Welfare "cliffs" which make it difficult for people to rise out of poverty or free themselves from government dependency

[St_Francis]

Here is an article with a chart which shows one of the exact problems with our current welfare system. I am not against government aid (altho I would favor a more locally-based set-up, that’s a different topic), but do see that there are big problems with our current set-up which are not being addressed!

The chart shows the “cliffs” (which if anyone has read something I wrote I have called “gaps”) which make it difficult for people to leave poverty which includes government dependence. The clearest example is (pre-Obamacare–don’t onow how that will work) that once one reaches a certain level of income, one is no longer eligible for Medi-Caid, but that income level rarely includes health insurance as a benefit, and when it does, does not include the dental and eye coverage.

For a family with a member who *really needs *this coverage, it then becomes counter-helpful to accept a raise or get an additional job.

This set-up means that it is very difficult for people to rise out of poverty…

 

[SamH]

Here is an article with a chart which shows one of the exact problems with our current welfare system. I am not against government aid (altho I would favor a more locally-based set-up, that’s a different topic), but do see that there are big problems with our current set-up which are not being addressed!

The chart shows the “cliffs” (which if anyone has read something I wrote I have called “gaps”) which make it difficult for people to leave poverty which includes government dependence. The clearest example is (pre-Obamacare–don’t onow how that will work) that once one reaches a certain level of income, one is no longer eligible for Medi-Caid, but that income level rarely includes health insurance as a benefit, and when it does, does not include the dental and eye coverage.

For a family with a member who *really needs *this coverage, it then becomes counter-helpful to accept a raise or get an additional job.

This set-up means that it is very difficult for people to rise out of poverty…

Given the amount of time spent writing and rewriting these bills I wouldn’t think those gaps are there by accident.

 

[St_Francis]

Given the amount of time spent writing and rewriting these bills I wouldn’t think those gaps are there by accident.

That’s a point i was trying to avoid: that it seems that either all these people are insane to expect that different results will obtain from more of the same, or that there is a method to their madness, which is a scarey thought considering how long this has been going on.

In education, this is even more evident…

 

[Jeanne_S]

This is by design,keep folks between a rock and a hard place.Job security for the .beauracrats!

 

[St_Francis]

Here’s an article which shows what will happen under Obamacare.

My heart is aching for my country…

 

[Jeanne_S]

Here’s an article which shows what will happen under Obamacare.

My heart is aching for my country…

What a nightmare!

 

[Jozefo]

Here’s an article which shows what will happen under Obamacare.

My heart is aching for my country…

Mine too. This “law” truly is an abomination.

 

[ac_claire]

The linked article in the OP links to a couple more articles on welfare…one of which comes rigth out and says that people who receive assistance from the government are, of course, “scamming the system”. That’s bs. Of course some do that, but they’re in such a vast minority that it really, really enrages me to see them become the focal point of these conversations so often.

But back to the topic at hand. I personally wasn’t able to understand the chart about welfare cliffs. Can anyone give me the cliff (hah!) notes?

Also, once we’ve identified the problem, what do you guys propose as possible solutions to this problem?

 

[St_Francis]

The linked article in the OP links to a couple more articles on welfare…one of which comes rigth out and says that people who receive assistance from the government are, of course, “scamming the system”.

They seem to randomly put articles, not necessarily from the same site, in that box. It may be paid advertising.

That’s bs. Of course some do that, but they’re in such a vast minority that it really, really enrages me to see them become the focal point of these conversations so often.

Yes, but the scammers are not at issue here.

But back to the topic at hand. I personally wasn’t able to understand the chart about welfare cliffs. Can anyone give me the cliff (hah!) notes?

This article is pointing out one of two major problems I see with welfare as it exists in the US now, which is the difficulties placed in the way of someone trying to rise out of poverty. Let’s just look at one aspect to make it easier: (btw, this is totally made up as the numbers change from state to state)

Mrs X, a widow with 4 children, receives aid from the government in paying rent; she lives in a 3-bedroom apartment and the government pays $1000 of the rent.

If Mrs X gets a raise of $1/hour, her income will go over the amount under which she can receive the help, and she would lose the $1000/month of help for a raise of $160/month.

