This DU poll really disillusioned me

[Naturyl]

This poll, which asks "what is your number one issue," had 100 votes when I found it. NOT ONE VOTE was for poverty. Not one person out of a hundred at DU considers poverty the most important political issue for them.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=2612203&mesg_id=2616045

Well, it's *forced* to be the most important issue for me, since I have to live on $637 a month thanks to the fact that Americans apparently think that is a fair amount for the disabled poor.

I cast vote #101 with a little less hope for the future than I had before.

[JeffR]

1. Don't lose heart

Speaking for myself, I voted "Iraq", not only because the occupation is a crime against humanity, but because its perpetuation ensures that poverty, education and a host of other major issues can never be addressed. We're spending over there so that we can't spend here, in other words.

[regnaD kciN]

3. Yes, and...

...of the categories that are leading, both "healthcare" and "the economy" are more or less direct contributors to poverty. If we can get affordable universal health care and get the economy back to exporting products rather than jobs, it will become a lot easier to eradicate poverty.

(I must admit that, for myself, the choice would be "civil liberties," because that's pretty much the most important part of being an American IMHO. I wouldn't see anything wonderful in living in a prosperous authoritarian state where you could be assured of a living wage, but have no rights or privacy and be subject to imprisonment or worse at the whim of the government. But "poverty" and "the economy" would have come right after it.)

[Naturyl]

5. Iraq is a horrible situation.

I don't begrudge you your vote, and I agree with your reasoning. What really took me aback was that out of a hundred people, NOBODY put poverty first. What hope do poor people have when this happens in one of the most progressive communities on the Internet?

For God's sakes, I may have to just start trying to wish my disability away or get religion and go the "bootstraps" route. If poverty can't be the top issue for one person out of a hundred at a place like DU, maybe the Republicans are right when they say "you're on your own."

That's just how I feel right now.

[Skittles]

7. that was my thinking too, Jeff

I do care about poverty and education and health care but Iraq - it's killing our troops, killing civilians and sucking down billions. It's the number one thing that has to be dealt with in my mind - it's got to stop.

[sandnsea]

2. People vote for their own interests

I vote for help with health care. My sister votes for tax cuts. I can't fault her for voting in her economic interest when I'm voting in my economic interest. Religious voters, know they'll always be broke, think nothing is more important than God, and vote accordingly.

DU is no different. It takes an extraordinary force to challenge us to get outside ourselves and believe that making life better for the least is how we make life better for everybody.

[rpannier]

4. I'd have gone with civil liberties

They're all important causes.

[ingac70]

6. Healthcare and economy really ties in with poverty....

Improve those, and your making steps towards lessening poverty.

[Naturyl]

8. Very true. However, there is a simpler solution to poverty

A guaranteed minimum income.

I've done a ton of reserach on this. It's feasible and affordable. Hell, Richard Nixon (of all people) nearly passed it in the 70's. Even Milton Friedman favored it (for pragmatic reasons). But that was before the anti-welfare movement Reagan ushered in and all of the"welfare queen" bitterness it created.

All we lack is the political will. A GMI could wipe out poverty instantly and permanently. And the healthcare thing works both ways - with poverty under control, healthcare costs will drop substantially. The healthcare savings alone would probably pay for the GMI - not to mention the savings on prisons, police, existing social services, etc.

It just makes good sense - both morally and economically. So why doesn't it already exist? The only stumbling block is the idea that somebody might get by without working. That's the main objection most people raise, and this sort of "puritan work ethic" mentality is what is keeping poverty a reality in this country when it doesn't need to be.

[ingac70]

9. I think substantial a minimum raise rise would be good....

Unless someone is disabled or elderly, they shouldn't get any money for simply sitting on their ass.

I'm all for supplementing low wage earners... through national health, day care subsidies, etc.

I also think that things like Temporary Assistance to Needy Families and food stamps should be more readily available to married couples with children. Men shouldn't be pushed out of the picture so their kids can eat.

I myself have serious problems with the able bodied getting paid cash benefits for nothing. That would just never fly.

[Naturyl]

14. See? Case in point. It's as predictable as clockwork.

"Unless someone is disabled or elderly, they shouldn't get any money for simply sitting on their ass."

