The failure of LBJ's Great Society

[Redwingfan9]

In 1940 89% of black families were in poverty. By 1960 it was down to 47%. It then slowed in the 60's and 70's and now hovers around 30%. At the start of affirmative action black poverty was 30%, it dropped 1 point in 20 years.

Why did the decrease in black poverty slow? In 1960 around 75% of black children were in married homes, today 75% of black births are illegitimate and children live in one parent homes. The welfare state replaced fathers. The end result is a massive increase in black crime 45-50% of violent crime is committed by blacks, mostly against other blacks. The drug war has made those numbers worse of course by creating drug gangs that exist to feed demand for drugs but the lack of fathers in the home, their income replaced by the state, has had immeasurable negative consequences.

Minimum wage laws huet blacks, particularly teenagers. When people earn their market worth, there are fewer applicants and less competition. Minimum wage laws force below market value labor to compete with more valuable labor for jobs that are lower in number because of state action. Who does this hurt? Teenagers of all races. In black communities, the very people you don't want idle on the streets are the very ones priced out of the market by minimum wage laws.

Affirmative action has hurt blacks. It has taken kids who are capable of college work and put them in colleges a notch or two above their capabilities. They end up on academic probation, they feel inferior, they're resentful and many drop out. If they had gone to colleges they're capable of doing the work at, they would thrive.

The problem in this country isn't systematic racism. The problem is liberal do gooders who use government to further an agenda that actually hurts blacks. Slavery and the wickedness of government enforced racism (Jim Crow) couldn't destroy the black family but after two generations the liberal welfare state has decimated the black family all while claiming everyone who doesn't support their policies is a racist. The Great Society failed to do what free markets and individualism had been doing for blacks even with outrageous government blocks put in their way.

 

[istodolez]

Now you should read what black authors, thinkers and academics have to say about the topic of systemic racism.

 

[hedrick]

The great society stopped with Reagan. Some elements continued, but not the overall project.

 

[Broken Fence]

Well the breaking up of the home started back when Rockefeller Foundation organized women the right to vote. This took women out of home for work and the 1% got more taxes. This was a planned assault on the family unit.

 

[Redwingfan9]

Now you should read what black authors, thinkers and academics have to say about the topic of systemic racism.

I have. Thomas Sowell and Walter Williams are two of my favorite academics.

 

[Kentonio]

In 1940 89% of black families were in poverty. By 1960 it was down to 47%. It then slowed in the 60's and 70's and now hovers around 30%. At the start of affirmative action black poverty was 30%, it dropped 1 point in 20 years.

Why did the decrease in black poverty slow? In 1960 around 75% of black children were in married homes, today 75% of black births are illegitimate and children live in one parent homes. The welfare state replaced fathers. The end result is a massive increase in black crime 45-50% of violent crime is committed by blacks, mostly against other blacks. The drug war has made those numbers worse of course by creating drug gangs that exist to feed demand for drugs but the lack of fathers in the home, their income replaced by the state, has had immeasurable negative consequences.

Minimum wage laws huet blacks, particularly teenagers. When people earn their market worth, there are fewer applicants and less competition. Minimum wage laws force below market value labor to compete with more valuable labor for jobs that are lower in number because of state action. Who does this hurt? Teenagers of all races. In black communities, the very people you don't want idle on the streets are the very ones priced out of the market by minimum wage laws.

Affirmative action has hurt blacks. It has taken kids who are capable of college work and put them in colleges a notch or two above their capabilities. They end up on academic probation, they feel inferior, they're resentful and many drop out. If they had gone to colleges they're capable of doing the work at, they would thrive.

The problem in this country isn't systematic racism. The problem is liberal do gooders who use government to further an agenda that actually hurts blacks. Slavery and the wickedness of government enforced racism (Jim Crow) couldn't destroy the black family but after two generations the liberal welfare state has decimated the black family all while claiming everyone who doesn't support their policies is a racist. The Great Society failed to do what free markets and individualism had been doing for blacks even with outrageous government blocks put in their way.

Well that's certainly an 'interesting' take on things..

 

[Redwingfan9]

The great society stopped with Reagan. Some elements continued, but not the overall project.

Reagan did not cut welfare in any meaningful way. In fact, it was Clinton who rolled back welfare in 1996. Welfare still remained though and it continued to hurt black thereafter.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Intact families (dad, mom, kids) fare better than single parent families. Kids in such families use their minimum wage earnings to buy stuff for themselves rather than having to help pay bills.

 

[Brian Mcnamee]

In 1940 89% of black families were in poverty. By 1960 it was down to 47%. It then slowed in the 60's and 70's and now hovers around 30%. At the start of affirmative action black poverty was 30%, it dropped 1 point in 20 years.

