Answer to poverty is not more government spending, but less

Answer to

poverty is not more government spending, but less

The real problem with poverty

is that it defies definition or so it would seem as we continue to lower

the bar just at the time we seem to be catching up with it.

The U.S. poverty level is now

more than three times that of the world's average income. There are 155

countries with an average per capita income below the U.S. poverty level,

and about 50 countries with a per capita income one-tenth of U.S. level,

according to authors Stephen Moore and Julian Simon in their book, "It's

Getting Better All the Time." They also note that a high percentage

of those living in poverty in the U.S. have color TV sets.

Government benefits are frequently

excluded from income statistics, which skews the true figures, but when

benefits are deemed more valuable than working, recipients act accordingly

swelling the number of jobless benefit recipients.

The Joint Economic Committee

of Congress reports that reductions in government spending would both

increase employment and reduce the poverty rate. So the answer to poverty

is not more government spending, but less.

Raising the minimum wage wouldn't

help. It would simply mean fewer jobs for entry-level employees, and a

downturn in family income as a result. It would mean less productivity

and increased expenses for businesses, which are passed on to the consumer

in the form of higher prices, driving more customers away.

You can't repeal the laws of

economics as easily as you redefine poverty to suit the latest leftist

social fads. Creating more jobs and a vibrant economy through less government

interference is the best solution to help those low-income families.

William Fielder

Peachtree City