48 million Americans in poverty - we're utterly fucked for the next six years

Census Bureau http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2011/01/06/Census-Bureau-says-157-percent-in-poverty/UPI-69001294319947/">announced today that 47.8 million Americans are now living in poverty. Almost one in five children. The Reagan Revolution marches on.

For 30 years, there has been a withering war against working Americans. Two years ago, we finally figured this out, and we Democrats won a huge mandate for change. In fact, our selected leader ran on a platform where change was front and center. Change!

Well, it hasn't changed. http://www.harpers.org/archive/2009/07/0082562">Instead of FDR, we got Hoover, and predictably more and more working Americans are plunging into poverty, while their tax dollars go to pay for foie gras and sumptuous wines for bankers.

So, two months ago, Americans did what Dr. Dean predicted they would do. More than a year before our loss, he said: "We all voted for change we can believe in. If we don't get it, we'll get some more change in 2010"

So now we'll have another two years of catastrophe. The Democrats will block the Republicans from making it even worse (other than cutting Social Security of course) and the Republicans will scream "it would all be better if the Democrats let us do what we want". Because the Democrats were unable to turn the thing around when we had a mandate, voters will believe the Republicans in their desperation for actual change.

Two years from now, Speaker Boehner will be joined by Senate Majority Leader McConnell and President Jeb.

It will take at least another four years after that to win back enough of the government to have another crack at turning this around. So, sit tight. We've totally, utterly blown this for the next six years - or more.

Poor desperate working class willing to work for peanuts and no middle class.

I did add "or more" to the six years, thanks for the call out.

I'm not very optimistic about this. Not at all.

On account of peanuts don't buy big screen TVs or new cars. Although I'm not sure they grasp that concept yet.

country falls apart.

Might be 6 years might be 60.
The America most of us visualized in our youth is gone forever.
We can only hope we can hang on until the next generation or the next decides that they have had enough and take to the streets.
This generation isn't going to do it. They already got duped once--they came out en masse for "hope and change" and they got screwed.
It will be a while before they trust the system again.

6 years might be 60. I seriously doubt we're going to see people coming out of the woodwork like that again for quite awhile. And we have a MSM soaring with propaganda and twisted facts.

Census bureau numbers are through 2009, and many of the President's policies have prevented millions from sliding into poverty due to a recession he didn't creat.

Another look at poverty in the Great Recession





"Two years from now, Speaker Boehner will be joined by Senate Majority Leader McConnell and President Jeb."

Is this wishful thinking?

I guess its easier than arguing the merits - as borne out by your attempt to argue the merits.

If it was 47.8 million a year ago, then it's almost certainly higher now, since all measures of poverty rate have only increased in the last year. While the bankers enjoy their foie gras and sumptuous wines.

The coming Social Security cuts will only make it worse. Unless you're a banker.

Sorry.

I really am sorry.

There was/is a recession in progress. Is it your understanding that this President created the crisis?

He was elected to change the system. Instead, he appointed far-right kooks like Summers and Geithner who looked out for the bankers while mooning working America.

and the Hoover comparison is beyond ridiculous.

But I won't impugn your motives. I never have.

thoughts like this: "Two years from now, Speaker Boehner will be joined by Senate Majority Leader McConnell and President Jeb."

at this point.

:rofl:

although some repubs feel Romney is too moderate (because they are insane) but I know the old guard repubs support him.

the midterms were a complete disaster and that is on his doorstep (and Nancy Pelosi's for that matter). And now watch them cut Social Security and Medicare. Maybe when he said "change" he was talking about what we'd have left in our pockets in 2012.

A complete disaster would have been losing the Senate too. It's not the first time a President's party suffered huge losses, but it's one of the few times they didn't lose both the House and Senate.

after that? We get oligarchy as corporate rule with some very mean, rough totalitarian Fascism rather than the soft, inverted kind that tastes acrid on the tongue and biting to the skin. That is, if we allow it to continue this way as it is. Big question mark there --> ?

It seems that even the Democrats, by enabling and softening our resolve and placating our concerns, are directly contributing to this trend. Oh, yeah, that can be argued with and sounds paranoid still, but the picture of where it can and will go is getting clearer without the need to fantasize about it.

Worse yet, when it plunges into a chaotic nightmare, that's a place where the iron fist can easily smash any and all resistance to it. Our little bubble and dream is thin and ready to pop. Can we find some choices and flexibility with which to stand our ground before it's illegal? I wonder.

Just musing here on the pivot of this rather dark day.

Optimism is a noble pursuit.

You speak of turning it around in six years, but it seems to me that blowing this opportunity makes the job that much more difficult. Think of a grass fire. When it is small you can hit it with some water and put it out. Instead, the Republicans wanted to put gasoline on it, and Obama surrendered to them. In two years, the fire will be that much bigger. I don't even want to think about the damage that will be done in six more years with Obama as President for all of them.

I kinda think we'd have been better off with McCain. The Democratic Congress would have let the tax cuts expire, McCain and Republicans would be blamed for the bad economy and we'd have veto proof majorities in both houses of Congress and an excellent chance to win in 2012 with a much better candidate (hopefully - I cannot think of who.)

The Obama administration did all the right things to overt a catastrophe. It is sickening that many refuse to acknowledge that.

They propped up the bankers rather than propping up the banks and expunging the bankers. The bankers now have $12 trillion in guarantees and loans. And they're still doing essentially the same shit because we didn't restore Glass-Steagall, so the "save" may be temporary.