Why did the decrease in black poverty slow? In 1960 around 75% of black children were in married homes, today 75% of black births are illegitimate and children live in one parent homes. The welfare state replaced fathers. The end result is a massive increase in black crime 45-50% of violent crime is committed by blacks, mostly against other blacks. The drug war has made those numbers worse of course by creating drug gangs that exist to feed demand for drugs but the lack of fathers in the home, their income replaced by the state, has had immeasurable negative consequences.

Minimum wage laws huet blacks, particularly teenagers. When people earn their market worth, there are fewer applicants and less competition. Minimum wage laws force below market value labor to compete with more valuable labor for jobs that are lower in number because of state action. Who does this hurt? Teenagers of all races. In black communities, the very people you don't want idle on the streets are the very ones priced out of the market by minimum wage laws.

Affirmative action has hurt blacks. It has taken kids who are capable of college work and put them in colleges a notch or two above their capabilities. They end up on academic probation, they feel inferior, they're resentful and many drop out. If they had gone to colleges they're capable of doing the work at, they would thrive.

The problem in this country isn't systematic racism. The problem is liberal do gooders who use government to further an agenda that actually hurts blacks. Slavery and the wickedness of government enforced racism (Jim Crow) couldn't destroy the black family but after two generations the liberal welfare state has decimated the black family all while claiming everyone who doesn't support their policies is a racist. The Great Society failed to do what free markets and individualism had been doing for blacks even with outrageous government blocks put in their way.

Go Wings Go. good insight.

 

[Chesterton]

Well that's certainly an 'interesting' take on things..

All this and more of the same has been well-researched by many black academics and thinkers. They're largely ignored or called Uncle Toms.

 

[Redwingfan9]

Intact families (dad, mom, kids) fare better than single parent families. Kids in such families use their minimum wage earnings to buy stuff for themselves rather than having to help pay bills.

Even in poor families, teens who work to add to the family pot stay out of trouble. Teens with jobs are less likely to commit crimes. It's why minimum wage laws are so bad for black families. When minimum wage is above market value, it keeps black teens from obtaining jobs. That denies them valuable work experience and money but it also creates a bad combination of idleness and youth. That's true for all teens, but it's more pronounced in single parent households of which blacks are disproportionately members.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Even in poor families, teens who work to add to the family pot stay out of trouble. Teens with jobs are less likely to commit crimes. It's why minimum wage laws are so bad for black families. When minimum wage is above market value, it keeps black teens from obtaining jobs. That denies them valuable work experience and money but it also creates a bad combination of idleness and youth. That's true for all teens, but it's more pronounced in single parent households of which blacks are disproportionately members.

About half of the states have minimum wages above the Federal wage of $7.25.

Minimum Wage Tracker

Minimum wages were never meant to support a family, a good reason not to start one without education and training. However single persons entering the job market can do ok on it as long as they are still living at home. If one isn't going on to college or military service one can lay a good foundation on one or two minimum wage jobs to start. Entry level is just that. If one is entering a job that requires little skill minimum wage is fair pay.

 

[istodolez]

I have. Thomas Sowell and Walter Williams are two of my favorite academics.

Have you read any Kendi or Alexander?

 

[istodolez]

Minimum wages were never meant to support a family

What were they established for?

 

[istodolez]

Reagan did not cut welfare in any meaningful way. In fact, it was Clinton who rolled back welfare in 1996. Welfare still remained though and it continued to hurt black thereafter.

America has never really embraced the idea of "welfare" or "social safety net" so it's hard to say if welfare has had some systemic bad effect on people. And the number of people who stay on welfare for extended periods of time is actually lower than you would assume based on reading Conservatives.

America has far too many people in poverty related to our national wealth. We have steadfastly stood four-square against "helping" people in any meaningful way. We are Americans! That means so long as "I got mine" I can ameliorate any modest guilt I have by donating to a couple charities and calling it a day.

Unfortunately that isn't going to help as much as establishing a society that actually CARES about people with less. Instead we prefer to demonize the poor or blame the poor. Anything to save our precious little pile of gold we accumulated for ourselves.

Acting like welfare somehow hurts the poor is the most absurd myth we have concocted in our fever-dream of a political philosophy in this country. How pathological of us to find a way to demonize the idea of caring for others. We have a sickness in our national soul. It's more of a cancer. But even the Christians on here know it's real name. It's our worship of Mammon.

 

[Speedwell]

In 1940 89% of black families were in poverty. By 1960 it was down to 47%. It then slowed in the 60's and 70's and now hovers around 30%. At the start of affirmative action black poverty was 30%, it dropped 1 point in 20 years.

