JustMuleys
Active Member
- Messages
- 379
How times change. Doubtful he would get elected today.
The Last Democrat?
- Thread starter JustMuleys
- Start date
4
440sixpack
Guest
What was the tax rate 1n 1962? what was our national debt in 1962? see if you can connect the dots.
http://www.data360.org/dsg.aspx?Data_Set_Group_Id=475
http://www.data360.org/dsg.aspx?Data_Set_Group_Id=475
JustMuleys
Active Member
- Messages
- 379
LAST EDITED ON Aug-04-11 AT 07:35PM (MST)[p]Haha, I get it just fine oh wise one. I know your the epitome of wisdom. A health care deficent whiner, no one needs to look another further than that fountain of wisdom. And I am sure you know exactly what Kennedy would say.
Before you two break into a left handed mule loping exercise...
1. Think past your hatred of the right, or anybody that ain't Obama, for just a second......Did you hear Kennedy spew ONE word about how it is the rights fault? one word about how they are all terrorist's? how he inherited Ikes mess? No.
2. "In the 1960's, President John F. Kennedy cut the top rate to 70 percent from 91 percent. Between 1961 and 1968, as the economy expanded by more than 42 percent and tax revenues rose by one-third, the rich saw their share of the tax burden climb to 15.1 percent from 11.6 percent."
http://www.truthfulpolitics.com/htt...axes-increase-or-decrease-government-revenue/
Like I said "How times change".
BTW, Poor people are not poor because of rich people.
Before you two break into a left handed mule loping exercise...
1. Think past your hatred of the right, or anybody that ain't Obama, for just a second......Did you hear Kennedy spew ONE word about how it is the rights fault? one word about how they are all terrorist's? how he inherited Ikes mess? No.
2. "In the 1960's, President John F. Kennedy cut the top rate to 70 percent from 91 percent. Between 1961 and 1968, as the economy expanded by more than 42 percent and tax revenues rose by one-third, the rich saw their share of the tax burden climb to 15.1 percent from 11.6 percent."
http://www.truthfulpolitics.com/htt...axes-increase-or-decrease-government-revenue/
Like I said "How times change".
BTW, Poor people are not poor because of rich people.
4
440sixpack
Guest
Today the top rate is 35% , for over 380 K. Kennedy cut the rate to 70%, shouldn't our economy be twice as good as it was in 1963? WTF ?
The US already leads all other industrialized nations in the amount of tax the top 10% pays according to the nonpartisan tax research group Tax Foundation. The amount is 45.1% of all income taxes. Maybe it's time for the takers to pay their fair share of tax.
Thats because they are so wealthy, another twisted statistic. Lets see, don't the top 1% make more than the bottom 50%? give us a break, Americas weathy are the most privilaged people in the entire history of the world, they have reaped nearly all the benefits of the economy over the last several decades, they have done better than any other segment of society by far. Yea we are all just takers, I feel so bad, maybe I could donate 1 and1/2 of my 2 acres to the under privilaged picked on rich folks .
D
D13er
Guest
>Just pay your fair share.
LMMFAO
JB
LMMFAO
JB
JustMuleys
Active Member
- Messages
- 379
LAST EDITED ON Aug-04-11 AT 09:47PM (MST)[p]Our economy MIGHT be twice as good if:
We had the same burden level of govt imposed regulations they had in 63'?
AND, the total of ALL US debt was only 150% of GDP instead of almost 400%?
AND, nobody had listen to JM Keynes?
If a 91% Tax Rate was so good, why in 63', were we in a recession? (the 3rd one).
It would be nice, if somebody we hired to run this joint would figger it all out, before we start speaking Mandarin or Russian.
We had the same burden level of govt imposed regulations they had in 63'?
AND, the total of ALL US debt was only 150% of GDP instead of almost 400%?
AND, nobody had listen to JM Keynes?
If a 91% Tax Rate was so good, why in 63', were we in a recession? (the 3rd one).
It would be nice, if somebody we hired to run this joint would figger it all out, before we start speaking Mandarin or Russian.
