Ben Carson: poverty is a 'state of mind'

[Bham1982]

Very astute and well said, 3WC. The best way to defeat liberals is with logic, reason and common sense.

And then this is the response! LOL! "Logic, reason and common sense" = "pink alien unicorns are flying out of my butt"! Carry on with the Infowars/Breitbart bizzaroworld fantasy...

Many lefties are so apoplectic and filled with an unhealthy rage that they cannot accept that their philosophy and their politics have been repudiated. They have lost touch with reality. For some, their behavior borders on psychosis and they are in desperate need of mental health care.

You need mental help. Seriously.

There is no real Left in the U.S., what does exist enabled Trump, and the opposition to Trump is essentially 100% mainstream Dems and Reps.

Anyone who thinks that the "Left" is the opposition to Trump, when the only Left candidate [[Jill Stein) implicitly endorsed him, and when 90% of the world hates Trump, is either an idiot, hiding in a cave, or mentally ill.

[Richard]

Look at the hundreds of millions spent on private security companies that were formed after 9-11.

I have a friend that works for a military subcontractor dealing with those things buzzing about.Every two years she gets a intrastate transfer.Included in the transfer is a $300,000 bonus plus all moving costs are covered.That is on top of an extremely well paid yearly salary and she is not even close to management.

But yet you have collage kids haveing to scrape up gas money to relocate to another city to for a job barely abouve minimum wage.

Thats why the gov is so hard on organized crime,they do not like competition.

Mr Carson does have a mess on his hands and I do agree with a lot of his thought patterns but he is entering a realm of politics which does not always meen doing what is right for the masses.

[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...

[Bigdd]

Bham: We should just let you rant and rave but I feel compelled to respond since your nonsense was directed at me.

First, you obviously know nothing about Saul Alinski and his influence over Obama and Clinton. First, I confess I was an Alinski devotee in college many, many years ago. I saw many of the evils in the country and like so many other pseudo intellectuals and impressionable kids I became a follower. I devoured "Rules for Radicals" and Reveille for Radicals."

Hillary Clinton was one his most devoted followers. She became his friend and invited him to lecture several times at Wellesley. She wrote her senior thesis in support of his philosophy.

Obama was an even more devoted acolyte. Alinski's most significant tool towards overthrowing Capitalism and reducing the rich to the level of the poor [[talk about being screwed up), gaining power, was through
community organizing." Ring a bell?

Alinski was considered a genius by both his friends and enemies. He was very successful at what he did.

It didn't take me long, however, to realize Alinski had everything ass backwards. Obama and Clinton never saw the light.

You praise Obama's economic "accomplishments." Sure, he inherited a bad economy caused largely by Democrats control of Congress the last two years of Bush's administration. Dodd and Frank damn near economically wrecked the country, along with their Wall Street friends [[who still support Dems and have way too much influence in Washington) that created the mortgage meltdown. BUT, Obama did little to really stimulate the natural economic rebound. His policies resulted in the worst 7 years of economic recovery since 1949. He loaded so much debt on the country we'll never pay it down. Food stamp recipients tripled [[plug in the correct increase if that's slightly higher or lower.) The "poor" are worse off now than they were before the guy took office.

Luckily, just as in physics, politically, for every action there's an equal and opposite reaction, and that's why Trump is president.

If you, Bham, were as 5th as smart or accomplished as Carson maybe somebody would give you some credit for your opinions. Dream on.

If the U.S. is like Venezuela in the future it will be because it's been taken over by radical left wing nut jobs. If the shoe fits, wear it.

Well said 3WC. It's so odd how the radical leftists see truth like this as fantasy.

Perhaps it's that they never studied history,.. and so are doomed to have us repeat it. They think they want Socialism,. but can't grasp the reality that it doesn't work. And that it quickly leads to Communism [[which was the goal all along). But it isn't the idealist Communism you find in textbooks where everyone works together in harmony,.. but rather a system of Kings. [[Look at any Communist nation,... 99.99% of the population are desperately poor to the point of starvation,.. and the elites live in massive palaces, and own fleets of exotic cars,.. private jets etc. Extravagant enough to make the Queen of England blush. Not to mention exactions of dissidents etc.

[Richard]

Hugo Chavez net worth when he died = 1 billion

His daughter at age 35 = 4.3 billion which makes her the richest woman in the world.I wonder if she is single.

