Poverty is war (1)

---

The Oregon Medicaid Study found that the program significantly reduces financial hardship for its beneficiaries, who, under Oregon's eligibility rules at the time, all fell below the poverty line. A randomized evaluation of the Job Corps found that it caused improvements on a variety of outcomes, most notably a 12 percent increase in earnings of participants but also reductions in rates of incarceration, arrest, and conviction. Title I, on the other hand, is generally agreed to cause more equitable school funding allocations, but the evidence on its effects on student achievement is less promising , with many evaluations finding no effect.

A randomized evaluation of Head Start found that its effects faded out quickly , and many experts, notably James Heckman , are quite skeptical of the program's benefits. That said, other researchers, like Harvard's David Deming, have more positive evaluations. Largely because people rely on the official poverty rate, which is a horrendously flawed measure, which excludes income received from major anti-poverty programs like food stamps or the EITC.

It also fails to take into account expenses such as child care and out-of-pocket medical spending.

So when you read, say, the Cato Institute's Michael Tanner writing things like, "the poverty rate has remained relatively constant since , despite rising welfare spending," keep in mind that that statistic is completely meaningless in this context. The relevant measure is the supplemental poverty measure which, as mentioned above, fell following the start of the war on poverty. We could expand existing working anti-poverty programs like Social Security, the Earned Income Tax Credit, the child tax credit and food stamps, or at least reverse recent cuts to the latter.

We could adopt a still more dramatic transfer regime, such as a basic income or low-income wage subsidies. We could be investing in education, such as by scaling up successful pre-K pilots such as the Perry or Abecedarian experiments , or by expanding high-performing charter schools and having traditional public schools adopt their approaches. We could raise the minimum wage , which all researchers find reduces poverty. There is at the outset a very obvious and almost facile connection between the war in Vietnam and the struggle I, and others, have been waging in America. A few years ago there was a shining moment in that struggle.

There were experiments, hopes, new beginnings. Then came the buildup in Vietnam and I watched the program broken and eviscerated as if it were some idle political plaything of a society gone mad on war, and I knew that America would never invest the necessary funds or energies in rehabilitation of its poor so long as adventures like Vietnam continued to draw men and skills and money like some demonic destructive suction tube. So I was increasingly compelled to see the war as an enemy of the poor and to attack it as such.

Perhaps the more tragic recognition of reality took place when it became clear to me that the war was doing far more than devastating the hopes of the poor at home. So I was increasingly compelled to see the war as an enemy of the poor, and attack it as such.

Keep Exploring Britannica

In , the former executive officer of the Task Force on Poverty Hyman Bookbinder addressed such criticisms of the "war on poverty" in an op-ed in The New York Times. Today, the ranks of the poor are again swelling These and other statistics have led careless observers to conclude that the war on poverty failed.

No, it has achieved many good results. It tired of the war too soon, gave it inadequate resources and did not open up new fronts as required. Large-scale homelessness, an explosion of teen-age pregnancies and single-parent households, rampant illiteracy, drugs and crime — these have been both the results of and causes of persistent poverty. While it is thus inappropriate to celebrate an anniversary of the war on poverty, it is important to point up some of the big gains Did every program of the 60's work?

Was every dollar used to its maximum potential? Should every Great Society program be reinstated or increased?

International Encyclopedia of the First World War

First, we cannot afford not to resume the war. One way or another, the problem will remain expensive. Somehow, we will provide for the survival needs of the poorest: The fewer poor there are, the fewer the relief problems. Getting people out of poverty is the most cost-effective public investment. For conservatives, this suggests that federal programs have actually decreased poverty. For liberals, it lessens the supposed need to expand existing programs or to create new ones.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Welfare's effect on poverty. The Economics of Poverty: Retrieved May 13, Teach Your Children Well. Cambridge Center for Behavioral Studies.

Everything you need to know about the war on poverty

Retrieved August 9, Goldfarb December 9, Retrieved January 15, Income distribution and poverty. Retrieved January 18, Following its own, unpredictable, laws, the war awakened various feelings and thoughts and, suddenly, it had to transform itself from oppressor into an originator of ideas. Its power encouraged creative imagination and developed artistic gifts. Science was afforded the opportunity to "advance" in those areas that would directly contribute to the final outcome of the war.

In literature, meanwhile, literary dialogue was discontinued while influencing the development of new genres; mainly war literature flourished in all the combatant counties. Like other art-forms, the world of music and art also experienced difficult times; groping in the dark and uncertainty marked the war period and its aftermath. Young artists were dealing with restlessness and, in times of confused passions, the young generation longed for profound changes to edge away from the tradition and the past.

New directions opened up in philosophical thinking too.

"Years of Horror" 1914–1918

The war brought about confusion and uncertainty among historians; to make scientific work undisputable, one needs to rise above political and national prejudice, above the complicated and unclear present that spread hatred and vengefulness among nations and countries while boosting national pride and scorn.

It ruined the spirit and creativeness of a large part of intelligentsia and condemned many intellectuals to silence because they refused to sacrifice their ideals in the face of current passions or to succumb to propaganda. Looking at big events should allow the evaluation of responses to the war. But were the historians who were, after to the war, enriched with new life experience, able to understand and explain the past? A new era, new political relations and the changing world called upon them to do their "duty", but an unburdened disclosure of the past drifted further and further away.

War on Poverty

The old world shook; however, while radically changing the political and social map of Europe and intentionally or unintentionally paving the way to a "new order"; military forces and political institutions also strived to maintain and consolidate the old social and state hierarchy as they believed mainly in the power of the army and economy. Consequently, various contradictory concepts that we associate with World War I — freedom and imperialism, democracy and military expansionism, war of fair borders and wars of conquest — found in it a peculiar balance.

Without embarrassment, we can say of World War I that it was many wars in one. It was a fight of different principles, ideological concepts, political and social promises; and while the military conflict uninterruptedly ran its course by its own internal rules, heaped-up ideological, territorial and social difficulties made prospects for peace difficult and anticipated an even more uncertain future.

The war was a clash between old and new technologies; even if the heavy, slow, boring infantry holding in their hands the victorious weapon had its say on the battlefields, it was the aviation that sparked the imagination of civilians. Every soldier, every army, every country entered the war with its own history, with an idea of itself and its opponents, with a different level of economic, technical and organisational development. This was an industrial war that should have been won by the one dropping on the enemy the largest number of bombs from planes and cannons.

Those who could not keep up with technologically advanced opponents compensated for the deficit with new soldiers, who were ruthlessly packed into trenches. In this context, World War I was a trench warfare war, the most significant and recognisable image of massive human killings. For four years, the trench came to be home for the solider, where the immobility represented normal conditions for an infantryman who was condemned to passivity; hence the ensuing virtues that marked and distinguished the foot soldier: The war was not only fought by inexhaustible but exhausted armies, their staff quarters, politicians, it was also fought by civilians on the internal front.

World War I turned out to be a total war, deeply affecting the lives, habits and customs of the civilian population.

Many people were chased from their homes due to the military plans envisaging there being a front there. There was a strong bond between an internal and battle front — opaque streams of letters, postcards, messages, usually with sparing words. Both soldiers and their families felt the need to survive in the world they were forced to leave behind; the army of soldiers with poor literacy suddenly took a pen to confess, write diaries and describe what was going on around them and the emotions they were dealing with.

• Healers: Extraordinary Clinicians at Work
• The Gorgons Head [with Biographical Introduction]
• Three Junes
• Experiencing the Fathers Love: Learning to live as sons and daugthers of our heavenly Father
• The Spider Inside Her, a Dark Urban Fantasy (Dark Encounters Book 2)