Ben Carson: poverty is a 'state of mind'

[Tig3rzhark]

This man is pretty popular, considering that he was raised here in Detroit.

He has a Public School named after him here.

And he is now the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, despite he has no experience in the field. He would have been better off as the U.S. Surgeon General, but I disgress.

I'm starting a new thread here in hopes to gather the thoughts of his actions as well as how his actions have had an effect on the city of Detroit alone.

Despite being raised here in Detroit, it seems that when he became Sec. of HUD, that he has not only forgotten where he has come from but has little concern for the poor through his statements.

[Hypestyles]

is there a full transcript of the speech?
http://www.npr.org/2017/05/25/530068...-state-of-mind

[Tig3rzhark]

is there a full transcript of the speech?
http://www.npr.org/2017/05/25/530068...-state-of-mind

I couldn't find the full transcript.

[renf]

Is there anyone in this group who knows Dr. Carson well. I have friends who knew him when he was a surgeon at Johns Hopkins and they speak highly of him as a compassionate physician. However, there is nothing in his book or his speeches to suggest that has read any of the immense literature about racial discrepancies, poverty and current urban challenges.

[Wesley Mouch]

Is there anyone in this group who knows Dr. Carson well. I have friends who knew him when he was a surgeon at Johns Hopkins and they speak highly of him as a compassionate physician. However, there is nothing in his book or his speeches to suggest that has read any of the immense literature about racial discrepancies, poverty and current urban challenges.

Dr. Carson may have noticed that the war on poverty, based on the 'immense literature' has accomplished nearly nothing, and if anything, has destroyed black society.

He is an outsider. He has no experience. And its hard to imagine how he can do any worse.

Not knowing the 'literature' -- and not having experience may be his most valuable asset. He has the opportunity to take a fresh approach to urban poverty. We can bitch, or we can let him try. We've had 50 years of failure. The worst that can happen is failure. Doesn't seem like a risk to me. I say let Carson be progressive and try new ideas.

[Bigdd]

Dr. Carson may have noticed that the war on poverty, based on the 'immense literature' has accomplished nearly nothing, and if anything, has destroyed black society.

........

Not knowing the 'literature' -- and not having experience may be his most valuable asset.

THIS

The Democratic welfare approach was never intended to help lift blacks OUT of poverty,.. rather to make them poor,.. dependent on government,.. and voting for the correct party.

It is one of the planks of Communism,.. which was boiled down into 8 easy steps by Hillary's mentor, Saul Alinsky.

Saul Alinsky's doctrine; 8 steps to topple a nation and create a socialist state.

1) Healthcare — Control healthcare and you control the people
2) Poverty — Increase the Poverty level as high as possible, poor people are easier to control and will not fight back if you are providing everything for them to live.
3) Debt — Increase the debt to an unsustainable level. That way you are able to increase taxes, and this will produce more poverty.
4) Gun Control — Remove the ability to defend themselves from the Government. That way you are able to create a police state.
5) Welfare — Take control of every aspect of their lives [[Food, Housing, and Income).
6) Education — Take control of what people read and listen to — take control of what children learn in school.
7) Religion — Remove the belief in the God from the Government and schools.
8) Class Warfare — Divide the people into the wealthy and the poor. This will cause more discontent and it will be easier to take [[Tax) the wealthy with the support of the poor.

[Tig3rzhark]

THIS

The Democratic welfare approach was never intended to help lift blacks OUT of poverty,.. rather to make them poor,.. dependent on government,.. and voting for the correct party.

It is one of the planks of Communism,.. which was boiled down into 8 easy steps by Hillary's mentor, Saul Alinsky.

Saul Alinsky's doctrine; 8 steps to topple a nation and create a socialist state.

1) Healthcare — Control healthcare and you control the people
2) Poverty — Increase the Poverty level as high as possible, poor people are easier to control and will not fight back if you are providing everything for them to live.
3) Debt — Increase the debt to an unsustainable level. That way you are able to increase taxes, and this will produce more poverty.
4) Gun Control — Remove the ability to defend themselves from the Government. That way you are able to create a police state.
5) Welfare — Take control of every aspect of their lives [[Food, Housing, and Income).
6) Education — Take control of what people read and listen to — take control of what children learn in school.
7) Religion — Remove the belief in the God from the Government and schools.
8) Class Warfare — Divide the people into the wealthy and the poor. This will cause more discontent and it will be easier to take [[Tax) the wealthy with the support of the poor.

