LaLaLa...@philhendrie.con> wrote in
> news:e6645$52bcdf1a$414e828e$20...@EVERESTKC.NET:
>
>> On 12/26/2013 5:52 PM, Siri Cruz wrote:
>>> In article <3ab7b$52bcd700$414e828e$18...@EVERESTKC.NET>,
>>>> Leftists created and sustain the culture of dependency.
>>>
>>> But according to you it's conservative who are the dependents.
>>
>> Mostly it's the clients of leftists who are dependents.
>>
>> I don't think SSI-swigging hillbillies in Appalachia have much
>> political consciousness.
>
> Actually they pretty much vote Repug/conservative.

Actually you don't have any fucking clue how they vote. Actually you're
a bullshitting left-wing extremist cocksucker.

>> Regardless of what political consciousness
>> they might have, they are dependents, and leftists made them that way.
>> As we have seen, once a culture of dependency takes hold, it's self
>> sustaining. It's a bad thing.
>>
> And your fix is to kill them off.

No, my fix is to break the cycle of dependency.

Stop pretending you have any sympathy for Appalachian dole scroungers.
It's obvious you don't.

Billy

unread,

Dec 28, 2013, 3:17:40 PM12/28/13