These “cliffs” occur because of the lack of graduation in the way they allocate money compared to how much the recipient makes. For example, if they said, you got a raise, great! We’ll give you $100 less; then the recipient would still be rewarded for the raise (by getting some of the extra money), but not be out on the street by going over the income level at which she can receive any help at all.

There are various cliffs of this sort involved in our “safety net” structure, and they make it difficult for people to get off government aid.

Also, once we’ve identified the problem, what do you guys propose as possible solutions to this problem?

There are other problems with our welfare system as well, and lots of solutions. Mostly I posted this because it’s something I’ve mentioned as a problem and this article made what I was inadequately trying to say much clearer.

The solution to this particular problem would be clear: to re-structure the whole thing so people could afford to rise out of poverty.

The point, however, is that it is not structured this way, which begs the question: why isn’t it?

 

[St_Francis]

Interesting articleabout a tv show which puts current UK dependents into the original UK welfare system to see how they fare.

The original system was oriented to putting people into jobs; workplaces had to hire disabled people, for example. And the original system had much lower benefits for those who did not qualify for work, but perhaps more help–the elderly participant was moved to an old folks’ home, where all his meals were made for him, which he seemed to think was not a bad trade-off.

What the author concluded? “And the underlying message from the experiment? The 1949 system worked best for those who wanted to work. The system now works best for those who don’t. Until we turn that basic premise around, we will never transform the dependency culture of Benefits Britain 2013.”

Given the current level of unemployment in the UK, I don’t think the original works-oriented system of 1949 would be able to work, but it was very interesting.

(Off-topic: one of the participants was a young man in a wheelchair due to spinal bifida. He seemed so sweet! He really wanted to work, but no one would hire him. As a result of this show, he “had” to work at a place for a week, but after the week was over, they offered him a job!)

 

[Abu]

Another aspect of “welfarism” which is associated with foreign aid exposes the error in the approach.

**Bono Affirms That Capitalism Alleviates Poverty More Than Aid
by ELISE HILTON on TUESDAY, AUGUST 13, 2013 **Extract:
In the world of celebrity-do-gooders, Bono has earned the reputation of being more than a mouthpiece. Over two decades, the musician has created the ONE campaign, worked with Amnesty International, collaborated on the Band Aid concerts, and became increasingly involved in poverty-stricken Africa. He worked for years to promote debt forgiveness for African nations, while working for increased foreign aid.

And now? Bono says capitalism is the answer.

George Ayittey, an African entrepreneur, met Bono in 2007 and gave the rock star a copy of his book, Africa Unchained: The Blueprint For Development. Some of it must have taken hold, as Bono has come to acknowledge that foreign aid is merely a “stopgap” for poverty, not a realistic solution.
blog.acton.org/archives/58688-bono-affirms-that-capitalism-alleviates-poverty-more-than-aid.html

 

[St_Francis]

Very good points. I think it’s important to tailor help to others to be actually helpful rather than enslaving.

Another aspect of “welfarism” which is associated with foreign aid exposes the error in the approach.

**Bono Affirms That Capitalism Alleviates Poverty More Than Aid
by ELISE HILTON on TUESDAY, AUGUST 13, 2013 **Extract:
In the world of celebrity-do-gooders, Bono has earned the reputation of being more than a mouthpiece. Over two decades, the musician has created the ONE campaign, worked with Amnesty International, collaborated on the Band Aid concerts, and became increasingly involved in poverty-stricken Africa. He worked for years to promote debt forgiveness for African nations, while working for increased foreign aid.

And now? Bono says capitalism is the answer.

George Ayittey, an African entrepreneur, met Bono in 2007 and gave the rock star a copy of his book, Africa Unchained: The Blueprint For Development. Some of it must have taken hold, as Bono has come to acknowledge that foreign aid is merely a “stopgap” for poverty, not a realistic solution.
blog.acton.org/archives/58688-bono-affirms-that-capitalism-alleviates-poverty-more-than-aid.html

 

[MamaJTwins]

Interesting articleabout a tv show which puts current UK dependents into the original UK welfare system to see how they fare.

The original system was oriented to putting people into jobs; workplaces had to hire disabled people, for example. And the original system had much lower benefits for those who did not qualify for work, but perhaps more help–the elderly participant was moved to an old folks’ home, where all his meals were made for him, which he seemed to think was not a bad trade-off.