This nation will more than likely become another oligarchy like today's Russia. No wonder Trump has an admiration for Putin.

1. We were close to having good health care, until the GOP made it there mission to repeal it.

2. There is enough poverty to go around.

3. National Debt....check.

4. We have enough laws defending the rights of guns. I wouldn't worry about it so much.

5. Wanna take care of that problem? See 6.

6. If you want your children go to catholic school, pay for it yourself, or have the Vatican do it for ya. If you want to go to private school, pay for it yourself. Do not do it on the government dime.

7. That is what the U.S. Constitution is for. "Congress shall make no law establishing a religion nor prohibit the free exercise thereof." If we had an official religion in government, then we wouldn't have freedom of religion.

8. Talk to Trump and his supporters about that one.

[Richard]

This nation will more than likely become another oligarchy like today's Russia. No wonder Trump has an admiration for Putin.

1. We were close to having good health care, until the GOP made it there mission to repeal it.

2. There is enough poverty to go around.

3. National Debt....check.

4. We have enough laws defending the rights of guns. I wouldn't worry about it so much.

5. Wanna take care of that problem? See 6.

6. If you want your children go to catholic school, pay for it yourself, or have the Vatican do it for ya. If you want to go to private school, pay for it yourself. Do not do it on the government dime.

7. That is what the U.S. Constitution is for. "Congress shall make no law establishing a religion nor prohibit the free exercise thereof." If we had an official religion in government, then we wouldn't have freedom of religion.

8. Talk to Trump and his supporters about that one.

So you make a post about Mr. Carson and in usual media format you twist it around to it is Trumps fault that poverty exists. Why even pretend that you cared enough to ask? The posters cared enough to seriously answer the question.

Why would you even do that?

I think Russia has infiltrated the media more so then anything else.

That is page 17 in the handbook,create disorder by useing the media to spread misinformation.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=SYDgnCef8rs

http://www.ontheissues.org/2016/Ben_..._+_Poverty.htm

His speech was on xm,I am not a subscriber so not able to pull it up.

I do not care if he was tea party.
I do not care that he was an advive Mr. Obama supporter.
I think he is correct and is the best man for the job no matter how it gets twisted.

[Bigdd]

This nation will more than likely become another oligarchy like today's Russia. No wonder Trump has an admiration for Putin.

1. We were close to having good health care, until the GOP made it there mission to repeal it.


6. If you want your children go to catholic school, pay for it yourself, or have the Vatican do it for ya. If you want to go to private school, pay for it yourself. Do not do it on the government dime.

7. That is what the U.S. Constitution is for. "Congress shall make no law establishing a religion nor prohibit the free exercise thereof." If we had an official religion in government, then we wouldn't have freedom of religion.

Re #1. Tens if not hundreds of millions of people LOST their healthcare under Obamacare. Sure I have a card in my wallet [[Blue Cross),.. but it's worthless. The deductible is $14,300. So I pay well into 4 figures a month for nothing. Sure the poor get everything for free,.. but even then it's not health "CARE",.. rather it's just a health "plan",.. that only pays for MD's to keep you sick and addict you to drugs that don't fix anything. If you want to actually get cured,.. you have to leave the country and pay out of pocket.

Re #6. But then you have to pay twice. You pay to have your children go to public school with your local and state prop taxes,.. and then pay again for the private school. That's not right. And that's why vouchers are so important. The voucher could be used to pay for the private school. The best private school in my area is cheaper than the public schools and does a vastly better job.

#8? Huh? What does he have to do with that?

The reality is,.. neither party is in charge. The owners of the government are the ones making these decisions, and they are not bound by the Constitution. If they were,.. there would be no Dept of Ed, no govt control of our healthcare, no dept of Agriculture, no Federal income Tax, etc.

[Oddz313]

THIS

The Democratic welfare approach was never intended to help lift blacks OUT of poverty,.. rather to make them poor,.. dependent on government,.. and voting for the correct party.

It is one of the planks of Communism,.. which was boiled down into 8 easy steps by Hillary's mentor, Saul Alinsky.

Saul Alinsky's doctrine; 8 steps to topple a nation and create a socialist state.

