How about some facts and data, John? You’re in academe now; don’t you think it’s time to drop the demagogic claptrap and quantify your statements? If you were serious about the problem and not trying to use the poor as a vehicle for your presidential campaign, you would do so.
But of course, you’re not serious. And everybody knows it. I checked again, and here is what your campaign fa?ade the Center for Poverty, Work and Opportunity at UNC Law has on tap in the coming months:
?zilch?
?bupkis?
?bugger-all?
Plus the same typographical error that was there all last year
So tell us, “academic” taking advantage of resources provided to you by the taxpayers of North Carolina to campaign in Boston freaking Massachusetts:
? What do you mean by poverty? How do you define it?
? Are you seriously trying to say poverty is worse in America now than in the 1960s? If so, to what do you attribute it? Real academics studying the problem say “changes in the poverty rate can be not just affected by, but entirely attributable to, personal decisions rather than labor markets.” Isn’t that anathema to winning a Democrat primary? Would you dare say that? Isn’t it easier to blame America?
? How many of the thirty million American poor earning less than $8.70/hr. are actually supporting a family of four? What government handouts are they already on? You know statistics on poverty categorically avoid adding in government handouts. Doesn’t that make it easier to portray the government as not doing anything when your statistics by their very nature discount everything the government does? Wouldn’t an academic want to know the full picture?
There are far more questions to ask, but I don’t want perfect-hair-boy to split an end ducking any more than these, so I’ll desist for the present.
