Beginning:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orruar
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
It does seem odd that poverty rates were steadily declining until we decided to focus our federal government on the problem of poverty, then the rates stopped the decline and even rose a bit. I can only imagine that if the exact opposite had happened (rates flat and then declined once we started throwing money at the problem), we'd never hear the end about how we need to expand the programs. And yet we're now hearing we need to expand the programs.
|
My Response:
Quote:
Originally Posted by aowen
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Decline from when to when? Seeing as there was this thing called the great depression right before welfare programs became a status quo, I have a hard time believing your time frame is representative of anything meaningful.
|
Your decision to skip all the programs in the given time frame and go straight to war on poverty:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orruar
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
End of the great depression: 1941-1945, depending on who you ask.
Start of the war on poverty: 1964
Apparently 19-23 years is "right before" in your universe. I suppose if we're looking at the world in geologic terms, you're right. On these time scales, the fall of Rome was "right before" the war on poverty began as well. I wonder if they are linked!
|
Sticking to the original point, you tried to make it sound like the war on poverty was the first implementation of government programs focused on poverty alleviation, which coincided with increasing poverty rates. FALSE so shut up
09-20-2013, 07:00 PM
Linear Mode
