Mitt Romney inserted his foot, heel and toes, into his mouth and bit down hard today:
Glenn Reynolds, bending over backwards in an attempt to be fair, said this:
Frankly, I think he’s got a point. People whose livelihood comes from the government — whether the very poor, or the government employees — are doing fine. It’s people who depend on the actual economy who are hurting.
Bill Quick was -er- quick to respond:
Sorry, but only somebody who doesn’t know anybody whose family has been living on the government dole for two or three generations could make such a stunningly ignorant statement about the “very poor.” They are not “doing fine.”
In this case I think Bill is right and Glenn is wrong. The very poor have to spend more, as a percentage of their income, on food and transportation than those better off. When one considers the fact that gas and food prices have risen dramatically in the last three years with no end in sight, I’d say that there is reason to be concerned about the very poor.
While income inequality has dropped in recent years in dollars, in terms of actual buying power, the poor have had their incomes slashed by Obama’s inflation tax on necessities. Even if one wants to get out of the hole and off the dole, the path to self-reliance has had caltrops tossed on it with the increase in minimum wage and the current policies that discourage hiring, especially on the low-wage, low-skill level most of the very poor are qualified for.
Sorry, Glenn. The very poor people on the dole have to live in the same economy as the rest of us, and they are getting more and more trapped by an economy that lowers their effective income and keeps them from working.
Romney thinks the poor are doing fine because of a safety net? That’s only true in a world where the poor don’t eat, drive, or try to find work so they can stop being poor.