1) Healthcare — Control healthcare and you control the people
2) Poverty — Increase the Poverty level as high as possible, poor people are easier to control and will not fight back if you are providing everything for them to live.
3) Debt — Increase the debt to an unsustainable level. That way you are able to increase taxes, and this will produce more poverty.
4) Gun Control — Remove the ability to defend themselves from the Government. That way you are able to create a police state.
5) Welfare — Take control of every aspect of their lives [[Food, Housing, and Income).
6) Education — Take control of what people read and listen to — take control of what children learn in school.
7) Religion — Remove the belief in the God from the Government and schools.
8) Class Warfare — Divide the people into the wealthy and the poor. This will cause more discontent and it will be easier to take [[Tax) the wealthy with the support of the poor.

The debt goes up every year since Reagan adding to it is letting corporations stash over a trillion in tax liabilities every year and going to war all over.

[Jason]

THIS

The Democratic welfare approach was never intended to help lift blacks OUT of poverty,.. rather to make them poor,.. dependent on government,.. and voting for the correct party.

It is one of the planks of Communism,.. which was boiled down into 8 easy steps by Hillary's mentor, Saul Alinsky.

Saul Alinsky's doctrine; 8 steps to topple a nation and create a socialist state.

1) Healthcare — Control healthcare and you control the people
2) Poverty — Increase the Poverty level as high as possible, poor people are easier to control and will not fight back if you are providing everything for them to live.
3) Debt — Increase the debt to an unsustainable level. That way you are able to increase taxes, and this will produce more poverty.
4) Gun Control — Remove the ability to defend themselves from the Government. That way you are able to create a police state.
5) Welfare — Take control of every aspect of their lives [[Food, Housing, and Income).
6) Education — Take control of what people read and listen to — take control of what children learn in school.
7) Religion — Remove the belief in the God from the Government and schools.
8) Class Warfare — Divide the people into the wealthy and the poor. This will cause more discontent and it will be easier to take [[Tax) the wealthy with the support of the poor.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/alinsky.asp

1. "Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have." Power is derived from 2 main sources – money and people. "Have-Nots" must build power from flesh and blood.
2. "Never go outside the expertise of your people." It results in confusion, fear and retreat. Feeling secure adds to the backbone of anyone.
3. "Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy." Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty.
4. "Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules." If the rule is that every letter gets a reply, send 30,000 letters. You can kill them with this because no one can possibly obey all of their own rules.
5. "Ridicule is man's most potent weapon." There is no defense. It's irrational. It's infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions.
6. "A good tactic is one your people enjoy." They'll keep doing it without urging and come back to do more. They're doing their thing, and will even suggest better ones.
7. "A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag." Don't become old news.
8. "Keep the pressure on. Never let up." Keep trying new things to keep the opposition off balance. As the opposition masters one approach, hit them from the flank with something new.
9. "The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself." Imagination and ego can dream up many more consequences than any activist.
10. "The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition." It is this unceasing pressure that results in the reactions from the opposition that are essential for the success of the campaign.
11. "If you push a negative hard enough, it will push through and become a positive." Violence from the other side can win the public to your side because the public sympathizes with the underdog.
12. "The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative." Never let the enemy score points because you're caught without a solution to the problem.
13. "Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it." Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions.

Secondly, Clinton did write her thesis about Alinksy [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillar..._senior_thesis) but she doesn't have much good to say about his strategies. You can read the entire thesis if you want to, it's online. Her conclusion even at that young age was that working within the system to achieve incremental change was better. That's been consistent throughout her entire life.

For Obama, Alinksy's rules are basically the opposite of his political worldview. Obama's political career has been about building consensus with agreeable policy ideas. The idea that if you're nice guy and propose doing reasonable things that people will come together [[which turned out to be pretty naive). I have no idea where the narrative comes from that he's divisive. I've watched all of the State of the Union addresses, I followed his campaigns, I've seen plenty of his other interviews and things. The guy spent 8 years bending over backward to not be divisive.

Clinton is more politically adversarial, but in the normal traditional way. She understands that to get democratic policies implemented you need votes in congress, and getting them takes a lot of work and strategic deal making. Everyone who's ever dealt with her knows that she's very good at this. That's bad for republicans and so republicans should naturally oppose her. But her [[or Obama for that matter) becoming president just means normal traditional policy defeats for republicans, not the establishment of some kind of new world order socialist dictatorship.