And that is precisely why we can't solve poverty. We will never get rid of poverty in this country until we face the fact that somebody is always going to find a way to take a free ride. Even Milton Friedman understood this and was okay with it - he thought of it as the cost of doing business, so to speak.

Personally, I favor people being able to do whatever they want with their lives (including "sitting on their ass") without ever being denied access to the basic necessities of a decent life. To me, that's simply the most humane position. But I understand America is nowhere near ready for that kind of thinking.

So, look at the purely pragmatic side of it. Sure, a few people will take a free ride. But isn't that a small price to pay to end poverty, homelessness, and hunger in this nation?

[NMMNG]

16. "They shouldn't get any money for simply sitting on their ass"

http://pictures.directnews.co.uk/liveimages/Paris+Hilton_669_18276962_0_0_7001414_300.jpg

I agree.

[Naturyl]

20. Perfect. Thank you.

Leisure and idleness are only bad when poor people are enjoying them.

But someone will just respond that "the public doesn't have to support her." Maybe they have never stayed in one of her grandfather's overpriced hotels...

There's no doubt that her family has soaked up enough corporate welfare to support an army of unemployed poor for a lifetime. Plus, it's public funds that buy all the infrastructure her family's zillion dollar empire relies on every day.

But still, someone will object that she is "self-sufficient" - lol...

[ingac70]

29. I wouldn't deny them....

Things like health care, food stamps or even susidized housing. I just don't want to give them cash, unless they need temporary help during a rough patch.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

33. "Liberals would rather feed nine cheats than let one honest person starve;

conservatives would rather let nine honest people starve than feed one cheat."

[lvx35]

10. I'm disappointed about so few votes for "energy/environment"

For forward looking people, that's the big duo, the alien gestating in the chest of our ailing economy.

[lapfog_1]

11. I voted energy and environment

which, I hope, covers Global Warming.

If the worst happens with energy (we run out of oil and can't replace it) and we can't solve climate change... it won't matter if I have a job or health care or if a lot of us live in poverty or there is a war in Iraq.

There will be wars everywhere, some of them very nasty, because people, lots of people, will be starving.

All other issues pale to insignificance.

I hope we can solve energy/Global Warming/population control/resources (all part and parcel of the same issue, this planet can't support 6 billion people indefinitely. And, sad to say, unless we address the population issue, we can't conserve our way out of the problem either. We've reached the tipping point. It might be a 10 year or 20 year time frame, but if we don't address it in the next 8 years in a serious way, it won't matter.

The planet will be like Easter Island. Or a petri dish with some bacteria and no new food source.

[liberalla]

12. Right now, for me, the single worst problem we have

is the corporate control and ownership (privatization) of the government and it's many departments. Most, if not all the items on that list are worsened by corporate/business policies/practices. It's an umbrella shielding many of those issues from scrutiny and change.

The government is supposed to be answerable to 'We the People', but now it is controlled by CEO's, bottom lines and profits.

If we could release the 'stranglehold' (to quote John Edwards) of the corporations, it would go a long way to improve many items on the list. Poverty, hunger, housing, healthcare and education especially. Anything that helps people (individuals) is bottom of the list for this administration. Another tax cut for business, or no bid contract is more important.

We're pretty much screwed until we can make that change at the top.

[Didereaux]

13. You seem not to recognize that the economy must be fixed before you can fix poverty!

[Naturyl]

15. I don't recognized that because it isn't true.

Poverty can be fixed permanently anytime we want by a single piece of legislation - the gauaranteed minimum income. It is feasible and affordable. All we have to do is make a bill and pass it.

But since Americans (including most Democrats) are deathly afraid that a few people will sit around watching Springer on the public dime instead of getting jobs, we can't get it done. And as a result, hundreds of thousands remain homeless and millions remain poor.

Reagan and the GOP did their job far better than most people realize.

[DDQ]

22. I agree we don't help each other

And we often use the argument that "someone may scan the system"

I have worked in social services for most of my life.

I also have a chronic disability and am getting worse, and I don't for a minute think there is any hope.

I am also watching people I care about dying of cancer in poverty and without health care advocacy.

In my opinion it is shameful.

I believe this can be fixed, if people want it to be.

