In our society government system programs often do reach those people who are in need the most. In the 1960’s there was a war on poverty and $7 billion dollars was put into this war by federal, state, and local governments. Even though there was so much money invested, the poor remained largely untouched. Programs such as Social Security, workers compensation, unemployment, and disability, distribute far more money to the middle class than to the lower ones.
There are some programs that actually work, but those still only reach the minority of those actually in need. Programs such as Medicaid, food stamps, subsidized housing, and unemployment benefits are a few that actually help. The way these programs were run, appear to be radical liberalist. It appears that they put an effort in to help the poor, but did not take the time to see if it was going to the right people. Things have just gotten worse many cuts have taken place in the programs and the money is being moved to places where the more powerful want it.
As they take away these programs, Classic liberalism is becoming more into view. Any chance for the poor to move into higher class gets slimmer and slimmer. This leaves the poor to subservience to the rich. In our society the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer. This is not the way it should be, there needs to be more programs for the needy and all that power needs to be taken away from the oligarchs, hiding in the system to make themselves richer.
Housing is another policy that reflects the many inequalities in our society. Homeowners in the richest 20% of our population receive almost 60% of housing subsidies in the form of property tax exemptions, interest deductions, and capital gains deferral on housing sales. Only one-quarter of poor households receive any kind of housing subsidy.
In policies like these it is just the rich trying to help the rich make more money. Obviously this is the problem with classic liberalists, they rarely make attempts to help the poor out of their low-income status. Ideas like these are what make our country weaker. Without helping the lower income part of the population our economy slowly falls. We need the policies of radical liberalists, who at least try to help, or even democratic socialist who bombard society with programs for the poor in order to get them back in the system.
Housing is another way people cheat the system and make a lot of money while doing it. Private housing developments built with federal assistance are often rented to low incomers for a year or two just in order to qualify for federal funds. After a couple of years these developments are sold to private owners who are not held to the original contract, and they turn them into high priced rentals and make a bundle of cash. It seems to me that people who do this are more of an oligarch then anything.
They don’t care about helping anything, but their pocket book. They tell people what they want to hear and then when they find a loophole to make a lot of money they jump on it, no matter who it may hurt. This is exactly what they did in this example; many poor families get kicked out on the streets when these richer private owners increase their yearly income.
Perfect examples of another oligarch are corporations like GM and Standard Oil. In the 1930’s Los Angeles was served by one of the largest interurban railway systems in the world. It had 3000 quiet, pollution-free electric trains that carried 80 million people a year. These systems worked wonders for the environment, until GM and Standard Oil, using dummy corporations, bought the entire system.
They scraped everything and replaced them with GM buses fueled with Standard Oil on the Los Angeles streets. A short time after this they cut back on the bus services and forced the people to rely on their own private cars. These companies made mass amounts of money off this conspiracy, but they were brought to court and found guilty. They were fined the huge amount of $5000, which had absolutely no affect on them what so ever. It is one thing to help the rich, but another thing to help the rich by hurting the rest of society as was done here.
The health industry in our country is another corrupt system that hurts our nation. Consumer safety is not something that the government seems to care about; they are surely on the side of the profit-oriented producers. These producers flood the market with adulterated and unsafe products. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA), tests only about 1% of the drugs marketed. A government report showed that the health gap between economic classes has widened tremendously over the past several decades, with low-income individuals having a death rate more than three times that of higher-income individuals.
Most of the time the first examination a patient gets is that of their wallets. Around 1 million are refused treatment in the emergency room because they can’t show proof that they can pay. Other countries have a single adopted national health plan, unlike the U.S. who has over 1500. The single plan proves to be better by providing more beds per patient, lower infant mortality rates, and higher life expectancy. Even though all of this was proven, the Clinton administration still supported a “managed competition” plan, a private-market approach that provides a minimum care through the larger insurance companies and the HMO’s.
With all of their policies government agencies are doing nothing, but helping these corporations become richer. They are not looking out for the safety or welfare of the people. I don’t know whether to call these people classic liberalists or a bunch of sneaky oligarchs. Either or, they are not doing much to improve the health standards in our system.
A doctor by the name of Bernard Winter had this to say about the U.S. health-care system: “It is a costly, wasteful mechanism for funneling money to a sprawling medical industry that encompasses not only physicians and hospitals but equipment manufacturers, pharmaceutical corporations, bank and insurance companies.
The impulse that drives this industry is the same that drives every industry-the maximization of profit.” This is on doctor who is against the way things are run in our society. It seems that by his attitude in his quote that he is more in this field for the people rather than the profit. This doctor seems more like a radical liberal or maybe a democratic socialist. His goal is to help people; this is good for our society and every other aspect of our nation.
The people are not the only thing being taken advantage of just to make a profit, so is our environment. Mass amounts of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, selenium, mercury, lead, and hundreds of other substances continue to be dumped into our environment. All because of lack of maintenance or the high costs of having these materials and chemicals disposed of properly. Profits are higher when corporations can pillage our natural resources at will, dump their problems onto the public, and get the consumer to use at high and wasteful levels. The costs of fixing the disasters caused industries are passed to the taxpayers.
Many times it seems that we are forced to choose between economic growth and environmental protection, but without the protection there eventually will be no growth. Maximization of profit comes with disastrous affects, and the people whom contribute could care less. They have money for them and their families and don’t care at what costs. I don’t even think I can call people like this classic liberalists. I don’t see them thinking about anybody, but themselves and how they could make more money.
This appears to be an oligarch and one that hurts many more than it helps. These corporations are fighting to get policies passed that will do nothing, but make their very own corporations more powerful. In the process they are destroying our world and many of the people in it who live with the deadly effects on many of these chemicals. It doesn’t seem like the government has much impact on these people. It’s almost like they have their own Tory Corporatist society within their corporations. CG&P Annual 2000-2001