As far as Carson goes it doesn't matter what his ideas are or how smart or unsmart he is or what life experiences he's had. The basic fact is that running a large and complicated department requires experience in doing that kind of thing. He doesn't know how the department works, the organizational structure, how you go about implementing new policies [[regardless of what those policies are), how you balance different competing parts of the department and staff, how you can tell when the people around you are doing their jobs correctly. There are thousands of people all across the country who have dedicated their lives to working at HUD and with HUD's policy areas. He has no idea who they are or what they're talking about. It's like someone who never went to college, has never done art, has no experience with fundraising/bureaucracy/university politics, and doesn't even know who Picasso is, suddenly becoming the dean of an art school. He could literally be Albert Einstein, he simply doesn't have the expertise for that particular job. If Carson wanted to be the director of HUD then maybe he should have spent the last 40 years doing HUD stuff instead of doing brain surgery.

[Richard]

http://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/alinsky.asp



Secondly, Clinton did write her thesis about Alinksy [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillar..._senior_thesis) but she doesn't have much good to say about his strategies. You can read the entire thesis if you want to, it's online. Her conclusion even at that young age was that working within the system to achieve incremental change was better. That's been consistent throughout her entire life.

For Obama, Alinksy's rules are basically the opposite of his political worldview. Obama's political career has been about building consensus with agreeable policy ideas. The idea that if you're nice guy and propose doing reasonable things that people will come together [[which turned out to be pretty naive). I have no idea where the narrative comes from that he's divisive. I've watched all of the State of the Union addresses, I followed his campaigns, I've seen plenty of his other interviews and things. The guy spent 8 years bending over backward to not be divisive.

Clinton is more politically adversarial, but in the normal traditional way. She understands that to get democratic policies implemented you need votes in congress, and getting them takes a lot of work and strategic deal making. Everyone who's ever dealt with her knows that she's very good at this. That's bad for republicans and so republicans should naturally oppose her. But her [[or Obama for that matter) becoming president just means normal traditional policy defeats for republicans, not the establishment of some kind of new world order socialist dictatorship.


As far as Carson goes it doesn't matter what his ideas are or how smart or unsmart he is or what life experiences he's had. The basic fact is that running a large and complicated department requires experience in doing that kind of thing. He doesn't know how the department works, the organizational structure, how you go about implementing new policies [[regardless of what those policies are), how you balance different competing parts of the department and staff, how you can tell when the people around you are doing their jobs correctly. There are thousands of people all across the country who have dedicated their lives to working at HUD and with HUD's policy areas. He has no idea who they are or what they're talking about. It's like someone who never went to college, has never done art, has no experience with fundraising/bureaucracy/university politics, and doesn't even know who Picasso is, suddenly becoming the dean of an art school. He could literally be Albert Einstein, he simply doesn't have the expertise for that particular job. If Carson wanted to be the director of HUD then maybe he should have spent the last 40 years doing HUD stuff instead of doing brain surgery.

Mr. Carson was not put there to run a dictatorship,he is there to provide direction and goals,there are thousands of employees and supervisors that are there to help him along the way.

CEOs of corporations move all the time without haveing clue of how to produce a product,how many have worked a job where thier knowledge about what is going on far exceeds the newly replaced manager or supervisor.

I totally disagree on the notion of saying you come from poverty and have lived in government housing but do not have a clue about how it is.

That makes no sense at all,personally I would rather have somebody that has been there done that over a political appointee millionair that does not have a clue what poverty is like in the real world.

HUD has been run for the last 40 years with expertise by that assessment,maybe instead of trying to run HUD they should have been brain surgeons.

HUD has been a disaster,hell it took them 40 years to figure out there is not anybody in this world that was going to build an apartment complex in the middle of some farmers field 40 miles from the nearest city,but you sure could have collected millions of taxpayer dollars to build it.

How many hundreds of millions were wasted on that division.

Yes ,I am inquireing about the job listing that was posted in the division of rural housing can you please tell me what is expected of me.

Response- well actually nothing is required of you,basically you get a nice office and a phone,all you need to do is wait for somebody to inquire about building an apartment complex in the middle of nowhere.

Well that sounds great,how many phones calls can I expect per day?

Well actually the phone did ring once about 15 years ago but it ended up being a wrong number,but do not worry,you will not be bored because you will be joining a crew of about 120 more that are also waiting to be helpful,just in case there should be a rush of calls we would not want the taxpayer to be waiting or be transferred to voicemail.Also you will receive the standard full benefits package including medical.

Thank you,it all sounds great when can I start?