4
440sixpack
Guest
I'm still confused, the lower our taxes go the higher our debt goes. we started two wars and gave ourselves a tax break to pay for them and now look, this just isn't adding up we should be in fat city. I'm starting to think we can't cut taxes enough to pay this debt off, we're going to have to start giving rebates if there's to be any hope.
4
440sixpack
Guest
That's what most conservatives are too stupid to understand. by the time the ultra rich get done writing off their ranches, cutting horses, Bloomer trailers, Leer jets , Bell Rangers and every other one of the many loop holes at their disposal they pay a lower rate than Joe the plumber does. I'm not faulting them it's just smart business, but that's why we call them taxes not donations, it can't be optional. how the untra rich have convinced the trailer trash red state voters to back them on this is an act of political genius, I commend them.
Still the ultra rich are just the place to start, we're all going to have to pony up there just isn't any way around that. I just hope it can be kicked down the road far enough it's your kids problem not mine.
Still the ultra rich are just the place to start, we're all going to have to pony up there just isn't any way around that. I just hope it can be kicked down the road far enough it's your kids problem not mine.
Overton, the biggest out of control spending comes in at health care, energy costs, military, and law enforcment-prisons, thats where the big inflationary problems come from, tell us how to tackle that? As far as shedding tears for the wealthy, I admit to having a hard time with that. I wonder, when you talk about 50% that don't pay any taxes, are you including, babys, children, the elderly , stay at home mothers, and any other segment of society that can't work?
All federal spending is out of control piper. We are taking in 2.5 to 2.7 trillion dollars in federal tax this year. The deficit is somewhere around 1.5 trillion. If the federal government took every penny that the wealthiest Americans made it would not pay off this years deficit. It is a spending problem.
I have paid federal taxes for as long as I can remember, 30 some years. I wonder Overton,are you like your cousin RELH, always whining about something because your covering up guilt? like the homosexual politician that sponsers tough laws against homosexuals?
Piper-the big things are entitlements and the military. Medicaid is a huge problem, food stamps are skyrocketing and unemployment is killing our economy. Figure out $1500 a month for 12 million unemployed and the feds have taken it from 26 weeks to 99 weeks. Do that arithmetic and get back to me.
huntindad4
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 2,654
Piper said: "Overton, the biggest out of control spending comes in at health care, energy costs, military, and law enforcment-prisons, thats where the big inflationary problems come from, tell us how to tackle that?"
Health care: I don't think the new bill is the answer but I am not sure what is.
Energy: Quit pissin and moanin about enviro Bullchit issues (I'm not talking legitimate issues) and use the cheapest most efficient energy options available.
Military: Find a way out of the Middle East or Nuke the plicks, no more Mister nice guy and to the victor go the spoils, take their oil and any other valuable resource. Since when in history has a country conquered another and not done this but instead rebuilt the country, since we started it.
Law/Prisons: Walk the hell away from the war on drugs, quit taking 20 years of appeals before zapping a murderer, shoot Pedophyles on the first offense. You know quit making crime pay.
Bill
Look out Forkie, FTW is watching us!
Health care: I don't think the new bill is the answer but I am not sure what is.
Energy: Quit pissin and moanin about enviro Bullchit issues (I'm not talking legitimate issues) and use the cheapest most efficient energy options available.
Military: Find a way out of the Middle East or Nuke the plicks, no more Mister nice guy and to the victor go the spoils, take their oil and any other valuable resource. Since when in history has a country conquered another and not done this but instead rebuilt the country, since we started it.
Law/Prisons: Walk the hell away from the war on drugs, quit taking 20 years of appeals before zapping a murderer, shoot Pedophyles on the first offense. You know quit making crime pay.
Bill
Look out Forkie, FTW is watching us!
