facts, figures
I wrote a few weeks ago about my fruitless search for facts and figures about whether or not poverty is up or down and whether or not home ownership among blacks is up or down.
My search still hasn't produced any hard data supporting the facts either way. But, I caught Bill O'Reilly--who happens to be the only talking head mentioning this stuff--the other night and he threw out some numbers and I took notes so I could share them with you, my faithful R.F.L. readers.
Poverty entitlement spending under Clinton in fiscal year 1999 were $217 billion. Under President Bush, now in fiscal year 2006, is $367 billion. Again, this is according to Bill O'Reilly. Some people will automatically dismiss this post as partisan, but O'Reilly, from what I've observed usually gets his facts straight.
Poverty rate. The poverty rate under Clinton was 13.7%. Under Bush, today, it's 12.7%. But we've still got 38 million people in America living in poverty. We've got to do something about that. But, and O'Reilly said this too and it's totally true, there are some people who just don't want to compete in our society. There are some people who don't want to get out of poverty because they are too lazy, or because they don't mind living on welfare, or whatever reason they might have.
Where the Democrats have it wrong is they just continue to throw money and create social program after social program to eradicate the latest cause de jour. Then after they do that, they claim the 'we care more than Republicans do' mantle. Never mind the fact that there is no oversight into whether or not these programs actually work or not. Just because they throw money at the perceived problems in our society, they've 'done their job' by being 'caring,' 'compassionate' Liberals.
My side of the political aisle believes in the responsiblity of the individual. We're more than willing to give people the tools it takes to suceed, but we're not willing to continue to give handout after handout. At the end of the day the individual has to become responsible for themselves. And at some point, an internal audit has to be conducted. If the program to eradicate poverty works, fine. If not, we'll try something different.
That's been George Bush's approach toward public education and the 'Leave No Child Behind' program. He's big on accountability. Making sure that teachers teach and kids actually learn. This accountability mantra is applicable everywhere. If the government can help people out of poverty, by doing specific things, things that can be measured for success, let's do them and let's stop doing the things that haven't worked for 50 years.
Makes sense, right?
Let's talk about home ownership. According to O'Reilly, black home ownership is 'at record levels under Bush.' People scoffed at Bush's 'Ownership Society' during the '04 campaign, but guess what? If you own something--a house, a car--you're going to treat it differently than you would something you don't own. Owning things gives a person not only a sense of pride and accomplishment but also responsibility.
Just some stuff I'm thinking about this morning.
My search still hasn't produced any hard data supporting the facts either way. But, I caught Bill O'Reilly--who happens to be the only talking head mentioning this stuff--the other night and he threw out some numbers and I took notes so I could share them with you, my faithful R.F.L. readers.
Poverty entitlement spending under Clinton in fiscal year 1999 were $217 billion. Under President Bush, now in fiscal year 2006, is $367 billion. Again, this is according to Bill O'Reilly. Some people will automatically dismiss this post as partisan, but O'Reilly, from what I've observed usually gets his facts straight.
Poverty rate. The poverty rate under Clinton was 13.7%. Under Bush, today, it's 12.7%. But we've still got 38 million people in America living in poverty. We've got to do something about that. But, and O'Reilly said this too and it's totally true, there are some people who just don't want to compete in our society. There are some people who don't want to get out of poverty because they are too lazy, or because they don't mind living on welfare, or whatever reason they might have.
Where the Democrats have it wrong is they just continue to throw money and create social program after social program to eradicate the latest cause de jour. Then after they do that, they claim the 'we care more than Republicans do' mantle. Never mind the fact that there is no oversight into whether or not these programs actually work or not. Just because they throw money at the perceived problems in our society, they've 'done their job' by being 'caring,' 'compassionate' Liberals.
My side of the political aisle believes in the responsiblity of the individual. We're more than willing to give people the tools it takes to suceed, but we're not willing to continue to give handout after handout. At the end of the day the individual has to become responsible for themselves. And at some point, an internal audit has to be conducted. If the program to eradicate poverty works, fine. If not, we'll try something different.
That's been George Bush's approach toward public education and the 'Leave No Child Behind' program. He's big on accountability. Making sure that teachers teach and kids actually learn. This accountability mantra is applicable everywhere. If the government can help people out of poverty, by doing specific things, things that can be measured for success, let's do them and let's stop doing the things that haven't worked for 50 years.
Makes sense, right?
Let's talk about home ownership. According to O'Reilly, black home ownership is 'at record levels under Bush.' People scoffed at Bush's 'Ownership Society' during the '04 campaign, but guess what? If you own something--a house, a car--you're going to treat it differently than you would something you don't own. Owning things gives a person not only a sense of pride and accomplishment but also responsibility.
Just some stuff I'm thinking about this morning.

0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home