The Venezuela embassy in Washington has a slush fund of over 200 million.

Today the people are starving in the streets and fighting water cannons and tear gas with cardboard.

It takes two shopping bags full of currency to buy one loaf of bread,if you can find one.

This is what some want in this country.

[Bigdd]

Hugo Chavez net worth when he died = 1 billion

His daughter at age 35 = 4.3 billion which makes her the richest woman in the world.I wonder if she is single.

The Venezuela embassy in Washington has a slush fund of over 200 million.

Today the people are starving in the streets and fighting water cannons and tear gas with cardboard.

It takes two shopping bags full of currency to buy one loaf of bread,if you can find one.

This is what some want in this country.

YEP. Bham especially. It's what he wants for everyone.

The Socialism / Communism / brutal dictatorship route is a bit like going on a cocaine or credit card binge. Lots of fun for a short while [[free stuff for everyone),.. but then there's absolute Hell to pay for a LONG, LONG time afterwards.

But the snowflakes can't see that far down the road.

[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.

[SyGolden48236]

And then this is the response! LOL! "Logic, reason and common sense" = "pink alien unicorns are flying out of my butt"! Carry on with the Infowars/Breitbart bizzaroworld fantasy...



You need mental help. Seriously.

There is no real Left in the U.S., what does exist enabled Trump, and the opposition to Trump is essentially 100% mainstream Dems and Reps.

Anyone who thinks that the "Left" is the opposition to Trump, when the only Left candidate [[Jill Stein) implicitly endorsed him, and when 90% of the world hates Trump, is either an idiot, hiding in a cave, or mentally ill.

The hystrionics, weeping and gnashing of teeth, and irrational rage from many on the left was annoying at first. It is now becoming comical.

The next four, hopefully eight, years are going to be very interesting as this country finally gets back on the right course.

For those on the left who can only react with hissy fits, dereanged tantrums, riots, exaggerations, lies, hatred and intolerance it is going to be rough going.

[Richard]

I like how some use other countries health care systems are the ones to follow or to be used as an example.

UK health system is collapsing,the minimum wait time to schedule surgery is 90 days.

Scandinavia used as an example in this thread,the wait time is one year,that is a long wait if one has cancer.

They are having a massive brain drain of the younger generation because of the high tax rates in order to pay for it,we are well aware of where that cycle goes.

Providing and paying for are two different things.

[Wesley Mouch]

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...

I am not impressed by President Trump. His 'cast of WH clowns' seem weak too.

Yet when I look at the mess we've made of urban social policy, I am open to new ideas.

The road under Trump is very bumpy. But at least there's some hope for new ideas, not just the old retreads. So yes, there's hope for change.

[401don]

I like how some use other countries health care systems are the ones to follow or to be used as an example.

UK health system is collapsing,the minimum wait time to schedule surgery is 90 days.

Scandinavia used as an example in this thread,the wait time is one year,that is a long wait if one has cancer.

They are having a massive brain drain of the younger generation because of the high tax rates in order to pay for it,we are well aware of where that cycle goes.

Providing and paying for are two different things.

It's my understanding that the U.S. spends more per capita on healthcare than any other country yet fails to insure millions of people. The enormous costs of insurance companies and gov't billing practices are probably the number one reason. Here in Canada our wait times are too long but the main reason is our specialists and surgeons leave for the U.S. where they can make 10 times as much money. If the U.S. didn't have hospitals competing to the same degree, maybe they wouldn't have to pay millions to a doctor [[and some more of our specialists would stay at home).

[Jason]

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.

Carson does not understand the topic of housing well enough to give direction or goals. When Carson has an idea about something, the people around him will say, "that's already something we do" "we can't do that because X, Y, and Z" "that idea was thought of in the 70s, here's a 2 foot high stack of studies about it" "we can't get funding for that". Next time Carson goes to a housing policy conference he's going to have no idea what anyone is talking about.

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.

A CEO needs CEO skills. They need to have experience working with the board of directors, how the stock market works, how companies should be run organizationally, how to find the best talent for the highest positions and how to hold them accountable. The CEO of a toy company doesn't need to be a masterful sculptor or a plastic injection engineer or a tool and die guy. Although they do need to have an understanding of toy markets.

Or if you think that Carson has surrounded himself with people with expertise and organizational skills, you can check out the principal staff directory: https://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD...ipal_directory

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.