What the author concluded? “And the underlying message from the experiment? The 1949 system worked best for those who wanted to work. The system now works best for those who don’t. Until we turn that basic premise around, we will never transform the dependency culture of Benefits Britain 2013.”

Given the current level of unemployment in the UK, I don’t think the original works-oriented system of 1949 would be able to work, but it was very interesting.

(Off-topic: one of the participants was a young man in a wheelchair due to spinal bifida. He seemed so sweet! He really wanted to work, but no one would hire him. As a result of this show, he “had” to work at a place for a week, but after the week was over, they offered him a job!)

Very interesting! Would love to see this kind of experiment in the US.

 

[Abu]

“The Church is intolerant in principle because she believes; she is tolerant in practice because she loves. The enemies of the Church are tolerant in principle because they do not believe; they are intolerant in practice because they do not love.”
Rev. Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange O.P

Thank you, St Francis. A marvelous insight for truth, here.

 

[CaptFun]

Another aspect of “welfarism” which is associated with foreign aid exposes the error in the approach.

**Bono Affirms That Capitalism Alleviates Poverty More Than Aid
by ELISE HILTON on TUESDAY, AUGUST 13, 2013 **Extract:
In the world of celebrity-do-gooders, Bono has earned the reputation of being more than a mouthpiece. Over two decades, the musician has created the ONE campaign, worked with Amnesty International, collaborated on the Band Aid concerts, and became increasingly involved in poverty-stricken Africa. He worked for years to promote debt forgiveness for African nations, while working for increased foreign aid.

And now? Bono says capitalism is the answer.

George Ayittey, an African entrepreneur, met Bono in 2007 and gave the rock star a copy of his book, Africa Unchained: The Blueprint For Development. Some of it must have taken hold, as Bono has come to acknowledge that foreign aid is merely a “stopgap” for poverty, not a realistic solution.
blog.acton.org/archives/58688-bono-affirms-that-capitalism-alleviates-poverty-more-than-aid.html

Besides Capitalism vs. other vehicles for economic welfare … there is the personal, spiritual element of “welfare” that comes from doing one’s best and feeling God’s pleasure.

I heard THIS this morning. An old inspirational speech by the Reverend Martin Luther King
in 1967 that spoke to personal responsibility, commitment and inspiration.

**KING: ** What I’m saying to you this morning, my friends:

Even if it falls your lot to be a street sweeper, go out and sweep streets like Michelangelo painted pictures!

Sweep streets like Handel and Beethoven composed music.

Sweep streets like Shakespeare wrote poetry.

Sweep streets so well that all the host of heaven and earth will have to pause and say,

"Here lived a great street sweeper who swept his job well!"

If you can’t be a pine on the top of a hill, be a scrub in the valley, but be the best little scrub on the side of the rill.

Be a bush if you can’t be a tree. If you can’t be a highway, just be a trail. If you can’t be a sun, be a star.

It isn’t by size that you win or you fail; be the best at whatever that you are!

rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2013/08/28/dr_king_be_the_best_of_whatever_you_are

 

[Cricket123]

Oh, dear… Rush quoting MLK. How about some more MLK, also from 1967, from his book *Where Do We Go From Here: Chaos or Community *:

"In the treatment of poverty nationally, one fact stands out: there are twice as many white poor as Negro poor in the United States. Therefore I will not dwell on the experiences of poverty that derive from racial discrimination, but will discuss the poverty that affects white and Negro alike.

Up to recently we have proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils: lack of education restricting job opportunities; poor housing which stultified home life and suppressed initiative; fragile family relationships which distorted personality development. The logic of this approach suggested that each of these causes be attacked one by one. Hence a housing program to transform living conditions, improved educational facilities to furnish tools for better job opportunities, and family counseling to create better personal adjustments were designed. In combination these measures were intended to remove the causes of poverty.

While none of these remedies in itself is unsound, all have a fatal disadvantage. The programs have never proceeded on a coordinated basis or at a similar rate of development. Housing measures have fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies. They have been piecemeal and pygmy. Educational reforms have been even more sluggish and entangled in bureaucratic stalling and economy-dominated decisions. Family assistance stagnated in neglect and then suddenly was discovered to be the central issue on the basis of hasty and superficial studies. At no time has a total, coordinated and fully adequate program been conceived. As a consequence, fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.

