IT SHOULD PROBABLY GO WITHOUT
SAYING THAT PROGRAMS LIKE FOOD
STAMPS AND OTHER SOCIAL WELFARE
PROGRAMS THAT TAKE CARE OF THOSE
LESS WELL-OFF HELP TO CUT
POVERTY, THAT IS THEIR POINT AND
IT IS CLEARLY THEIR EFFECT.
BUT IT
TURNS OUT THEY ARE FAR MORE
EFFECTIVE AT DOING THAT THAN WE
PREVIOUSLY THOUGHT WHEN YOU
MEASURE IT IN THE RIGHT WAY.
LET'S BRING UP THIS CHART, IT
WILL SHOW YOU TWO DIFFERENT WAYS
OF MEASURING THE EFFECT ON
REDUCTIONS IN POVERTY.
SURVEY
DATA IS IN THE LIGHT BLUE, AND A
LOOK AT THE HARD ADMINISTRATIVE
DATA IN TERMS OF WHO IS ACTUALLY
ON THESE PROGRAMS -- IT TURNS
OUT WHEN YOU SURVEY PEOPLE YOU
GET AN INACCURATE VIEW OF HOW
MANY PEOPLE ARE TAKING PART
IN THIS PROGRAM.
THAT IS WHY YOU
MIGHT HAVE THOUGHT THAT FOR
INSTANCE DEEP POVERTY WAS CUT BY
2.5% IN THE FIRST POLL -- TURNS
OUT IT IS HIGHER.
AND WHEN YOU
GO TO SOMETHING LIKE NEAR
POVERTY, PEOPLE ABOVE THE
POVERTY LINE, IT IS
SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER.
LET'S
BRING UP THE CHART ONE MORE
TIME.
IT LOOKS LIKE THESE
PROGRAMS, ACCORDING TO SURVEY
DATA, HAVE CUT THE POVERTY RATE
BY 1%.
THEY HAVE CUT IT BY FOUR
TIMES AS MUCH.
THAT AFFECTS THE LIVES OF
TENS OF THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE
AT THE VERY LEAST.
BUT ACCORDING TO THE REAL
DATA --
IT HAS DROPPED DOWN TO 8%.
SO
IT HAD TWICE THE IMPACT WE
PREVIOUSLY THOUGHT.
AND FOOD
STAMPS IS ONE OF THE THINGS WE
ARE TALKING ABOUT HERE, DIDN'T
WE CUT THAT BY $10 BILLION AT
THE FEDERAL LEVEL A YEAR OR TWO
AGO?
WHAT GOOD WAS IT DOING,
ONLY TWICE AS MUCH GOOD AS WE
THOUGHT.
A MEASURE OF HOW MUCH NEW
MONEY THEY HAD TO SPEND,
WHICH ALSO STIMULATES THE ECONOMY --
YOU ARE TALKING FROM
JUST A FEW YEARS AGO, MASSIVE
CUTS IN THE POVERTY LEVEL.
AND
THIS SHOULD BE A TIME FOR
CELEBRATION IN AMERICA, THAT
WE WERE ABLE TO DO THIS.
THIS IS DEMOCRATS NOT BEING
ABLE TO USE DATA AND COMMUNICATE
IDEAS TO PEOPLE, IT IS BECAUSE
THEY ARE BOUGHT BY THEIR DONORS.
BUT HERE IS A STATISTIC THAT IS
NOT INCLUDED IN THIS, BUT I KNOW
FOR MEMORY, WHEN THEY INSTITUTED
MEDICARE -- WHEN YOU RETIRED YOU
WERE SCREWED, YOU DO NOT HAVE
ENOUGH HEALTHCARE.
33% OF SENIOR
CITIZENS USED TO LIVE IN
POVERTY, MOSTLY BECAUSE OF
HEALTHCARE COSTS.
THEN THEY
PASSED MEDICARE -- IN 10 YEARS
THE SENIOR POVERTY RATE WENT
FROM 33% TO 11%, THAT IS JUST
FROM MEDICARE IN 10 YEARS.
I
MIGHT BE A LITTLE OFF ON THOSE
NUMBERS BECAUSE I AM DOING IT
FROM MEMORY, I WAS TRYING TO
LOOK IT UP BUT OUR INTERNET IS
OUT RIGHT NOW --
OUR MEGABYTES HAVE DROPPED
FROM 30 TO JUST 11.
AND DEMOCRATS NEVER BRING THAT
UP.
AGAIN, WHEN WAS THE LAST
TIME BARACK OBAMA OR HILLARY
CLINTON MENTIONED FDR?
THEY
NEVER BRING UP THE MOST
SUCCESSFUL DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENT
IN THE HISTORY OF OUR COUNTRY.
THEY NEVER BRING HIM UP.
WHY IS
THAT?
BECAUSE OF THEIR DONORS.
THEY DON'T WANT THEM TO BRING
THEM UP.
THAT IS NOT WHAT THEY
WANT.
THAT IS WHAT IS WRONG WITH
THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY, WHICH IS
WHY BERNIE SANDERS IS RUNNING,
WHICH IS WHY I KEEP ASKING
PEOPLE WHO ARE PROMINENT
LIBERALS, WHY ARE YOU SUPPORTING
HILLARY CLINTON?