Saying that Carson should run HUD because he lived in government housing is like saying that I should be Surgeon General because I've gone to the doctor my whole life. Aside from that, Carson never actually lived in public housing.

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.

Rural areas have some of the highest rates of poverty and some of the lowest quality housing stock in the country. In many ways, rural areas are in even more need of public housing than urban areas. If you linked to what specifically happened I could read about it. I'm guessing what happened is they wanted to provide public housing to high need rural areas.

Are you saying that there should not be any government housing in rural areas, or are you saying that you don't like that HUD is dependent on private developers?

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?

That's a great resume for a dean. She has experience running large organizations, balancing groups within those organizations which each have their own incentives and ambitions, she has experience fundraising, dealing with bureaucracy. The resume shows that she has had jobs that are functionally similar to being a dean in different ways, and that she was presumably competent at each of them. Her previous positions have probably prepared her more for being a dean than if she had been a community college administrator or something. She could also plausibly be a HUD secretary assuming that she has an interest in HUD and a basic understanding of HUD issues.

[Bham1982]

Saying that Carson should run HUD because he lived in government housing is like saying that I should be Surgeon General because I've gone to the doctor my whole life. Aside from that, Carson never actually lived in public housing.

Carson is HUD secretary because he's black, rich and supports Trump; that's it.

There are practically no black supporters of Trump [[for absurdly obvious reasons) and Trump and his cultists associate urban/housing issues with "black people stuff" so Carson, as Trump's only prominent black sycophant, is the secretary.

Essentially every secretary position in this nightmare administration was given to sycophants. Trump has been very open that he asked his most fervent campaign proxies to "pick a position". Experience, qualifications, smarts and mental competence are completely irrelevant.

Rural areas have some of the highest rates of poverty and some of the lowest quality housing stock in the country.

Rural areas are actually far more distressed than urban areas these days, with higher rates of drug addiction, incarceration, early death, poverty, health problems, unemployment, etc. but facts don't matter. It's a "black problem" so HUD will be starved. HUD plays an vital role in rural areas too, but Trump will harm these areas that most support him.

The WSJ just had this article on rural American replacing urban America as the center of American dysfunction. Rural areas are getting hammered by the opioid crisis, street crime and suicides, and flight of educated young people. Frankly the Dems and previous administration deserve plenty of blame; these areas died on their watch too, and they helped create the monster occupying the White House:

Rural America is the New Inner City
https://www.wsj.com/articles/rural-a...ity-1495817008

[Richard]

Carson does not understand the topic of housing well enough to give direction or goals. When Carson has an idea about something, the people around him will say, "that's already something we do" "we can't do that because X, Y, and Z" "that idea was thought of in the 70s, here's a 2 foot high stack of studies about it" "we can't get funding for that". Next time Carson goes to a housing policy conference he's going to have no idea what anyone is talking about.

In the link that you have provided it shows a massive top heavy organization that we are paying for,in that upper administration aspect there are positions that are filled that pretty much cover any bump in the road,so he does have support.

A CEO needs CEO skills. They need to have experience working with the board of directors, how the stock market works, how companies should be run organizationally, how to find the best talent for the highest positions and how to hold them accountable. The CEO of a toy company doesn't need to be a masterful sculptor or a plastic injection engineer or a tool and die guy. Although they do need to have an understanding of toy markets.

Or if you think that Carson has surrounded himself with people with expertise and organizational skills, you can check out the principal staff directory: https://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD...ipal_directory

See bold text above

Saying that Carson should run HUD because he lived in government housing is like saying that I should be Surgeon General because I've gone to the doctor my whole life. Aside from that, Carson never actually lived in public housing.



Rural areas have some of the highest rates of poverty and some of the lowest quality housing stock in the country. In many ways, rural areas are in even more need of public housing than urban areas. If you linked to what specifically happened I could read about it. I'm guessing what happened is they wanted to provide public housing to high need rural areas.

Are you saying that there should not be any government housing in rural areas, or are you saying that you don't like that HUD is dependent on private developers?

The history of this country is based on migration,both internationally and within it borders,the country is littered with ghost towns of the past,dust bowl,depression,the mass migration from the south to the north to fuel the labor demands for the automotive industry.

Why? Because generally people want to have success in life and provide for their families so they migrate to where the jobs are.

