Poverty

Robert Rector and Rachel Sheffield did a study titled: "The War on Poverty After 50 Years." Her is the abstract:

In his January 1964 State of the Union address, President Lyndon Johnson proclaimed, “This administration today, here and now, declares unconditional war on poverty in America.” In the 50 years since that time, U.S. taxpayers have spent over $22 trillion on anti-poverty programs. Adjusted for inflation, this spending (which does not include Social Security or Medicare) is three times the cost of all U.S. military wars since the American Revolution. Yet progress against poverty, as measured by the U.S. Census Bureau, has been minimal, and in terms of President Johnson’s main goal of reducing the “causes” rather than the mere “consequences” of poverty, the War on Poverty has failed completely. In fact, a significant portion of the population is now less capable of self-sufficiency than it was when the War on Poverty began.

There are similar findings in the 2012 paper by th CATO Institute called: "The American Welfare State: How We Spend $1 Trillion a Year Fighting Poverty--and Fail."

I address this issue and the Law of Unintended Negative Consequences (LUNCs) as it relates to Liberal Policies on Government Welfare, I found that all that has really grown over the years, but particularly during the Obama administration, is the size of government.  I demonstrate that during the Obama administration, the divide between rich and poor has escalated (see HERE),  disibility claims increased (see HERE), and poverty expanded (see HERE)

Following the passage of the "stimulus package" in February of 2009, President Obama promised that the package would lift 2 million people from poverty. (SeeHERE)

For additional documentation, see HERE and HERE and HERE and HERE.