EXCEPT FOR THE
REASON THAT YOU THINK SHE CAN
WIN?
KEEP IN MIND, MEDICARE
REDUCING POVERTY FROM 33% TO
11%.
THAT IS A SUCCESSFUL SOCIAL
PROGRAM.
AND WE HAVE THE MONEY
TO GIVE EDUCATION AND HEALTHCARE
AND FOOD TO ALL OUR PEOPLE.
WE
HAVE ENOUGH MONEY TO GIVE JOBS
TO ALL OUR PEOPLE.
WE HAVE THE
MONEY.
WE JUST DON'T WANT TO
SPEND IT IN THE WAYS THAT ARE
HELPFUL TO OUR SOCIETY AS A
WHOLE, BECAUSE WE HAVE A HANDFUL
OF PEOPLE WHO ARE RUNNING THE
GOVERNMENT, AND LIKE TWO OF THEM
ARE FROM WALL STREET, TWO OF
THEM ARE FROM GENERAL ELECTRIC,
AND THE OTHER ONE WORKS FOR
BOEING.
THAT IS WHO IS RUNNING
THE COUNTRY.
WE HAVE THE MONEY,
JOHNNY.
WE ARE THE RICHEST
COUNTRY THE FACE OF THE EARTH
HAS EVER SEEN, WE HAVE AN
ECONOMY TWICE THE SIZE OF CHINA
STILL TODAY.
WE HAVE THE GOD
DAMN MONEY.
GERMANY, YOU CAN GET
FREE HEALTH CARE, EVERYBODY GOES
TO COLLEGE FOR FREE, AND THEY
HAVE THE STRONGEST ECONOMY IN
EUROPE.
IT IS POSSIBLE, IT CAN
BE DONE.
IT COULD BE EASILY DONE
HERE IN AMERICA.
THEY BUDGETED
$30 BILLION FOR MORE BOMBS IN
SYRIA, WHICH WILL DO ZILCH TO
HELP OUR COUNTRY OR ANYBODY.
IT
WILL JUST CREATE --
IT WILL HELP ISIS RECRUIT, I
IMAGINE.
$30 BILLION THEY WILL THROW
OUT THE FUCKING WINDOW NEXT
YEAR.
FOR 60 BILLION YOU COULD
SEND EVERYBODY IN THE COUNTRY TO
COLLEGE FOR FREE.
WE HAVE THE GOD DAMN MONEY.
WE DON'T HAVE LEADERS.
ALMOST EVERY DIFFERENCE WE
HAVE BETWEEN OURSELVES NOW AS
WORKERS AND PEASANTS IN ENGLAND
300 YEARS AGO, WE HAVE ALMOST
ALL OF THOSE BECAUSE OF THE
LEFT.
LITTLE THINGS LIKE
WEEKENDS OR OVERTIME OR AN EIGHT
HOUR WORKDAY OR THE FACT THAT
YOUR KIDS AT THREE AREN'T
NECESSARILY GOING TO BE WORKING
IN A COAL MINE.
YOU COULD MAKE A
LIST A MILE LONG OF THE OBVIOUS
THINGS EVERYBODY TAKES FOR
GRANTED NOW, YOU GOT THEM
BECAUSE OF THE LEFT.
IN A LOT OF
CASES YOU GOT THEM BECAUSE OF
UNIONS AS WELL, BUT UNION
WORKERS WHO WERE POLITICALLY
LEFT.
BUT FOR SOME REASON YOU
DON'T SAY THOSE THINGS.
AND
PEOPLE FORGET WHERE THEY CAME
FROM.
SOCIAL SECURITY, THAT IS
OLD, I DON'T KNOW WHO GAVE IT TO
ME.
MEDICARE, MEDICAID, WHO THE
FUCK KNOWS.
THEN IT ALLOWS
REPUBLICANS TO PAINT DEMOCRATS
AS THE ONES WHO WANT TO CUT IT.
YOU SHOULD PROTECT THOSE
PROGRAMS AND EXPAND THEM WHERE
POSSIBLE, LIKE BERNIE SANDERS
WANTS TO DO WITH MEDICARE FOR
ALL.
USE THAT LEGACY OF SUCCESS
IN THE PAST TO BUILD SUCCESSES
IN THE FUTURE.
THEY WILL NOT MENTION FDR,
THEY WILL NOT MENTION LBJ.
THEY
DON'T MENTION THAT LBJ WAS THE
ONE WHO PASSED CIVIL RIGHTS
LEGISLATION.
THEY DON'T MENTION
THE FACT THAT HE GAVE US MEDICARE.
THEY DON'T TALK ABOUT THAT,
BECAUSE THE NARRATIVE IN THE
MAINSTREAM NEWS MEDIA IS THAT
THE GREAT SOCIETY WAS A FAILURE.
LOOK, WE STILL HAVE POVERTY.
IT DIDN'T WORK.
WE STILL HAVE WARS SO I GUESS
WE SHOULD GET RID OF THE
DEFENSE DEPARTMENT?