The good news was it only took 40 years for them to figure out that those funds could be put to better use,like where they were actually needed.

They changed that program last year and it has helped in the funding process to get a few Detroit projects off of the ground.

.Imagine that,when you direct funding to where it is needed,the impact creates the best results and serves the public in a manner that actually makes sense.

They built massive complexes without a thought to how the surrounding community was going to pay for the added police,fire,and emergency services,they put no time restrictions,no drug restrictions,allows the woman to sign the lease and never live there while the thug does.

It has been the big game of the more people that you put in poverty and housing the more money you can ask for and be come a more powerful institution to collect more funds.

Little to do with actually rising abouve,but hey that is their job,the warehouse storage of numbers and only that.

Maybe it is time to close that chapter.

Whoever it was at HUD that came up with the afirmitive action neighborhood initive needs to be fired and beaten in the town square.

That little experiment is right out of the socialist playbook

This is America where we get to choose where we live.

and I like the salted Picasso's but they are pricy and only a few in the little bags.

[Wesley Mouch]

...snip...
As far as Carson goes it doesn't matter what his ideas are or how smart or unsmart he is or what life experiences he's had. The basic fact is that running a large and complicated department requires experience in doing that kind of thing. He doesn't know how the department works, the organizational structure, how you go about implementing new policies [[regardless of what those policies are), how you balance different competing parts of the department and staff, how you can tell when the people around you are doing their jobs correctly. There are thousands of people all across the country who have dedicated their lives to working at HUD and with HUD's policy areas. He has no idea who they are or what they're talking about. It's like someone who never went to college, has never done art, has no experience with fundraising/bureaucracy/university politics, and doesn't even know who Picasso is, suddenly becoming the dean of an art school. He could literally be Albert Einstein, he simply doesn't have the expertise for that particular job. If Carson wanted to be the director of HUD then maybe he should have spent the last 40 years doing HUD stuff instead of doing brain surgery.

What you're saying makes sense. But when I look at the people appointed to run big organizations in government, I have my doubts that most cabinet secretaries are experts in their fields. It looks more like a 'usual suspects' list.

So let's take a random familiar name. Janet Napolitano. Unfortunate that she's a D, because some may think I'm picking sides. What are her credentials for running a major state university system? Her CV shows Attorney General & Governor of Arizona, Sec'y of Homeland Security, lawyer, & US Attorney. Nowhere in her Wikipedia bio does it say she has any experience in education. Sure, she did run big organizations. But its not clear to me how she gained any real experience other than 'on the job'. [[AFAIK, she's a fine administrator -- that's not relevant -- the question is should only career experts be considered? Or can an outsider lead a governmental organization?

I do not expect Dr. Carson to know anything about the administrative world. I expect him to know something about poverty, racial discrimination, and human nature. To be intelligent. To be wise. And to lead.

Your criticism that he's not a member of the club of experts doesn't convince me that he can't lead HUD.

I agree that there is a lot of skill needed to run the machine of HUD. I expect that there are civil servants doing that skillfully. And who can serve leaders of either party faithfully.

[EastsideAl]

Dr. Carson may have noticed that the war on poverty, based on the 'immense literature' has accomplished nearly nothing, and if anything, has destroyed black society.

The consistent invoking of the "war on poverty" hobgoblin by the right is so ahistorical that its ridiculous. Nixon essentially killed off the War on Poverty in the early '70s, in the process of undoing much of what the Johnson administration did. And it's been mostly downhill from there, under Republican and Democratic presidents alike.

[Wesley Mouch]

The consistent invoking of the "war on poverty" hobgoblin by the right is so ahistorical that its ridiculous. Nixon essentially killed off the War on Poverty in the early '70s, in the process of undoing much of what the Johnson administration did. And it's been mostly downhill from there, under Republican and Democratic presidents alike.

You are right that I descended into hyperbole. But let's both not all into talking points.

The point I was making is that poverty reduction efforts to date have not helped. We can choose to double-down under the assumption that we just need to spend more money to do it right, or we can respect alternative voices.

One of my favorite moments of each day is noticing just how conservative the Democratic party can be. Charters? No way. We just need more of the same, please. Poverty? Too bad we haven't spent enough because of those evil Republicans. If we could just spend more, and increase benefits all will be great. Uber to allow poor people to earn a little extra money? No way. More licensing and insurance so we can protect the status quo.