Piper-the numbers for unemployment costs are $6 billion a MONTH. Food stamps are another %6 billion a MONTH. I know people need a little help in rough times but I also know plenty of people who are living a decent life on UE and food stamps and they are not even trying to get a job. I also know people with a bunch of kids that are earning $40000 a year and still taking food stamps. If we are going to pay government employees $123000 a year with benefits we should expect them to be more critical of people who ask for help. In reality those public workers encourage people to apply for the max and will do anything to help them get it. That is the way of the government worker. Job security comes from growing their dependent base.
4
440sixpack
Guest
Spending isn't the only problem but it's the major one. it's not rocket science that medicare, SS and the military are our biggest expenses and there is no way in hell to balance the budget without cuts there. Is that going to happen ?
Who will be the ones to commit political suicide to get it a balanced budget? don't say the teabaggers, if they had the votes to get it done they wouldn't have the guts to try it. it's easy to hold your ground when you know you aren't going to have to answer for your actions.
Nothing will change but the tax rates until our credit flat runs out. that's just the way it is.
Who will be the ones to commit political suicide to get it a balanced budget? don't say the teabaggers, if they had the votes to get it done they wouldn't have the guts to try it. it's easy to hold your ground when you know you aren't going to have to answer for your actions.
Nothing will change but the tax rates until our credit flat runs out. that's just the way it is.
> I have paid federal taxes
>for as long as I
>can remember, 30 some years.
> I wonder Overton,are you
>like your cousin RELH, always
>whining about something because your
>covering up guilt? like
>the homosexual politician that sponsers
>tough laws against homosexuals?
Piper
The rich charge us more for goods and services to pay their tax. That is why I don't like higher taxes. Those below them shoulder the burden.
Keep your homo references to your personal life please.
>for as long as I
>can remember, 30 some years.
> I wonder Overton,are you
>like your cousin RELH, always
>whining about something because your
>covering up guilt? like
>the homosexual politician that sponsers
>tough laws against homosexuals?
Piper
The rich charge us more for goods and services to pay their tax. That is why I don't like higher taxes. Those below them shoulder the burden.
Keep your homo references to your personal life please.
manny53
Long Time Member
- Messages
- 5,257
LAST EDITED ON Aug-05-11 AT 05:52PM (MST)[p]>Piper-the numbers for unemployment costs are
>$6 billion a MONTH. Food
>stamps are another %6 billion
>a MONTH. I know people
>need a little help in
>rough times but I also
>know plenty of people who
>are living a decent life
>on UE and food stamps
>and they are not even
>trying to get a job.
>I also know people with
>a bunch of kids that
>are earning $40000 a year
>and still taking food stamps.
>If we are going to
>pay government employees $123000 a
>year with benefits we should
>expect them to be more
>critical of people who ask
>for help. In reality those
>public workers encourage people to
>apply for the max and
>will do anything to help
>them get it. That is
>the way of the government
>worker. Job security comes from
>growing their dependent base.
======================
this is what the Left is up too Read: I gotta say it's working quite well?
Cloward?Piven strategy
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Cloward?Piven strategy is a political strategy outlined in 1966 by American sociologists and political activists Richard Cloward (1926-2001) and Frances Fox Piven (b. 1932) that called for overloading the U.S. public welfare system in order to precipitate a crisis that would lead to a replacement of the welfare system with a national system of "a guaranteed annual income and thus an end to poverty". Cloward and Piven were a married couple who were both professors at the Columbia University School of Social Work.
The strategy was formulated in a May 1966 article in left-wing[1] magazine The Nation entitled "The Weight of the Poor: A Strategy to End Poverty".[2]
The two were critical of the public welfare system, and their strategy called for overloading that system to force a different set of policies to address poverty. They stated that many Americans who were eligible for welfare were not receiving benefits, and that a welfare enrollment drive would strain local budgets, precipitating a crisis at the state and local levels that would be a wake-up call for the federal government, particularly the Democratic Party, thus forcing it to implement a national solution to poverty. Cloward and Piven wrote that ?the ultimate objective of this strategy [would be] to wipe out poverty by establishing a guaranteed annual income...?[2] There would also be side consequences of this strategy, according to Cloward and Piven.