[Naturyl]

26. It can be, but people don't want it to be.

Thanks to the lingering effect of Reagan-era propaganda, the idea of a few people taking a free ride is considered too high a price to pay by most Americans. I think that is wrong-headed in so many ways, but that's how it is. Nothing will change until we start to address that.

[silverojo]

17. People in poverty can die before the economy is "fixed"

When you're sick and in dire need of health care, you can't heat your house, and you can't put food on the table, you don't have time to wait for the economy to pick up. You need emergency assistance, NOW.

John Edwards gets it, and that's why I support him.

[eridani]

18. Like the environment, poverty is something that we can't deal with UNTIL

--we decide we can't afford to be the military dictators of the world anymore. Then there will be money to do something about poverty, our deteriorating infrastructure, and inventing the next energy economy.

[unhappycamper]

19. On that subject,

http://wakeupcall-vfp.blogspot.com/2007/12/imagine-campaign-that-called-for.html

An F-22 Raptor costs $330,000,000 a pop.

An F-35 Lightening cost $239,000,000 a pop.

An MRAP costs $1,000,000 a pop.

The list goes on and on and on. You can read about it in the Veterans forum.

[Naturyl]

21. There's already money to end poverty

I totally agree with your point, but it would only take a *tenth* of the Pentagon budget to create a guaranteed income that would lift every American above the poverty line. In other words, we could still build metric shitloads of bombs and tanks and stupid weapons systems and screw up the world to our heart's delight, lol. It doesn't take massive, crippling cuts to get this done. All it takes is the political will.

[OneBlueSky]

23. I remember a time when out government committed to a "war on poverty" . . .

that included a lot of progressive elements like AFDC (Aid For Dependent Children) . . . most, if not all, of those elements have since been shit-canned by succeeding Congresses and administrations . . .

[Naturyl]

27. Yep

And it all happened after Repukes succeeded in selling the "welfare queen" spin. Once they got that done, it was all over but the crying.

[kenfrequed]

24. Hate to disappoint...

I voted on the war. I think it is the greatest diversion from all other important matters that face our nation at this time and therefore ending it is of the greatest importance.

I look to Ike's farwell address to underline this:
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and not clothed. The world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children....This is not a way of life at all, in any true sense. Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from an iron cross."

Pretty good words for a Republican, but Ike was a military man, drafted by a stupid party that hoped to use him to springboard that snake Nixon into office.

[midlife_mo_Jo]

25. Just because it's not the number one issue for most folks

doesn't mean that it's not ranked highly among their concerns.

Right now, the war, healthcare, the environment and poverty are my top concerns, but in all honesty, you're still alive, while a few thousand Americans and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis are dead, and people are dying because they don't have healthcare, so those two would have to be my top two concerns.

I'm really sorry things are so difficult for you. I wish you well, and hope that your concerns are addressed soon by the next DEMOCRATIC administration!

[Naturyl]

28. Thank you. I hope yours are as well.

And I'm concerned about those things as well.

[On the Road]

30. I Completely Agree with You

I can't understand it. Poverty seems to be taken for granted, even though it's continued to increase over the last 25 years. Things were not like this 40 years ago.

Presidential candidates have found that addressing issues of the middle class wins elections while addressing poverty doesn't help. But on DU, you would think otherwise.

[Naturyl]

31. Yes, you would think otherwise.

But for the most part, you would be wrong.

The right-wing has pretty much succeeded in erasing poverty as a viable issue in America. They have done such a good job that not even Democrats are trying very hard anymore.

[ProgressIn2008]

32. Agreed - I wonder if people distance themselves from the issue

because they think somehow it won't affect them? But the way things are going, more people will have to face the reality.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

34. I didn't answer the poll, but the war is bleeding this country dry

The $250 million PER DAY that the Busheviks are throwing at Iraq could be put to uses such as raising disability payments and providing living wage jobs rebuilding our infrastructure.

The Republicanites are using "lack of money" (created, of course, by their runaway military spending) as the excuse for not doing anything about poverty.

[bobbolink]

35. Welcome to my world! I"ve brought this up on DU repeatedly, but nothing changes.

Poverty isn't "sexy" to "progressives".

How can we turn up the heat???