![\"The](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.dougsbriefcase.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/01\/credit-huff-post.jpg\")
<\/a>The 50th anniver\u00adsary of the Pres\u00adi\u00addent John\u00adson\u2019s dec\u00adla\u00adra\u00adtion of a War on Pover\u00adty has pro\u00advoked strong views on whether it has suc\u00adceed\u00aded or failed. The truth lies some\u00adwhere between. [Cred\u00adit: Huff\u00adin\u00adg\u00adton Post]<\/p><\/div>It\u2019s not much of an exag\u00adger\u00ada\u00adtion to say that right now Repub\u00adli\u00adcans are doing all they can to hurt the poor, and they would have inflict\u00aded vast\u00adly more harm if they had won the 2012 elec\u00adtion. More\u00adover, GOP<\/span> harsh\u00adness toward the less for\u00adtu\u00adnate isn\u2019t just a mat\u00adter of spite (although that\u2019s part of it); it\u2019s deeply root\u00aded in the party\u2019s ide\u00adol\u00ado\u00adgy. <\/em>Paul Krug\u00adman, \u201cEne\u00admies of the Poor<\/a>,\u201d Jan\u00adu\u00adary 12, 2014\n The 50th anniver\u00adsary of Pres\u00adi\u00addent Johnson\u2019s War on Pover\u00adty has occa\u00adsioned a good deal of moral exhi\u00adbi\u00adtion\u00adism. Lib\u00ader\u00adals heap praise on the pro\u00adgrams and flat\u00adter them\u00adselves for sup\u00adport\u00ading the trans\u00adfer of an esti\u00admat\u00aded $20.7 tril\u00adlion<\/a> (in 2011 dol\u00adlars) in cash and non-cash ben\u00ade\u00adfits from those who earned it to those who did not. And they are rel\u00adish\u00ading the oppor\u00adtu\u00adni\u00adty to denounce con\u00adser\u00adv\u00ada\u00adtives as ene\u00admies of the poor, moti\u00advat\u00aded by ide\u00adol\u00ado\u00adgy and spite.<\/p>\n Some con\u00adser\u00adv\u00ada\u00adtives, like the Her\u00aditage Foundation\u2019s Robert Rec\u00adtor, are using the anniver\u00adsary to declare the War on Pover\u00adty lost. Rec\u00adtor recent\u00adly was quot\u00aded as say\u00ading that \u201cthe War on Pover\u00adty has been a com\u00adplete cat\u00ada\u00adstro\u00adphe<\/a>.\u201d<\/p>\n The truth lies some\u00adwhere between. On one lev\u00adel, gov\u00adern\u00adment pro\u00adgrams have been an unde\u00adni\u00adable suc\u00adcess. Rec\u00adtor him\u00adself has observed<\/a> that the pro\u00adgrams have improved liv\u00ading stan\u00addards for the poor. Pover\u00adty is less oner\u00adous than it was a gen\u00ader\u00ada\u00adtion ago. Tech\u00adno\u00adlog\u00adi\u00adcal devel\u00adop\u00adment has cer\u00adtain\u00adly played its part. Sophis\u00adti\u00adcat\u00aded new gad\u00adgets and devices are now wide\u00adly avail\u00adable and the abun\u00addance of afford\u00adable car\u00adbon-based ener\u00adgy has facil\u00adi\u00adtat\u00aded the broad dis\u00adsem\u00adi\u00adna\u00adtion of air con\u00addi\u00adtion\u00ading, cars and a wide vari\u00adety of com\u00adforts and con\u00adve\u00adniences. But the role of gov\u00adern\u00adment can\u2019t be dis\u00admissed. Improve\u00adments in liv\u00ading stan\u00addards among the poor\u00adest house\u00adholds would have been impos\u00adsi\u00adble with\u00adout the panoply of gov\u00adern\u00adment pro\u00adgrams that com\u00adprise the War on Poverty.<\/p>\n Gov\u00adern\u00adment has made pover\u00adty more tol\u00ader\u00ada\u00adble; that is its suc\u00adcess. Its fail\u00adure lies in poverty\u2019s stub\u00adborn per\u00adsis\u00adtence<\/a>. After near\u00adly half a cen\u00adtu\u00adry of increas\u00ading\u00adly high\u00ader spend\u00ading on anti-pover\u00adty pro\u00adgrams, the pover\u00adty rate stood at 15 per\u00adcent for the third con\u00adsec\u00adu\u00adtive year in 2012<\/a>,<\/span> the first time it has stayed that ele\u00advat\u00aded for that long since the 1960s. A record 46.5 mil\u00adlion peo\u00adple<\/a> lived below the pover\u00adty line in 2012, accord\u00ading to the Cen\u00adsus Bureau.