Nobody wants to leave their home where they were raised but they make that sacrifice.

Is it fair to those,that make that sacrifice in order to have a better life,that while building that dream they have to pay for those who choose not to.

Is it wise as a country to keep family's in created desperate situations generation after generation by not offering a productive solution and by doing so passing the bill down to ones grandchildren?

The math is 1 person or family receives $30,000 to $50,000 a year in full benefits depending on local costs and family size,just based on that over a 30 year period that is $900,000 if they have 3 children that end up in the same trap that becomes 2.7 million dollars for a family of 3.

It would seem reasonable to say take even $100,000 of those funds and train that person in a skills trade,but then they need a job,so take another $100k and subsidize 50% of their salary for 2 years working for a company building products made in America.

That would be or could be considered a war or solution towards eliminating poverty and breaking the cycle.

No,I do not think there should be public housing in rural,I think that the dependence system already in place would require the same plan of attack as it would in a urban situation.

I also agree with HUD working hand in hand with contractors and builders,Detroit is a poster child of how those programs can effect when they are used in the best manner.

The problem in the past was the time it took to implement the funding.

In the link that you posted look at the nuts and bolts of the actual budget proposals and course of actions and you will find your answer about Mr. Carson and his ability to oversee.

I am ecstatic that HUD has eliminated the common neighborhood program and its city blackmail tactics.

[Richard]

It's my understanding that the U.S. spends more per capita on healthcare than any other country yet fails to insure millions of people. The enormous costs of insurance companies and gov't billing practices are probably the number one reason. Here in Canada our wait times are too long but the main reason is our specialists and surgeons leave for the U.S. where they can make 10 times as much money. If the U.S. didn't have hospitals competing to the same degree, maybe they wouldn't have to pay millions to a doctor [[and some more of our specialists would stay at home).

Australia or the UK was experiencing the same problem,taxpayers were paying for the doctors training then they would leave to another country leaving the host to pay the tab.They went and arrested the doctors overseas.

The problem in this country is the high cost of medicine and medical in general,the reasoning behind it is the associated costs,IE pharmaceutical says the research and development costs are the driving costs.

But yet we can buy our meds across the border for half the price,in some countries over the counter simple meds are readily available where here they are prescription based.

It is a combination of greed,wasteful spending,out right fraud and powerful lobbyists to barley touch the surface,I think it is delusional and pandering to offer a solution of free healthcare to all without fixing the broken aspect of it first and it is so ingrained into the system for so many years.

Go to the doctor and it becomes a chain reaction of referrals to high paid specialists all interested in enhancing their bottom line.If the incentive is there somebody is going to exploit it.

It is a sad situation,I know recent immigrants that were doctors in their country that are cleaning time shares making more money then they did in their respective countries.

They became doctors because it was a respectable position and they had the compassion to help and the money was secondary.Not to say all doctors are like that,but they are regulated by the politics of their perspective base.Seems like you cannot even be a doctor anymore without also being a politician,they go hand in hand anymore.

[SyGolden48236]

Carson is HUD secretary because he's black, rich and supports Trump; that's it.

There are practically no black supporters of Trump [[for absurdly obvious reasons) and Trump and his cultists associate urban/housing issues with "black people stuff" so Carson, as Trump's only prominent black sycophant, is the secretary.

Your arrogant and elitist dismissal of Dr. Carson as only being qualified for the position based on his skin color is utterly racist and completely ignorant.

Further, you assert that there are "practically no black supporters of Trump". Again, this is more Alt.Left/CNN/MSNBC lies and propaganda. My wife, who happens to be black, our children who are half black, and many of our black friends as well as business associates support President Trump. It is sad that such provincial and racist attitudes still pervade certain segments of society in this day and age.

[Wesley Mouch]

Jason, its a reasonable opinion that he's not qualified -- but there is a reasonable argument as well that an intelligent individual may bring value to an organization that needs to dramatically change its goals and mission.

I understand your concerns about Dr. Carson. But I'll take a radical who wants to bring change over a bureaucrat who protects a status quo that I think harms the poor.

That's basically my opinion on President Trump. Sure, he's a loose canon on deck. But at least there's a greater chance of organizational change and progress with Trump than there would have been with the 'pandering the status quo' Mrs. Clinton.