In addition to the absence of coordination and sufficiency, the programs of the past all have another common failing – they are indirect. Each seeks to solve poverty by first solving something else.

I am now convinced that the simplest approach will prove to be the most effective – the solution to poverty is to abolish it directly by a now widely discussed measure: the guaranteed income.

Earlier in this century this proposal would have been greeted with ridicule and denunciation as destructive of initiative and responsibility. At that time economic status was considered the measure of the individual’s abilities and talents. In the simplistic thinking of that day the absence of worldly goods indicated a want of industrious habits and moral fiber.

We have come a long way in our understanding of human motivation and of the blind operation of our economic system. Now we realize that dislocations in the market operation of our economy and the prevalence of discrimination thrust people into idleness and bind them in constant or frequent unemployment against their will. The poor are less often dismissed from our conscience today by being branded as inferior and incompetent. We also know that no matter how dynamically the economy develops and expands it does not eliminate all poverty.

We have come to the point where we must make the nonproducer a consumer or we will find ourselves drowning in a sea of consumer goods. We have so energetically mastered production that we now must give attention to distribution. Though there have been increases in purchasing power, they have lagged behind increases in production. Those at the lowest economic level, the poor white and Negro, the aged and chronically ill, are traditionally unorganized and therefore have little ability to force the necessary growth in their income. They stagnate or become even poorer in relation to the larger society.

The problem indicates that our emphasis must be two-fold. We must create full employment or we must create incomes. People must be made consumers by one method or the other. Once they are placed in this position, we need to be concerned that the potential of the individual is not wasted. New forms of work that enhance the social good will have to be devised for those for whom traditional jobs are not available.

In 1879 Henry George anticipated this state of affairs when he wrote, in Progress and Poverty:

“The fact is that the work which improves the condition of mankind, the work which extends knowledge and increases power and enriches literature, and elevates thought, is not done to secure a living. It is not the work of slaves, driven to their task either by the lash of a master or by animal necessities. It is the work of men who perform it for their own sake, and not that they may get more to eat or drink, or wear, or display. In a state of society where want is abolished, work of this sort could be enormously increased.”
We are likely to find that the problems of housing and education, instead of preceding the elimination of poverty, will themselves be affected if poverty is first abolished. The poor transformed into purchasers will do a great deal on their own to alter housing decay. Negroes, who have a double disability, will have a greater effect on discrimination when they have the additional weapon of cash to use in their struggle.

Beyond these advantages, a host of positive psychological changes inevitably will result from widespread economic security. The dignity of the individual will flourish when the decisions concerning his life are in his own hands, when he has the assurance that his income is stable and certain, and when he knows that he has the means to seek self-improvement. Personal conflicts between husband, wife and children will diminish when the unjust measurement of human worth on a scale of dollars is eliminated."

cont’d

 

[Cricket123]

cont’d…

"Two conditions are indispensable if we are to ensure that the guaranteed income operates as a consistently progressive measure. First, it must be pegged to the median income of society, not the lowest levels of income. To guarantee an income at the floor would simply perpetuate welfare standards and freeze into the society poverty conditions. Second, the guaranteed income must be dynamic; it must automatically increase as the total social income grows. Were it permitted to remain static under growth conditions, the recipients would suffer a relative decline. If periodic reviews disclose that the whole national income has risen, then the guaranteed income would have to be adjusted upward by the same percentage. Without these safeguards a creeping retrogression would occur, nullifying the gains of security and stability.

This proposal is not a “civil rights” program, in the sense that that term is currently used. The program would benefit all the poor, including the two-thirds of them who are white. I hope that both Negro and white will act in coalition to effect this change, because their combined strength will be necessary to overcome the fierce opposition we must realistically anticipate.

Our nation’s adjustment to a new mode of thinking will be facilitated if we realize that for nearly forty years two groups in our society have already been enjoying a guaranteed income. Indeed, it is a symptom of our confused social values that these two groups turn out to be the richest and the poorest. The wealthy who own securities have always had an assured income; and their polar opposite, the relief client, has been guaranteed an income, however miniscule, through welfare benefits.

John Kenneth Galbraith has estimated that $20 billion a year would effect a guaranteed income, which he describes as “not much more than we will spend the next fiscal year to rescue freedom and democracy and religious liberty as these are defined by ‘experts’ in Vietnam.”