These would include: easing the plight of the poor in the short-term (through their participation in the welfare system); shoring up support for the national Democratic Party then-splintered by pluralist interests (through its cultivation of poor and minority constituencies by implementing a national solution to poverty); and relieving local governments of the financially and politically onerous burdens of public welfare (through a national solution to poverty).
The strategy
Cloward and Piven?s article is focused on forcing the Democratic Party, which in 1966 controlled the presidency and both houses of the United States Congress, to take federal action to help the poor. They stated that full enrollment of those eligible for welfare ?would produce bureaucratic disruption in welfare agencies and fiscal disruption in local and state governments? that would ?deepen existing divisions among elements in the big-city Democratic coalition: the remaining white middle class, the working-class ethnic groups and the growing minority poor. To avoid a further weakening of that historic coalition, a national Democratic administration would be constrained to advance a federal solution to poverty that would override local welfare failures, local class and racial conflicts and local revenue dilemmas.?[3] They wrote:
? The ultimate objective of this strategy?to wipe out poverty by establishing a guaranteed annual income?will be questioned by some. Because the ideal of individual social and economic mobility has deep roots, even activists seem reluctant to call for national programs to eliminate poverty by the outright redistribution of income.[3]
?
Michael Reisch and Janice Andrews wrote that Cloward and Piven "proposed to create a crisis in the current welfare system ? by exploiting the gap between welfare law and practice ? that would ultimately bring about its collapse and replace it with a system of guaranteed annual income. They hoped to accomplish this end by informing the poor of their rights to welfare assistance, encouraging them to apply for benefits and, in effect, overloading an already overburdened bureaucracy."[4]
[edit]Focus on Democrats
The authors pinned their hopes on creating disruption within the Democratic Party. "Conservative Republicans are always ready to declaim the evils of public welfare, and they would probably be the first to raise a hue and cry. But deeper and politically more telling conflicts would take place within the Democratic coalition," they wrote. "Whites ? both working class ethnic groups and many in the middle class ? would be aroused against the ghetto poor, while liberal groups, which until recently have been comforted by the notion that the poor are few... would probably support the movement. Group conflict, spelling political crisis for the local party apparatus, would thus become acute as welfare rolls mounted and the strains on local budgets became more severe.?[5]
[edit]Reception and criticism
Howard Phillips, chairman of The Conservative Caucus, was quoted in 1982 as saying that the strategy could be effective because "Great Society programs had created a vast army of full-time liberal activists whose salaries are paid from the taxes of conservative working people."[6]
Left-wing commentator Michael Tomasky, writing about the strategy in the 1990s and again in 2011, called it "wrongheaded and self-defeating", writing: "It apparently didn't occur to [Cloward and Piven] that the system would just regard rabble-rousing black people as a phenomenon to be ignored or quashed."[7]
[edit]Impact of the strategy
Cloward and Piven themselves, in papers published in 1971 and 1977, argued that mass unrest in the United States, especially between 1964 and 1969, did lead to a massive expansion of welfare rolls, though not to the guaranteed-income program that they had hoped for.[8] Political scientist Robert Albritton disagreed, writing in 1979 that that the data did not support this thesis; he offered an alternative explanation for the rise in welfare caseloads.