Funny how the left is so conservative. And funny how the right now has become the real progressive party -- if you're interested in results and not just feeling good about yourself and all you've done to solve poverty -- which you haven't.

[Bham1982]

Funny how the left is so conservative. And funny how the right now has become the real progressive party -- if you're interested in results and not just feeling good about yourself and all you've done to solve poverty -- which you haven't.

Just in case this thread weren't quite absurd and delusional enough, we have this.

Yes, clearly the Trump disaster is all about "results" and the bigots and dummies of America desperately wanting the feds to solve poverty and inequality.

No doubt Trump/Bannon and the cast of White House clowns, grifters and crazies are laser-focused on the minutiae of federal social policy, and effecting positive change for poor Americans. Glad we got that out of the way...

[401don]

Whenever I see Carson speak he reminds me of that kid in class who always got straight A's but never had an ounce of common sense.

[Shai_Hulud]

Whenever I see Carson speak he reminds me of that kid in class who always got straight A's but never had an ounce of common sense.

The term savant comes to mind.

[3WC]

Wesley Mouch and Bigdd, your comments are the most thoughtful and intelligent I've seen on the Forum in a long time.

Bigdd, you are correct that Saul Alinski's influence over Hillary - and more so over Obama - has shaped much of U.S. policy over the past 8 years. It has damn near sunk us for good.

Carson has not only the intellectual creds for his job, but the street creds as well, having been born in and lived through poverty in his formative years.

To a great extent, poverty is a state of mind. So is wealth accretion. I have known many rich people, who did not inherit money. They have a singular trait - they have a compelling desire to become wealthy; they may not be the smartest people in the room, but they are the hardest workers and risk takers.

There are of course scores of much smarter people who do not desire to be rich. They desire lifestyles which provide more satisfaction than large amounts of money can provide.

There are almost infinite number of examples of persons who have risen out of poverty to achieve wealth and other less money driven accomplishments. Usually, there are strong family ties that influence them to have the necessary work ethic, reliance, self confidence and motivation to succeed. Carson's mom was such a person.

Carson's problem, if there is one, is that he is so calm and reasoned that too many people don't take him as seriously as they should. That's too bad. If he were a guy who comes across like like Trump when he's not Tweeting he would get a much larger audience.

[Bham1982]

Bigdd, you are correct that Saul Alinski's influence over Hillary - and more so over Obama - has shaped much of U.S. policy over the past 8 years. It has damn near sunk us for good.

What?? Is this like some insane talking point from Breitbart or Infowars or something?

Saul Alinsky is like the polar opposite of Hillary and Obama. They have absolutely nothing to do with each other. Their social policies are diametrically opposed. Alinsky was a radical who sought to smash the system and basically end wealth accumulation.

The Obama administration presided over the second greatest period of wealth creation in American history. The [[Bill) Clinton administration presided over the greatest in history. The claim that their policies mirror those of Alinsky is completely bizarre and nonsensical.

Carson has not only the intellectual creds for his job, but the street creds as well, having been born in and lived through poverty in his formative years.

LOL! Carson is a d-bag of the highest level, has zero experience or credibility, talks like a raving lunatic, and lies about his background, childhood and career.

Come to think of it, he fits in perfectly with this administration. He's an unhinged nut.

To a great extent, poverty is a state of mind. So is wealth accretion.

Yes, those f-ing dirt-poor Africans, Middle Easterners, Latin Americans and SE Asians are just dummies who need to realize this! Duh!

Poverty is a "state of mind", starving children of sub-Saharan Africa! Buck-up, losers!

When you read comments like these, you understand damn well how this country could be so screwed. People really believe the nutcase alt-right stuff. They actually believe stuff like Pizzagate, "Obama was a Muslim radical commie", "Hillary had Vincent Foster killed" and all the rest.

This is like a cancer that needs to be rooted out, or this country is absolutely doomed. We'll be Venezuela in 50 years.

[Richard]

Back in the day Mrs Roosevelt was riding through NYC,she witnessed recent immigrants living with multiple families in crowded one room apartments they were stuck in a catch 22 situation,poverty breeds desperation.

Her idea was if the government provided a hand up,meaning a clean place to lay their head and a substance to help them until they found employment.Once they found employment they were expected to go off on their own.

Most people feel much better if they have a dollar in their pocket and can be more productive when they are not having to worry about where their next meal was coming from or where they were going to sleep that night.