<\/p>\n High rates of pover\u00adty have with\u00adstood a 50-year onslaught of gov\u00adern\u00adment spend\u00ading. One rea\u00adson is that the gov\u00adern\u00adment has con\u00adduct\u00aded its war amid social trends that resist its efforts. Some of those cul\u00adtur\u00adal changes have been decid\u00aded\u00adly ben\u00ade\u00adfi\u00adcial. Social con\u00adstraints are weak\u00ader, peo\u00adple are in some respects freer, enter\u00adtain\u00adment is less for\u00admu\u00adla\u00adic, social atti\u00adtudes are less rigid and in some ways less judg\u00admen\u00adtal. Racism, though hard\u00adly extinct, is less preva\u00adlent, women have more occu\u00adpa\u00adtion\u00adal oppor\u00adtu\u00adni\u00adties and lifestyle choic\u00ades, and soci\u00adety is more tol\u00ader\u00adant, at least of prac\u00adtices of which it was for\u00admer\u00adly intol\u00ader\u00adant (smok\u00ading pot, for exam\u00adple, is increas\u00ading\u00adly tol\u00ader\u00adat\u00aded, smok\u00ading tobac\u00adco decreas\u00ading\u00adly so).<\/p>\n These cul\u00adtur\u00adal changes, how\u00adev\u00ader, also have yield\u00aded a soci\u00adety that is eco\u00adnom\u00adi\u00adcal\u00adly, social\u00adly and polit\u00adi\u00adcal\u00adly more polar\u00adized than that of a gen\u00ader\u00ada\u00adtion ago. Pres\u00adi\u00addent Oba\u00adma<\/a> and Sen\u00ada\u00adtor Mar\u00adco Rubio<\/a> (R\u2011FL<\/span>) alike have expressed con\u00adcern about ris\u00ading income inequal\u00adi\u00adty and declin\u00ading social mobility.<\/p>\n These trends have cul\u00adtur\u00adal roots. Social prac\u00adtices have changed remark\u00adably over the past half cen\u00adtu\u00adry. The late Daniel Patrick Moyni\u00adhan warned in a March 1965 report<\/a> that the African-Amer\u00adi\u00adcan fam\u00adi\u00adly struc\u00adture was becom\u00ading \u201chigh\u00adly unsta\u00adble, and in many urban cen\u00adters is approach\u00ading com\u00adplete break\u00addown.\u201d Among the caus\u00ades for Moynihan\u2019s alarm was the rate of births to unmar\u00adried African-Amer\u00adi\u00adcan women, which then stood at 25 per\u00adcent. In 2011, 41 per\u00adcent<\/a> of all<\/strong><\/em> births were to unmar\u00adried women. The rate of non-mar\u00adi\u00adtal births<\/a> to African Amer\u00adi\u00adcan women was 72 per\u00adcent; among His\u00adpan\u00adics, 53 per\u00adcent; among non-His\u00adpan\u00adic whites, 29 percent.<\/p>\n The chang\u00ading cul\u00adtur\u00adal atti\u00adtudes that helped pro\u00adduce these results have been cel\u00ade\u00adbrat\u00aded by cul\u00adtur\u00adal elites as lib\u00ader\u00adat\u00ading the mass\u00ades from moral rigid\u00adi\u00adty. Indeed they have. And that works for some peo\u00adple. For a per\u00adson of means, mar\u00adriage and chil\u00addren are lifestyle choic\u00ades. The order in which they occur \u2013 and if they occur at all \u2014 is a mat\u00adter of per\u00adson\u00adal taste. There are few neg\u00ada\u00adtive con\u00adse\u00adquences what\u00adev\u00ader one decides. But to a woman try\u00ading to escape pover\u00adty, a non-mar\u00adi\u00adtal birth can car\u00adry poten\u00adtial\u00adly dev\u00adas\u00adtat\u00ading con\u00adse\u00adquences. It does not guar\u00adan\u00adtee a life of pover\u00adty, but it makes it sta\u00adtis\u00adti\u00adcal\u00adly far more likely.<\/p>\n Peo\u00adple of means can han\u00addle the con\u00adse\u00adquences of per\u00adpet\u00adu\u00adal self-absorp\u00adtion; the less for\u00adtu\u00adnate can\u00adnot. The val\u00adues that work for the wealthy and suc\u00adcess\u00adful can be tox\u00adic to the poor.<\/p>\n The pro\u00adsa\u00adic road of labor, mar\u00adriage and devo\u00adtion to fam\u00adi\u00adly offers the surest route of escap\u00ading pover\u00adty. It has become the road less trav\u00adeled. A return to a soci\u00adety that held mar\u00adriage, fam\u00adi\u00adly, deferred grat\u00adi\u00adfi\u00adca\u00adtion and work in high\u00ader regard seems unimag\u00adin\u00adable. We have made our choic\u00ades. Now is the time for consequences.