In his 2006 book Winning the Race, commentator John McWhorter attributed the rise in the welfare state after the 1960s to the Cloward-Piven strategy, but wrote about it negatively, stating that the strategy "created generations of black people for whom working for a living is an abstraction."[9]
According to historian Robert E. Weir in 2007, "Although the strategy helped to boost recipient numbers between 1966 and 1975, the revolution its proponents envisioned never transpired."[10]
Some commentators have blamed the Cloward-Piven strategy for the near-bankruptcy of New York City in 1975.[11][12]
Conservative commentator Glenn Beck has referred to the Cloward-Piven Strategy on his broadcast since 2009, stating that it forms part of the basis for President Barack Obama's economic policy. On February 18, 2010, he said, "you've got total destruction of wealth coming... It's the final phase of the Cloward-Piven strategy, which is collapse the system."[13]
Richard Kim, writing in 2010 in The Nation (in which the original essay appeared), called such assertions "a reactionary paranoid fantasy..." but says that "the left's gut reaction upon hearing of it--to laugh it off as a Scooby-Doo comic mystery--does nothing to blunt its appeal or limit its impact."[14] The Nation later stated that Beck blames the "Cloward-Piven Strategy" for "the financial crisis of 2008, healthcare reform, Obama's election and massive voter fraud" and has resulted in the posting of much violent and threatening rhetoric by users on Beck's website, including death threats against Frances Fox Piven.[15] For her part, Piven vigorously continues to defend the original idea, calling its conservative interpretation "lunatic".[16]
References
^ Peters, Jeremy W. (November 7, 2010). "Bad News for Liberals May Be Good News for a Liberal Magazine". The New York Times. Retrieved June 17, 2010.
^ a b Cloward, Richard; Piven, Frances (May 2, 1966). "The Weight of the Poor: A Strategy to End Poverty". (Originally published in The Nation).
^ a b Cloward and Piven, p. 510
^ Reisch, Michael; Janice Andrews (2001). The Road Not Taken. Brunner Routledge. pp. 144?146. ISBN 1-58391-025-5.
^ Cloward and Piven, p. 516
^ Robert Pear (1984-04-15). "Drive to Sign Up Poor for Voting Meets Resistance". New York Times.
^ Glenn Beck and Fran Piven, Michael Tomasky, Michael Tomasky's Blog, The Guardian, January 24, 2011
^ Albritton, Robert (December 1979). Social Amelioration through Mass Insurgency? A Reexamination of the Piven and Cloward Thesis. American Political Science Review. Retrieved March 6, 2011.
^ McWhorter, John, "John McWhorter: How Welfare Went Wrong", NPR, August 9, 2006.
^ Weir, Robert (2007). Class in America. Greenwood Press. pp. 616. ISBN 978-0-313-33719-2.
^ Chandler, Richard, "The Cloward?Piven strategy", The Washington Times, October 15, 2008
^ Frances Fox Piven: Glenn Beck Seeks ?Foreign, Dark-Skinned, Intellectual? Scapegoats, Kyle Olson, BigGovernment.com, February 8, 2010
^ Glenn Beck, "Study Says We're Toast", http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/36505/ Accessed February 1, 2011
^ Richard Kim, "The Mad Tea Party", The Nation April 12, 2010 http://www.thenation.com/article/mad-tea-party Accessed February 1, 2011
^ "Glenn Beck Targets Frances Fox Piven" in February 7, 2011 issue of "the Nation" http://www.thenation.com/article/157900/glenn-beck-targets-frances-fox-piven Accessed February 1, 2011
^ Piven, F.F. (2011) Crazy Talk and American Politics: or, My Glenn Beck Story, The Chronicle of Higher Education (The Chronicle Review) 57(25), B4-B5.
>$6 billion a MONTH. Food
>stamps are another %6 billion
>a MONTH. I know people
>need a little help in
>rough times but I also
>know plenty of people who
>are living a decent life
>on UE and food stamps
>and they are not even
>trying to get a job.
>I also know people with
>a bunch of kids that
>are earning $40000 a year
>and still taking food stamps.
>If we are going to
>pay government employees $123000 a
>year with benefits we should
>expect them to be more
>critical of people who ask
>for help. In reality those
>public workers encourage people to
>apply for the max and
>will do anything to help
>them get it. That is
>the way of the government
>worker. Job security comes from
>growing their dependent base.
======================
this is what the Left is up too Read: I gotta say it's working quite well?
Cloward?Piven strategy
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Cloward?Piven strategy is a political strategy outlined in 1966 by American sociologists and political activists Richard Cloward (1926-2001) and Frances Fox Piven (b. 1932) that called for overloading the U.S. public welfare system in order to precipitate a crisis that would lead to a replacement of the welfare system with a national system of "a guaranteed annual income and thus an end to poverty". Cloward and Piven were a married couple who were both professors at the Columbia University School of Social Work.