The contemporary tendency in our society is to base our distribution on scarcity, which has vanished, and to compress our abundance into the overfed mouths of the middle and upper classes until they gag with superfluity. If democracy is to have breadth of meaning, it is necessary to adjust this inequity. It is not only moral, but it is also intelligent. We are wasting and degrading human life by clinging to archaic thinking.

The curse of poverty has no justification in our age. It is socially as cruel and blind as the practice of cannibalism at the dawn of civilization, when men ate each other because they had not yet learned to take food from the soil or to consume the abundant animal life around them. The time has come for us to civilize ourselves by the total, direct and immediate abolition of poverty."

Hmmm…

 

[CaptFun]

Oh, dear… Rush quoting MLK.

… Actually he played a soundbite from MLK’s 1967 speech (to schoolchildren) called*** “What is Your Life’s Blueprint?”***

AND replayed it again today!

http://bossip.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/rush.png?w=631&h=364

youtube.com/watch?v=b7O2Gcsc4Ck < I think it’s identical to this same soundbite on YouTube. Can’t find the whole speech (in the voice of MLK) on the internet so far … ****** but the King Family owns the rights to it according to another site.

Above is the “street sweeper” section of the speech (its thundering concluision). But the brief speech is the perfect opening day of school speech for students (of any color, ethnicity, or creed) to attend to with its advice on planning, discipline, dedication, self-respect, and ambition – wrapped unambiguously in the power of faith (King was Reverend King after all).

My sister printed out the speech in its entirety and plans to use it as part of an exercise
on the second day of class (the first REAL day after orientation). And reading it (Rush did not put the FULL text on his site … just that which he broadcast … for the last TWO days as his listeners requested it be rebroadcast) you can see how it would set up summer-foggy students to have a good year per motivation.

Thanks Cricket, for posting the other MLK speech - that agrees with - but also presents other aspects of our thread topic. I did not quote most of your VERY THOROUGH post … but do recommend to our other visitors to the thread to back up and read it. And think about the time in which he said it and the changes America has gone through since. This part of it I will quote … as certain words (still relevant today IMO) jumped out at me.

While none of these remedies in itself is unsound, all have a fatal disadvantage.

The programs have never proceeded on a coordinated basis or at a similar rate of development.

Housing measures have fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies. They have been piecemeal and pygmy.

Educational reforms have been even more sluggish and entangled in bureaucratic stalling and economy-dominated decisions.
Family assistance stagnated in neglect and then suddenly was discovered to be the central issue on the basis of hasty and superficial studies.

At no time has a total, coordinated and fully adequate program been conceived. As a consequence, fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.

In addition to the absence of coordination and sufficiency, the programs of the past all have another common failing – they are indirect. Each seeks to solve poverty by first solving something else. — MLK quote … my emphases

Apparently Dr. King was not so impressed by the hoopla of a new solve all program being created … and actually criticized Big Government’s superficiality, inefficiency and almost deliberate mediocrity in execution. And my take on the same things is that some social reformers don’t WANT to do a job so complete that their NEW rescue efforts are then not needed … for the problem will be solved (or reduced to being a minor problem). IOW “Ease the problem a little. But SOLVE it at your own expense!”

I may follow your lead and post MLKs "What is your life’s blueprint?" textually since it is brief, yet quite profound.

And is germane to the thread though its approach is personal in its message.

 

[CaptFun]

seattletimes.com/special/mlk/king/words/blueprint.html

The FULL text of the speech Martin Luther King gave:

**What Is Your Life’s Blueprint? **
Six months before he was assassinated, King spoke to a group of students at Barratt Junior High School in Philadelphia on October 26, 1967.

http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQxZfsMoI8HEMFQ2z7K_1UJSgPTece6DcKcMVdB20IkHG94fiOv

KING: I want to ask you a question, and that is: What is your life’s blueprint?

Whenever a building is constructed, you usually have an architect who draws a blueprint, and that blueprint serves as the pattern, as the guide, and a building is not well erected without a good, solid blueprint.

Now each of you is in the process of building the structure of your lives, and the question is whether you have a proper, a solid and a sound blueprint.

I want to suggest some of the things that should begin your life’s blueprint.