<\/p>\n One such con\u00adse\u00adquence is a large and grow\u00ading wel\u00adfare state. Anoth\u00ader is a soci\u00adety that is less eco\u00adnom\u00adi\u00adcal\u00adly equal and mobile than before. That, I believe, explains why Krug\u00adman and oth\u00aders react so harsh\u00adly when con\u00adser\u00adv\u00ada\u00adtives note that cer\u00adtain behav\u00adiors that arise from val\u00adues that lib\u00ader\u00adals cel\u00ade\u00adbrate tend to per\u00adpet\u00adu\u00adate pover\u00adty. They bris\u00adtle at the sug\u00adges\u00adtion that the tri\u00adumph of their val\u00adues has con\u00adtributed to the inequal\u00adi\u00adty for which they blame oth\u00aders. Their sup\u00adport for more social wel\u00adfare spend\u00ading, despite abun\u00addant evi\u00addence of its lim\u00adit\u00aded util\u00adi\u00adty, proves their lib\u00ader\u00adal\u00adi\u00adty and worth, at least in their own eyes. The sug\u00adges\u00adtion that such pro\u00adgrams require reform is regard\u00aded as proof that the Repub\u00adli\u00adcan par\u00adty, in Krugman\u2019s words, is \u201ccom\u00admit\u00adted to hurt\u00ading, not help\u00ading the poor\u2026 no mat\u00adter how hard the likes of Paul Ryan and Mar\u00adco Rubio try to con\u00advince us otherwise.\u201d<\/p>\n Advo\u00adcat\u00ading increas\u00ades in social wel\u00adfare spend\u00ading with\u00adout regard to its mixed record of suc\u00adcess pro\u00advides a moral perch from which to judge oth\u00aders. Krug\u00adman exem\u00adpli\u00adfies this mor\u00adal\u00adiz\u00ading spir\u00adit. Hol\u00adly\u00adwood embod\u00adies it. It has become a glob\u00adal cen\u00adter of hedo\u00adnism, nar\u00adcis\u00adsism and moral preen\u00ading. An indus\u00adtry that 50 years ago chafed against the moral stric\u00adtures of the Hayes Code today mor\u00adal\u00adizes with the fer\u00advor of tel\u00ade\u00advan\u00adge\u00adlists. And per\u00adhaps with the same moti\u00adva\u00adtion: it\u2019s much eas\u00adi\u00ader to over\u00adlook your own sins when decry\u00ading the sins of oth\u00aders. Self-right\u00adeous\u00adness is the com\u00adpan\u00adion of self-indulgence.<\/p>\n Gen\u00aduine con\u00adcern for the poor requires dis\u00adpas\u00adsion\u00adate analy\u00adsis. It must begin with a recog\u00adni\u00adtion of what the War on Pover\u00adty has accom\u00adplished \u2013 an eas\u00ading of some of poverty\u2019s worst effects \u2013 and a frank acknowl\u00adedge\u00adment of what it has not \u2013 a reduc\u00adtion in its inci\u00addence. It must stip\u00adu\u00adlate that gov\u00adern\u00adment pro\u00adgrams alone can\u00adnot erad\u00adi\u00adcate pover\u00adty, par\u00adtic\u00adu\u00adlar\u00adly when they are con\u00adfront\u00aded with cul\u00adtur\u00adal tides that prop\u00ada\u00adgate it. It must rec\u00adog\u00adnize that social wel\u00adfare pro\u00adgrams were large\u00adly con\u00adceived in a very dif\u00adfer\u00adent time with very dif\u00adfer\u00adent social val\u00adues and must be adapt\u00aded to new real\u00adi\u00adties. It must be open to fresh ideas and approaches.<\/p>\n Most impor\u00adtant\u00adly, per\u00adhaps, it must be con\u00adduct\u00aded in a less cor\u00adro\u00adsive way. Accus\u00ading your oppo\u00adnents of being evil and mean-spir\u00adit\u00aded is coun\u00adter\u00adpro\u00adduc\u00adtive. Repub\u00adli\u00adcans aren\u2019t out to hurt the poor, despite Krugman\u2019s dec\u00adla\u00adra\u00adtions; nor are Democ\u00adrats. Nei\u00adther has suc\u00adceed\u00aded in devis\u00ading poli\u00adcies that reduce the preva\u00adlence of pover\u00adty. Both could ben\u00ade\u00adfit from more clear-head\u00aded analy\u00adsis and less moralizing.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" It\u2019s not much of an exag\u00adger\u00ada\u00adtion to say that right now Repub\u00adli\u00adcans are doing all they can to hurt the poor, and they would have inflict\u00aded vast\u00adly more harm if they had won the 2012 elec\u00adtion. More\u00adover, GOP<\/span> harsh\u00adness toward \u2026 Con\u00adtin\u00adue read\u00ading