The strategy was formulated in a May 1966 article in left-wing[1] magazine The Nation entitled "The Weight of the Poor: A Strategy to End Poverty".[2]
The two were critical of the public welfare system, and their strategy called for overloading that system to force a different set of policies to address poverty. They stated that many Americans who were eligible for welfare were not receiving benefits, and that a welfare enrollment drive would strain local budgets, precipitating a crisis at the state and local levels that would be a wake-up call for the federal government, particularly the Democratic Party, thus forcing it to implement a national solution to poverty. Cloward and Piven wrote that ?the ultimate objective of this strategy [would be] to wipe out poverty by establishing a guaranteed annual income...?[2] There would also be side consequences of this strategy, according to Cloward and Piven.
These would include: easing the plight of the poor in the short-term (through their participation in the welfare system); shoring up support for the national Democratic Party then-splintered by pluralist interests (through its cultivation of poor and minority constituencies by implementing a national solution to poverty); and relieving local governments of the financially and politically onerous burdens of public welfare (through a national solution to poverty).
The strategy
Cloward and Piven?s article is focused on forcing the Democratic Party, which in 1966 controlled the presidency and both houses of the United States Congress, to take federal action to help the poor. They stated that full enrollment of those eligible for welfare ?would produce bureaucratic disruption in welfare agencies and fiscal disruption in local and state governments? that would ?deepen existing divisions among elements in the big-city Democratic coalition: the remaining white middle class, the working-class ethnic groups and the growing minority poor. To avoid a further weakening of that historic coalition, a national Democratic administration would be constrained to advance a federal solution to poverty that would override local welfare failures, local class and racial conflicts and local revenue dilemmas.?[3] They wrote:
? The ultimate objective of this strategy?to wipe out poverty by establishing a guaranteed annual income?will be questioned by some. Because the ideal of individual social and economic mobility has deep roots, even activists seem reluctant to call for national programs to eliminate poverty by the outright redistribution of income.[3]
?
Michael Reisch and Janice Andrews wrote that Cloward and Piven "proposed to create a crisis in the current welfare system ? by exploiting the gap between welfare law and practice ? that would ultimately bring about its collapse and replace it with a system of guaranteed annual income. They hoped to accomplish this end by informing the poor of their rights to welfare assistance, encouraging them to apply for benefits and, in effect, overloading an already overburdened bureaucracy."[4]
[edit]Focus on Democrats
The authors pinned their hopes on creating disruption within the Democratic Party. "Conservative Republicans are always ready to declaim the evils of public welfare, and they would probably be the first to raise a hue and cry. But deeper and politically more telling conflicts would take place within the Democratic coalition," they wrote. "Whites ? both working class ethnic groups and many in the middle class ? would be aroused against the ghetto poor, while liberal groups, which until recently have been comforted by the notion that the poor are few... would probably support the movement. Group conflict, spelling political crisis for the local party apparatus, would thus become acute as welfare rolls mounted and the strains on local budgets became more severe.?[5]
[edit]Reception and criticism
Howard Phillips, chairman of The Conservative Caucus, was quoted in 1982 as saying that the strategy could be effective because "Great Society programs had created a vast army of full-time liberal activists whose salaries are paid from the taxes of conservative working people."[6]
Left-wing commentator Michael Tomasky, writing about the strategy in the 1990s and again in 2011, called it "wrongheaded and self-defeating", writing: "It apparently didn't occur to [Cloward and Piven] that the system would just regard rabble-rousing black people as a phenomenon to be ignored or quashed."[7]
[edit]Impact of the strategy
Cloward and Piven themselves, in papers published in 1971 and 1977, argued that mass unrest in the United States, especially between 1964 and 1969, did lead to a massive expansion of welfare rolls, though not to the guaranteed-income program that they had hoped for.[8] Political scientist Robert Albritton disagreed, writing in 1979 that that the data did not support this thesis; he offered an alternative explanation for the rise in welfare caseloads.