Why did the decrease in black poverty slow? In 1960 around 75% of black children were in married homes, today 75% of black births are illegitimate and children live in one parent homes. The welfare state replaced fathers. The end result is a massive increase in black crime 45-50% of violent crime is committed by blacks, mostly against other blacks. The drug war has made those numbers worse of course by creating drug gangs that exist to feed demand for drugs but the lack of fathers in the home, their income replaced by the state, has had immeasurable negative consequences.

Minimum wage laws huet blacks, particularly teenagers. When people earn their market worth, there are fewer applicants and less competition. Minimum wage laws force below market value labor to compete with more valuable labor for jobs that are lower in number because of state action. Who does this hurt? Teenagers of all races. In black communities, the very people you don't want idle on the streets are the very ones priced out of the market by minimum wage laws.

Affirmative action has hurt blacks. It has taken kids who are capable of college work and put them in colleges a notch or two above their capabilities. They end up on academic probation, they feel inferior, they're resentful and many drop out. If they had gone to colleges they're capable of doing the work at, they would thrive.

The problem in this country isn't systematic racism. The problem is liberal do gooders who use government to further an agenda that actually hurts blacks. Slavery and the wickedness of government enforced racism (Jim Crow) couldn't destroy the black family but after two generations the liberal welfare state has decimated the black family all while claiming everyone who doesn't support their policies is a racist. The Great Society failed to do what free markets and individualism had been doing for blacks even with outrageous government blocks put in their way.

One direct cause was the "No man in the house" rule Republicans forced into welfare legislation as a condition of passing it.

 

[SoldierOfTheKing]

Minimum wage laws long predate LBJ’s administration. What Johnson did to bring this about is expanding AFDC to cover illegitimate children. Any economist knows if you subsidize something you get more of it.

 

[istodolez]

Minimum wage laws long predate LBJ’s administration. What Johnson did to bring this about is expanding AFDC to cover illegitimate children. Any economist knows if you subsidize something you get more of it.

So is the answer to cut off all aid to anyone? I'm asking because we in America have definitely tried to see how little humans in need can get away with. And clearly Conservatives in the US will have none of this "caring for those with less" liberal mush. So it seems that the only thing we can explore now is to simply retreat to our bunkers with our piles of cash and count it in peace.

 

[Speedwell]

Minimum wage laws long predate LBJ’s administration. What Johnson did to bring this about is expanding AFDC to cover illegitimate children. Any economist knows if you subsidize something you get more of it.

Of course. No poor mother would want to marry the father of her children if it meant that her AFDC would be cut off.

 

[Redwingfan9]

America has never really embraced the idea of "welfare" or "social safety net" so it's hard to say if welfare has had some systemic bad effect on people. And the number of people who stay on welfare for extended periods of time is actually lower than you would assume based on reading Conservatives.

America has far too many people in poverty related to our national wealth. We have steadfastly stood four-square against "helping" people in any meaningful way. We are Americans! That means so long as "I got mine" I can ameliorate any modest guilt I have by donating to a couple charities and calling it a day.

Unfortunately that isn't going to help as much as establishing a society that actually CARES about people with less. Instead we prefer to demonize the poor or blame the poor. Anything to save our precious little pile of gold we accumulated for ourselves.

Acting like welfare somehow hurts the poor is the most absurd myth we have concocted in our fever-dream of a political philosophy in this country. How pathological of us to find a way to demonize the idea of caring for others. We have a sickness in our national soul. It's more of a cancer. But even the Christians on here know it's real name. It's our worship of Mammon.

What is poverty though? The people we claim live in poverty have goods and lifestyles that are upper middle and upper class compared not only to the rest of the world today but compared to the rich of the world in centuries past. The average person in poverty in America has a grab bag of luxuries ranging from cars, tv's and smart phones to refrigerators, running water, air conditioning and central heating. That they may be poor compared to some other people in America is really quite trivial when half the world lives on less than $2 a day.

Claiming people opposed to welfare don't CARE about the poor is not an argument. Such only seeks to turn the issue into one driven by emotions rather than facts. The fact is that since the Great Society, men have been removed from homes and replaced by welfare checks and other social welfare such as food stamps and WIC. Black poverty has remained fairly constant, despite other minority groups moving up.

If you want to care about other people you don't make them dependent on the state for support. You encourage them to live Godly lifestyles, to stop having kids out of wedlock and to start caring for their own kids rather than expecting others to do for them. You teach self sufficiency. For those truly destitute in the church, of which there are few in America if we are honest, then the deacons should provide very basic help. Charity in scripture isn't a government function, it is a voluntary action by Christians and charged to the church.