Trump's election was a rebuke of the status quo. Both R&D need to learn this. I don't think the electorate is done demanding change yet. I think the games have just started, and 2018, 2020 and beyond may be more radical that we think [[radical left or radial right, who knows, but radical).

[canuck]

Jason, its a reasonable opinion that he's not qualified -- but there is a reasonable argument as well that an intelligent individual may bring value to an organization that needs to dramatically change its goals and mission.

I understand your concerns about Dr. Carson. But I'll take a radical who wants to bring change over a bureaucrat who protects a status quo that I think harms the poor.

That's basically my opinion on President Trump. Sure, he's a loose canon on deck. But at least there's a greater chance of organizational change and progress with Trump than there would have been with the 'pandering the status quo' Mrs. Clinton.

Trump's election was a rebuke of the status quo. Both R&D need to learn this. I don't think the electorate is done demanding change yet. I think the games have just started, and 2018, 2020 and beyond may be more radical that we think [[radical left or radial right, who knows, but radical).

I really can't imagine Trump radically changing anything that would mean better working and living conditions with or without unions on the horizon. I can't fathom the idea that a loudmouth without a program can dismantle a system he claims only harms people when all I see is a capitalist narcissist reducing the critical press to vermin status like dictators are wont to do.

Bernie Sanders was vocal but not a loudmouth. He had a base from which to build momentum and a true sense of what government can do for the people. He didn't disparage the press, he didn't take potshots at the system that the world envies for all its potential for progress and the checks and balances that coalesce to restore the state when danger looms. I find all this talk of knocking down the edifice of government, of breaking down regulations for impeding on business a load of horseradish. Nothing radical to help the nation, but quite a lot to boost the fortunes of the most fortunate.

[MikeyinBrooklyn]

Canuck, I disagree with you almost entirely. But you are intelligent and respectful. I appreciate reading your informed and well stated posts. Bham1982, be more like Canuck. That is, when you return to Earth.

[Bham1982]

Your arrogant and elitist dismissal of Dr. Carson as only being qualified for the position based on his skin color is utterly racist and completely ignorant.

Yes, clearly anyone who questions the bizarre appointment of a senile, disgraced former doctor, previously the only prominent black supporter of a white supremacist administration, to the nation's public housing agency, no less, is a racist.

Keep telling yourself this; maybe one day you'll actually believe the nonsense you write. Anything to justify your cultlike devoition to a racist and traitorous regime.

Carson is best known for saying that Obamacare is worse than Naziism, that Obama is worse than Hitler, that the Big Bang Theory is from Satan, that there has never been racism in the U.S., that Planned Parenthood is a secret organization dedicated to murdering black babies, and that the ancient pyramids were secret alien grain silos. He's like your bats--- crazy great uncle, except the President just put him in a cabinet-level position.

The rest of your post is flat-out lies. Yeah, we really believe you have a Jewish black holocaust-surviving militant Trump cultist family. How incredibly convenient. Is there even one such family on the planet? They're illegal immigrants, gay, liberal and handicapped too, right?

But your incredibly unique family just LOVES Trump, so Trump can't be a bigoted d-bag, right? That gives you cover for your deplorable beliefs. Keep it up, cultist, this nightmare administration will not be long for this world., and those who chose cult over country will not be forgotten.

[Bham1982]

That's basically my opinion on President Trump. Sure, he's a loose canon on deck. But at least there's a greater chance of organizational change and progress with Trump than there would have been with the 'pandering the status quo' Mrs. Clinton.

On this we'll agree. It's bizarre logic, and I have no idea why anyone would think this way, but yes, Trump is clearly a change agent.

Not intentionally; he has no values or explicit policies, but the fact that we gave the most powerful position on earth to a lifelong grifter and reality TV host, and took the position from educated, experienced minds who love the country and its values, is certainly change.

It's like if you house has mold, so you decide to burn down the house. Or you win the lottery, but decide to flush the money down the toilet because you didn't win powerball.

Why that's better than the status quo is beyond me, but that's clearly the logic behind Trump. Change, regardless of type of change, is better than status quo, even if the status quo has the U.S. as the richest, most stable, most successful country in world history. Some people apparently like chaos.

[Bham1982]

CBham1982, be more like Canuck. That is, when you return to Earth.

I don't take advice from fringe cultists, but thanks.

I'm doing fine right here on earth, with the 90% of the planet that rejects your cult.