Why do people support political beliefs that have no basis in reality?

Question

For example, cons say social spending does not reduce poverty, but instead does the opposite. They say it increases poverty.

The FACTS show otherwise.

During the liberal 1960s with JFK's "New Frontier" and LBJ's "Great Society" programs, the poverty rate was almost cut in HALF!

It went from 22.2% in 1960 to 12.8% in 1968. The second biggest drop was under Clinton. It went from 14.8% in 1992 to 11.3% in 2000. Of course, the biggest drop probably happened under FDR and his New Deal policies. Unfortunately no data is available for those times.

On the other hand, poverty stayed the same under Reagan and increased under both Bush's.
http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/histpov/hstpov2.html

islam,

Social spending is more then just welfare stamps. It is spending in the form of public education for the masses, state subsidized universities, student grants, subsidized loans, GI Bills, job training, head start programs, etc, etc.

All these are also forms "redistributing" money from somebody who worked for it to somebody who didn't. It is done for the public good. More money in social spending means less money spend on prisons, cops, lawyers, and judges.

It also unlocks the full potential of society. There will always be a handful of people who come from poverty and become wealthy without any help at all from anybody (except their parents), but the number of people who "make it" increases when you help people help themselves.

Answer 1

because people would rather support what conforms to their agendas, rather than reality. It's disgusting.

Answer 2

You are the one not seeing reality!!!

Both arguments are valid.

Social spending can reduce poverty but at an expense to the taxpayer. That in turn takes money away from other areas. But it can and does work. But go solely down that road would take the countries economy to the cleaners.

On the other side if money is not given to social issues but is used to encourage a growth in employment then this takes people out of poverty, increases those paying taxes and therefore allows more tax money to be spent on other social spending requirements.

The UK has amply shown this. By encouraging growth and development unemployment was drastically reduced and poverty reduced with it. Sadly they then pumped huge sums of money into social provisions which was just swallowed up with little or no effect. Their social provisions are now much more expensive and far less effective!

As with many things neither side is wrong. The best way is probably somewhere in between but as the UK showed if you just throw money at it without structure and control it will all be wasted!

Answer 3

The welfare system doesn't allow people to get better jobs. In my state as soon as you hit a certain income level all benefits are cut off. A raise of $50 a month could cause you to lose several hundred in benefits. Not much incentive to imrpove your standing.

My state also eliminated daycare help for college students. You have to be working in a dead end job to receive it.

Answer 4

1) Reagan and his economic recover plan was a major success not for the working man in America but for corporate America. The trickle down theory where Corporations receive government subsides and tax cuts will "trickle" down benefits to its workers. But in reality for example U.S. Steel closed down the biggest steel mill in the United States costing the livelihood of 5000 employees and bought Marathon Oil for 5 billion dollars (using tax cuts and government subsidies).

2) The success of social services and medical services in France and Britain are largely ignored by ignorant and of course arrogant Americans.

3) A course in sociology should do wonders for republicans. Actually school in general will do great wonders for republicans!

Answer 5

You are right. It is unfortunate I believe, that without good leadership, our social programs have gone down the tubes. If, America is going to be a 'great' country, again, we need someone in leadership willing to reach out to other nations, to build good relationships, instead of mocking them.
In America, all citizens have the right to vote. I suggest much of the answer is in the outcome - I can only hope that people will begin to learn from the mistakes made, and vote out those who continue to bring our country down.

Answer 6

For the main area, not likely. the final i will do is say that, inspite of being a libertarian socialist, I admire some top-libertarians. relies upon on the right-libertarian in question, however. i are growing to be some reciprocal admire from them, so there is truthfully a factor of the libertarian top that i'm unable to purely admire, yet evaluate allies. previous that, i've got not got admire for authoritarian, social conservatism. If somebody is in my opinion socially conservative, it is super. in the event that they pick to purely affiliate with different socially conservative types, it is super. yet while they think of they are able to make the rest human beings behave the way they pick us to, we are able to combat.

Answer 7

I've said this before and I'll say it again.
Conservatives put ideology above fact and reason.Some progressives make the same mistake but it's definitely more common on the conservative side

Answer 8

The average IQ is 100.

nuff said.

Answer 9

Your "facts" as you like to call them show only the short term results of a change...we are now living with the long term results of those changes...if you could see past the end of your nose I wouldn't have to explain this to you...

Answer 10

Facts have no meaning to the faithful haters. It's been true throughout history, and it remains true today.