The American dream has no guarantees,it is hard and there is always somebody trying to knock one back down,the state of mind comes in with the ability to keep getting back up and pushing forward.

You see young adults in college working 3 jobs to put themselves through school,it is that state of mind that give them that drive to want to do better.

We created more poverty and desperation by dropping the hand up and converting it to a life long career,it was only meant for 90 days.

I agree with the concept of giving a hand up but also spending the necessary funds to help ensure the person receiving the help has the tools needed in order to be as successful in life as they wish.

Another point of Mr. Carson is it is not the governments job to be in the charity business,the private sector is more equipped to handle that because each individuals circumstance is different and it is cost prohibitive and wasteful for the government to run a one size fits all organization.

Another point of his is we give churches a tax exempt status,it is felt that because they receive that status they should be giving back to the community in both support and helping those in dire need.

There are many religious organizations that do exactly that,but there are also many that abuse that status.

He does interject religion or core values that everybody may not agree with,but if one does a bit of research on him,they are compassionate but with a firm hand.

XM had the interview,they released parts of it in commercials to entice listeners to purchase a subscription.

WAPo picked it up and twisted it into a war on the poor.

We will never eliminate poverty,it has been around for centuries but what we can do is offer the tools and opportunities to those that wish to rise abouve it,that creates hope and not desperation,we all know what desperation brings.

I have a friend,she is in her late 70s now,when she was 12 her mother passed and her father was a drunk,at 12 years old she would get her 2 younger siblings up and walk them to school,she would then go work in the fields picking cotton,or fruits or vegetables or whatever crops were advailable in order to feed her brother and sister,at 9 pm she would return from the fields,make the dinner,clean the shack,do the laundry,help her brother and sister with their homework and then she would do her homework that was sent by the teachers.

It is that drive,which is to do what ever it takes and make the sacrifices necessary to achieve the goals that you wish in life.

Last week the press and people were lambasting the millionaire Australian that commented about the younger generation will never own a home because they are more interested in expensive lattes and avocados [[some new fad having to do with $15 avocados).

They attacked him because they did not get the aspect of if you want something bad enough you have to make the sacrifices necessary to achieve that goal.

Sometimes people get caught up in the words and lose the message.

[drjeff]

A good friend of mine worked with Dr. Carson in the early 90s [[she's a nurse.) She says he was super nice, very eloquent, obviously intelligent. When she hears him speak now, it's like a different person. She and I suspect he has early dementia.

[Richard]

^^^

Hey,they have these life size cardboard cut out of Your president Mr Trump,if you like I can get you one for a Christmas present so his smiling face is the first one that you see every morning .

I can sent it a little early if you like,to help brighten your day and all if you prefer it sooner.

[MikeyinBrooklyn]

Of course there are many factors involved in poverty. But in the end, you cannot make someone else not poor. We should try to give everyone a good education [[but you can't make them study, do their homework, etc). I think what Dr. Carson was referring to is that ultimately the individual is the one responsible for whether or not they personally overcome poverty. Radically poor and uneducated immigrants of all colors tend to rise out of poverty both faster and in greater numbers than Americans living in poverty. In my opinion the social welfare state has made poverty comfortable enough so that there is not as strong an incentive to get out of it as there once was. Most welfare programs continue to exist for the mental satisfaction the program's advocates, not the true benefit of the recipients. The Left has-mostly unintentionally- broken the cycle of upward mobility in urban black and rural white poor areas.

[Zacha341]

...Radically poor and uneducated immigrants of all colors tend to rise out of poverty both faster and in greater numbers than Americans living in poverty.

They do overall, historically. We don't see the same generational welfare outcomes. This in part could be due to leveraging strong family networks.

In my opinion the social welfare state has made poverty comfortable enough so that there is not as strong an incentive to get out of it as there once was. Most welfare programs continue to exist for the mental satisfaction the program's advocates, not the true benefit of the recipients.

For certain living on welfare is precarious, and needs to be a turnstyle as such, and the funding not infinite. And as funds must be spread further the 'satisfaction' factor is fading. As is the tax-payer base.

The Left has-mostly unintentionally- broken the cycle of upward mobility in urban black and rural white poor areas.

Precisely! By jettisoning the man from the households [[to qualify for welfare benefits) the welfare state [[ergo replacing the head of the household) for example, helped destroy the black nuclear family.

The stronger the intact family, the stronger the opportunity for upward mobility!