In his 2006 book Winning the Race, commentator John McWhorter attributed the rise in the welfare state after the 1960s to the Cloward-Piven strategy, but wrote about it negatively, stating that the strategy "created generations of black people for whom working for a living is an abstraction."[9]
According to historian Robert E. Weir in 2007, "Although the strategy helped to boost recipient numbers between 1966 and 1975, the revolution its proponents envisioned never transpired."[10]
Some commentators have blamed the Cloward-Piven strategy for the near-bankruptcy of New York City in 1975.[11][12]
Conservative commentator Glenn Beck has referred to the Cloward-Piven Strategy on his broadcast since 2009, stating that it forms part of the basis for President Barack Obama's economic policy. On February 18, 2010, he said, "you've got total destruction of wealth coming... It's the final phase of the Cloward-Piven strategy, which is collapse the system."[13]
Richard Kim, writing in 2010 in The Nation (in which the original essay appeared), called such assertions "a reactionary paranoid fantasy..." but says that "the left's gut reaction upon hearing of it--to laugh it off as a Scooby-Doo comic mystery--does nothing to blunt its appeal or limit its impact."[14] The Nation later stated that Beck blames the "Cloward-Piven Strategy" for "the financial crisis of 2008, healthcare reform, Obama's election and massive voter fraud" and has resulted in the posting of much violent and threatening rhetoric by users on Beck's website, including death threats against Frances Fox Piven.[15] For her part, Piven vigorously continues to defend the original idea, calling its conservative interpretation "lunatic".[16]
References
^ Peters, Jeremy W. (November 7, 2010). "Bad News for Liberals May Be Good News for a Liberal Magazine". The New York Times. Retrieved June 17, 2010.
^ a b Cloward, Richard; Piven, Frances (May 2, 1966). "The Weight of the Poor: A Strategy to End Poverty". (Originally published in The Nation).
^ a b Cloward and Piven, p. 510
^ Reisch, Michael; Janice Andrews (2001). The Road Not Taken. Brunner Routledge. pp. 144?146. ISBN 1-58391-025-5.
^ Cloward and Piven, p. 516
^ Robert Pear (1984-04-15). "Drive to Sign Up Poor for Voting Meets Resistance". New York Times.
^ Glenn Beck and Fran Piven, Michael Tomasky, Michael Tomasky's Blog, The Guardian, January 24, 2011
^ Albritton, Robert (December 1979). Social Amelioration through Mass Insurgency? A Reexamination of the Piven and Cloward Thesis. American Political Science Review. Retrieved March 6, 2011.
^ McWhorter, John, "John McWhorter: How Welfare Went Wrong", NPR, August 9, 2006.
^ Weir, Robert (2007). Class in America. Greenwood Press. pp. 616. ISBN 978-0-313-33719-2.
^ Chandler, Richard, "The Cloward?Piven strategy", The Washington Times, October 15, 2008
^ Frances Fox Piven: Glenn Beck Seeks ?Foreign, Dark-Skinned, Intellectual? Scapegoats, Kyle Olson, BigGovernment.com, February 8, 2010
^ Glenn Beck, "Study Says We're Toast", http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/36505/ Accessed February 1, 2011
^ Richard Kim, "The Mad Tea Party", The Nation April 12, 2010 http://www.thenation.com/article/mad-tea-party Accessed February 1, 2011
^ "Glenn Beck Targets Frances Fox Piven" in February 7, 2011 issue of "the Nation" http://www.thenation.com/article/157900/glenn-beck-targets-frances-fox-piven Accessed February 1, 2011
^ Piven, F.F. (2011) Crazy Talk and American Politics: or, My Glenn Beck Story, The Chronicle of Higher Education (The Chronicle Review) 57(25), B4-B5.
huntindad4
Very Active Member
- Messages
- 2,654
+1
Bill
Look out Forkie, FTW is watching us!
Bill
Look out Forkie, FTW is watching us!