The rest of us got about 6% of what the bankers got, and that was sent to us via trickle-down mechanisms rather than directly, so we actually got even less.

obscenely lucrative. Don't expect any change there.

Hyperbolic much?

Obama hardly did squat. Pelosi was the driving force. And who got beat in 2010? Pelosi.

Obama is skating by trying to get the gawd-damned idiots to vote for him.
And in so doing, is making them more and more powerful.

"ALL" the right things is a total crock.

We essentially saw a replay- on an even larger scale- of the S&L crisis of the late 1970s. Remember "Fast Eddie" McBirney?

we might have 20% real unemployment, declining wages, an ongoing foreclosure crisis, spiraling housing price declines, a consumer collapse, new oil and commodities bubbles, a bond crisis, state and local budget crises and multiple sovereign debt crises all leading to austerity, economic dislocations and global riots.

Oh, wait...

Well stated.

had Obama not become President:

"we might have 20% real unemployment, declining wages, an ongoing foreclosure crisis, spiraling housing price declines, a consumer collapse, new oil and commodities bubbles, a bond crisis, state and local budget crises and multiple sovereign debt crises all leading to austerity, economic dislocations and global riots."

The crisis would have reversed itself via the super wonderful policies of President X.

and getting worse?

that it started decades ago and crashed a few years ago, leaving a huge hole and mess to deal with?

Thanks.

Instead, trillions were gifted to the crooks who created this disaster. Bonuses were increased. Bubbles were re-blown. The global Ponzi casino is back in business and Wall Street's got Bernanke's Amex black card.

Ask yourself, what kind of medical team would give blood transfusions to a parasite and a couple of aspirins to the host? The patient is still dying but the parasite is healthy again... for now. It's economic malpractice.

nothing will change. Sadly, there's been a 30 year war on demonizing Democrats by people like Rush Limbaugh and various other RW gasbags. The end result is that many people who vote Republican do so only because they irrationally hate the Democratic brand even more. If they won't be convinced by objective reality of their misguided hatred, I really don't see anything that will change their sports-like approach to politics.

And should there be a seachange in the Republican voter attitude, I suspect that Republicans will make the necessary election-rigging/gerrymandering needed to maintain their grip on power.

We are now a turd circling the bowl...

Beware of the sub 100 IQ....it is your enemy !

off the very people who should be voting for us. Maybe looking down on folks and accusing them of being stupid is not working ... just a thought.

They have the Arrogance...Arrogance married to Ignorance...there is no reasoning with that combination, therefore, I do not feel compelled in the slightest to do anything other than expose them for the hateful cretins that they are !

You can try, however.....let us know how it works out.

30K a year should vote for repubs but they do it all the time because they think dems look down on them. It's the PR that needs to be worked on. Repubs have it down to an art, and get millions of folks to vote for them who have no reason to do so.

My situation is no different then when Bush was in office 10 years ago, so not really worried about it. Because the arguments have not changed, nor been answered.

Although if they want to bring another gun, to a knife fight, that is fine also.

Might as well have fun playing music.



On a side note, anyone notice that if someone uses a threat against you, then says they will set you free if you join them, then you probably shouldn't. It is common sense, don't join something you think is bad, if they threaten you with bad. Because they are only going to do worse if you give them your power. Your choices should be free, not by coercion.

The voice.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YaqQnhBtxaI

It is what the guy in storm of the century movie was said to have done, use a threat of fear to get people to help a fear thing. And why I don't think threats of 'it will be worse if you don't' are an argument to help the thing that makes those threats.


Although without violence, I like this clip.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WiQmQhA-OrM

Note the gun was in the same place as the bowling ball from Mystery Men. And still on strike. Although now its in the hand isn't it.


And Amy Goodman was one of the few people in media that did not just go along with the media fanfare for war.


Aerosmith - Janie's Got A Gun
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqQn2ADZE1A



AC/DC - Thunderstruck
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RukUetw0hAM


Leon the Professional
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f2_s5X3kAec

I think we all better be thinking about what we want to do, back President Obama for another 4 years to lock in a Democratic executive and then work toward someone else for 2016? Or are we going to risk changing candidates? I am uneasy looking ahead to the next election.

Nomatter what we are better off with a Democratic (even if he/she is the 'good cop') president than a Republican. The idea of Jeb makes me ill.

that's a long way off.

Republicans don't care.

The http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/data/census/1960/cphl162.html">poverty rate in 1969 was 13.7%, in 1979 it was 12.4%, in 1989 it was 13.1%, and in 1999 it was 11.8%. We http://www.census.gov/main/www/popclock.html">currently have 310,593,682 people in the US. If 47.8 million people are living in poverty, that makes the poverty rate 15.3%. That's a couple of percentage points higher than our average over the last 40 years, but the difference is largely attributable to the large number of illegal immigrants who live in poverty. The http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/14/AR2009041401433.html">poverty rate for illegal immigrants is twice the rate for US citizens and legal immigrants. If there are 11 million illegal immigrants in the US, 15% would be 1.65 million people living in poverty. However, since the poverty rate is about twice as high for illegal immigrants it becomes 30% living in poverty, or 3.3 million people. Remove these people from the statistics and the poverty rate drops from 15.3% to 14.3%.

However, if we compare all future economic times against the data from the height of the tech bubble we're going to be disappointed for a very long time.