During the 2022 campaign and the 2023 legislative session, in the immediate wake of burning through a $19B surplus, that the DFL claimed that the spending binge would “Reduce Poverty by 30%”.
The sessions ended a year ago yesterday.
So how’s that going?
Well, apparently we won’t know for another couple of years. The MN Department of Health’s poverty numbers end in 2022 – when they were rising.
According to some sources generally aligned with the left, poverty was steady to up; to others, it was rising…
…as of the end of 2022.
But since the spending orgy?
No idea.
All I know is, the DFL has been incredibly quiet about the subject for this past year.
There appears to be an 18-24 month lag getting poverty numbers to the public.
Huh.
So they spent $19B, and raised the budget 40%, to “eradicate” something…
…that they couldn’t test until well after this fall’s election?
Weird.
Childhood poverty is only one indicator of the enormous damage done to society by Republicans in general and Trump in specific. There is so much more work to be done before we achieve equity.
– Test scores for HALF of all Minnesotan students are below average.
– The lowest quintile of Minnesota incomes earns ONE FIFTH of the highest.
– Young Black men aged 13-30 make up less than 5% of the population but are accused of committing more than 50% of violent crimes, a blatant show of disparate-impact racial discrimination which plainly springs from a place of White Privilige.
These terrible inequities must stop. Minnesotans should be HAPPY to pay for a more equitable society for those of us who haven’t fled the state.
^ That was a first-class example of Poe’s Law. Bravo, sir.
Thank you, sir. The ability to think like a Liberal was a hard-acquired skill for me.
In speech class, we had to research BOTH sides of the debate topic so we could convincingly argue either side despite our inherent bias. It was like Heinlein’s explanation of “grok:” you must understand the topic so well that it becomes you and you become it, because only then, seeing both sides with clarity, can you choose between them.
That’s why I get frustrated with modern Liberals who can’t defend their ideas in adult words so they resort to toddler tantrums. I understand their side of the argument better than they do, and it’s tedious to have to explain it so I can refute it.
Bigman – exactly! That’s why we get so much crap like The Handmaid’s Tale, where none of it even resembles conservative thought, but yet it’s attributed to us as if it’s gospel.
MtkaMoose – it’s fun to imagine a conversation with a Liberal.
“Suppose a virus escaped from the lab, a virus that would leave 90% of all men sterile. Within a generation, America would have no military age men capable of defending the nation. Suppose the Russians and Chinese embark institute a motherhood program to rebuild their militaries. Should the women of America have a similar duty to bear children to repopulate the country before we can be conquered?”
If the answer is NO, prefer national suicide to maternity?
If the answer is Yes, how will that duty be enforced? Handmaid’s Tale?
Wait, I know – open the borders to Mexico to let the rest of the world occupy the country we lost, being too prickly of our Rights to defend it.
Not to worry though, part of the solution they paid for with the surplus $Bs was to Fully Fund Education which will help reduce poverty even further, No?
Liberals are great at pointing out the problem, and then providing solutions that make the problem much worse.
News article from the future:
“So they ONLY spent $19B, and ONLY raised the budget 40% . . . because those darn Republicans wouldn’t let the honest and noble Democrats solve the problem once and for all, which is why childhood poverty is still raging and why we need even more money this time around.”