If Richmond was serious about poverty, it would do at least two things-

1) Improve its school buildings- at least satisy ADA! Education improves the overall population, helps equality, and is a valuable tool for both encouraging people to find ways out of poverty and helping people find ways out of poverty.

2) Change the ulitiy structure. RIght now, now matter how rich or poor you are, it costs $43 to get that first glass of water from the tap. That’s right, Richmond may have the most regressive minimum water rate in the country. Talk about “ghetto taxes” and keeping people IN poverty!

Neither of those items are handouts. Just a change in priorities that could easily be enacted by the City leadership.

Instead we get opera houses for the rich in the form of the Center Stage/VaPAF.

The great thing about America is that you have a right to succeed or to fail!

liberals are trying to eliminate both freedoms by pandering to the homeless,unemployed and demonizing the successful and the wealthy.

Many of the homeless and unemployed are happy with their station in life.

Patrick,

Not stances. I believe both Pearlstein and the conservative wonks are trying to understand and explain poverty, and what I am saying is that I think both have uncovered a piece of the problem. It isn’t a liberal or a conservative thing, just a competing explanation of poverty that would probably better be melded into only one theory.

I can go along with programs that dismantle welfare, and yet those same people will need a job, so I hope those opportunities either exist or can be manufactured.

Some poor can not be taught success because they are not successful people. They have disabilities, not mobile, 6 kids. There have to be options to fit all scenarios or else real people will suffer. By most accounts, are doing so today already.

I agree with the basic premise that full blown welfare is teaching people to suck off the hind tit of handouts, and not teaching them how to get up and walk and as you say, be successful. Their kids just grow to make the very same mistakes all over again. Beyond that, I havn’t seen where Pearlstein or anyone else has any brilliant solutions.

Hey Ed, I like your stances: “For the record, I agree both with the traditional conservative view and with the Pearlstein insights on poverty,“. True to your beliefs.

The underlying problem of poverty is twofold: 1. There will always be the have-nots. Human characteristics do not change, some will succeed and others do not. 2% sounds good to me. 2. Much of the poverty problem in the US today is due to “white guilt” over racial actions before 1980. Instead of positive programs of mentoring the black population, poor is the codeword, to a healthy lifestyle—we gave them everything they wanted instantly. Sort of like taking a 16 yr. old to the Mall and letting them buy anything they see. Now,we have one huge social problem with 13% of US population.

Instead of teaching success, we have one self-defeating lifestyle enslaved to poverty, ignorance and violence. A lifestyle incompatible with society’s mainstream and failing miserably. Every other group comes to the US as immigrants, then bypasses the black community by every measurement.

Ed, got a solution? Showers? Conservative view? Pearlstein view? No view? Or perhaps we should ignore what we hear and see everyday in Richmond and elsewhere. Help the poor? Can you make a horse drink the water?

I would be willing to bet that both Pearlstein’s notion and that of the conservatives, that poverty fosters a culture of dependence, are both correct.

I say this based on simple observation. They had a book out some time back that stated teenage pregnancy was fostered by what Pearlstein might have termed “declining expectations” if he had been doing the study. The poor have kids when young and unmarried because they have no illusions they will ever get their life on track, or become pretty, or rich. Now is as good a time as any to have that baby. They fail to see their life will become miserable because it already is well on the way to being miserable. No false illusions.

You also see the conservative view of culture of dependence by observing how the poor react to handouts. They often act as if it is some form of entitlement. (By the way, rich people believe in entitlements too. They think they are entitled to the Learjet and the vacation home.) Oh yeah, you better believe it.

Unfortunately, both viewpoints are sometimes held up as if they “cure” poverty when in fact they seem to suggest just the opposite, that poverty is very stubborn, very ingrained to human nature, very resistant to progress.

Rayner’s column suggested we are making progress. I could spend 10 long boring paragraphs quibbling over his conclusions and producing links that anyone with Google and interest can find for themselves. Besides that, to be a poverty pimp, I have little of the requisite outrage. So Hanover County is one of the richest in the nation per capita. Hoorah ! Let’s go, as R. Smith cheekily suggests, smack them homeless around.

So instead, allow me to just focus on one stat. He says the census stats state a poor family with a home has a 3 bedroom home. Hmn. Let me see, they define poverty as $24K/yr for a family of 4. Now let me think, how many people do I know who can buy a 3 bedroom home on $24,000, or even qualify for one of those old fashioned subprime loans ? No one ? Yes, correct answer.

That would be someone who used to have a job and now has nothing. Either that, or hidden income.

Once again, am I outraged ? Hell maybe. No. I’m thinking of starting an organization called GHAS (Give Homeless a Shower) to encourage homeless people to take showers so they won’t stink. You could be a senior fellow, Bart. In my thinktank, so to speak, soaking your feet.  If we can get enough petitions, maybe Inrich can supply a website for me with a neat logo.

For the record, I agree both with the traditional conservative view and with the Pearlstein insights on poverty, but I must say it still leaves the problem itself still sitting there like an uninvited guest, waiting for his turn to take a shower.

My next cause will be RABTAP (Read a Book to a Puppy). How does that one sound ? It may even cure poverty.