Is the article in The Week magazine true?

Question

There's an article published which states that to balance the budget, the poorest of the poor will suffer economically. Meaning disabled folks, the elderly, and families with dependant children will suffer the most. Anyone on government assistance will suffer the coming year, because assistance will either cease, or will drastically be reduced. Sometimes people do write articles in a sarcastic type of way just  to make eye-openning articles, to make folks think. But the article made sense to me. Now all President Obama has to worry about is his legacy, and to make folks come your way, compromise is almost, always a given...so are the poor in trouble? I know no one really has to do anyone any favors, and the poor are the first to suffer if a recession is at hand, but leaving them totally out of options is just plain cruel. IF what the article states is true, what are these marginalized folks to do? It's simple to say work for a living, but what if there are no jobs? What if a person simply cant compete, and therefore, loses out? I'm not asking about fairness, I'm asking about humanity verses jungle tryanny. There are folks who just got a bad deal in life, so are they just supposed to starve because the budget needs to be balanced? I know the rich work for their earnings, and even finding loopholes takes $ and time, but y shut out the folks who only need a fraction of what the rich make annually, to live on? Just asking for workable solutions. Thanks.

PoohBearPenguin · Answer

You didn't link the article so how can we say?

Each state is going to be different, so there is no single universal plan that will automatically work in all states.

Now in California, cutting the budget is pretty much what the governor had to do in order to balance the budget.  A lot of public services too a big hit in many cities.  Not just education or social programs, but also things like fire and police as well.

Now, nearly 5 years later, things are beginning to turn around and suddenly we're going to have a budget surplus for the first time in years.  However, that does not mean we are out of the woods yet.  The governor has already stated that we'll have to remain fiscally slim for years to come while funding is slowly replenished from those areas.  In the meantime, the state has suffered from the cuts.  Crime and violent crime is up statewide and it will take years to build up the cities' police forces again.

Of course, California is lucky.  It's been benefiting the most from the recovering economy.   However other states are going to take a lot longer   This is why I say that there is no single economic program to fix all states' budget.

How would I Know · Answer

It's your typical liberal babble.  If you don't give me an endless stream of government handouts you're a mass murdering pedophile... or whatever the insult of the day is.

What these mindless liberals don't mention is that the more the government takes from the tax payers the more poor it creates.   And then it has to take more from the tax payers to take care of those poor, which creates more poor.  It's a self feeding cycle towards inevitable collapse of society.

Anonymous · Answer

ok

Trending News

Is the article in The Week magazine true?

3 Answers