– Number one in your life’s blueprint, should be a deep belief in your own dignity, your worth and your own somebodiness. Don’t allow anybody to make you fell that you’re nobody. Always feel that you count. Always feel that you have worth, and always feel that your life has ultimate significance.

– Secondly, in your life’s blueprint you must have as the basic principle the determination to achieve excellence in your various fields of endeavor. You’re going to be deciding as the days, as the years unfold what you will do in life — what your life’s work will be. Set out to do it well.

And I say to you, my young friends, doors are opening to you–doors of opportunities that were not open to your mothers and your fathers — and the great challenge facing you is to be ready to face these doors as they open.

Ralph Waldo Emerson, the great essayist, said in a lecture in 1871, “If a man can write a better book or preach a better sermon or make a better mousetrap than his neighbor, even if he builds his house in the woods, the world will make a beaten path to his door.”

This hasn’t always been true — but it will become increasingly true, and so I would urge you to study hard, to burn the midnight oil; I would say to you, don’t drop out of school. I understand all the sociological reasons, but I urge you that in spite of your economic plight, in spite of the situation that you’re forced to live in — stay in school.

And when you discover what you will be in your life, set out to do it as if God Almighty called you at this particular moment in history to do it. don’t just set out to do a good job. Set out to do such a good job that the living, the dead*** or the unborn ***couldn’t do it any better.

If it falls your lot to be a street sweeper, sweep streets like Michelangelo painted pictures, sweep streets like Beethoven composed music, sweep streets like Leontyne Price sings before the Metropolitan Opera. Sweep streets like Shakespeare wrote poetry. Sweep streets so well that all the hosts of heaven and earth will have to pause and say: Here lived a great street sweeper who swept his job well. If you can’t be a pine at the top of the hill, be a shrub in the valley. Be be the best little shrub on the side of the hill.

Be a bush if you can’t be a tree. If you can’t be a highway, just be a trail. If you can’t be a sun, be a star. For it isn’t by size that you win or fail. Be the best of whatever you are.

— From the estate of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

Color, bolding, underlining emphases within the quote are mine.

But so many more things are here that on a second read through a whole set of other fruitful insights might be considered. Wisdom is like that. Inspiration too. IMO this speech of Dr. King’s was wise and inspired - and should be shared. So I have.

This speech is less an indictment of the failings of Big Government - than the recommendation of a completely different path than that of relying upon it as victims.

It is full of hope – but full of calls to a personal responsibility. Has self-esteem and self respect so as to SUCCEED! Plan. Have a direction (and as Dr. King had … a “dream”).

***I appreciated the unabashed invocation of God and holiness throughout his speech – that is practically verboten on Public School campuses today. A “deep belief …”, " … your life has ultimate significance …", " … God Almighty," " … the hosts of heaven and earth".

And I loved all the action verbs and phrases in his advice: “achieve excellence …”, “Set out …”, “You’re going to be deciding …”, " … be ready to face those doors as they open".

He acknowledges barriers might be encountered … but sets forth a spirit that cannot be defeated. Be the best where you are (in the meantime … understood ).

---

No victimization. No class warfare jealousies stirred up. A not so subtle allusion to the fact that these students were children of God with an eternal purpose as well as well as a daily one on earth. No equal time for the State’s preferred theories of evolution (and a life that has NO ultimate significance per an afterlife but only for the day). He ACTUALLY mentions “the unborn” like America’s founding fathers did in their documents (which would have been … all of US!) … alluding to the future generations that would benefit from ONE person’s
dedication, excellence, and example. No appeals to selfish desires to be pampered and excused.

Dr. King actually makes declarative sentences with command: Stay in school. DON’T drop out. If you can’t be THIS … BE THAT!

What a “High Road” exhortation! Don’t hear much of THIS today. Glad it has been re-exposed to the light of day. Thank you Dr. King. And (for the retrieving of it) Rush.

 

[ProVobis]

.

**Bono Affirms That Capitalism Alleviates Poverty More Than Aid
by ELISE HILTON on TUESDAY, AUGUST 13, 2013 **Extract:

Mewonders what kind of capitalism is he talking about? Where they hand out stock certificates, print trillions of dollars from which they pay out dividends on those stock certificates, and maybe hit them with some bonuses to boot?

Yeh, I can see where that alleviates poverty.