For The Orange County Register, columnist Joel Kotkin used a United Way study that shows 80 percent of illegal Hispanics in the state of California are living under the poverty line even though they continue to receive government assistance. It's all because of what he calls, "progressive policies [that] drive more into poverty."
"By United Way’s calculation, roughly one in three Californians can barely make ends meet, despite the state’s relatively generous transfer payments, subsidies and general assistance," Kotkin writes.
Bearing the brunt of this statistic are African American and Latino households, but it's the noncitizen Latino category that propels the latter much higher than the rest. The highest concentrations of these poor are located in the larger area between Watts and the neighborhoods surrounding the University of Southern California, south of downtown Los Angeles. Kotkin states that 60 to 80 percent of those living in this area "are struggling to make ends meet."
These numbers quickly show how ineffectual government assistance truly is, but of course, that never stops the government from distributing more. Yet, as Kotkin explains, their methods don't always match their motives:
Given the avowed commitment of progressives to addressing inequality and poverty, one would expect that there would be a renewed focus on spurring economic growth. But, instead, in part due to the bizarre policy choices made by many Latino legislators, the state keeps ratcheting up the prices for both energy and housing through its quixotic – and, fundamentally, narcissistic – attempt to single-handedly reverse climate change.
Across the nation, progressives increasingly look at California as a model state. This tendency has increased as climate change has emerged as the Democratic Party’s driving issue. To them, California’s recovery from a very tough recession is proof positive that you can impose ever greater regulation on everything from housing to electricity and still have a thriving economy.
And despite this focus by who Kotkin calls "climate-obsessed political elites," it is noted that only five percent of Californians view climate change as a big issue for the state. However, the state continues to expand subsidies for housing and energy. Kotkin explains, "Some $130 million from cap-and-trade funds – the very mechanism helping to drive higher energy costs – will go for affordable housing. Yet this is the most full-bore tokenism imaginable. At a cost per affordable apartment unit of about $300,000, at best only a few thousand Californians will benefit, making it essentially irrelevant in a state of almost 39 million people."
Kotkin finally offers what he views as a possible solution:
We might start by reversing our frog-walk toward ever more extreme greenhouse gas reduction goals, which will only boost housing prices, threaten middle- and working-class jobs and make things worse overall without doing much of anything for the climate. Spending on vitally needed infrastructure – like water storage, seawater desalination, port and road improvements – could spur jobs and the economy. Measures to at least slow down, or even reverse, some of the most regressive taxes, and perhaps reduce the burden on potential job-creating businesses, might be considered.
California can continue to work to reduce greenhouse gases in a reasonable way, but with a goal of not further victimizing our increasingly large population of poor and near-poor.
Anyone who criticizes the current policy drift, no matter how social democratic their perspective, will likely be written off as a “denier” or right-wing, or simply ignored by the mainstream media. In contrast to the people-centered progressivism of a Gov. Pat Brown or President Harry Truman, today’s Left increasingly seems unconcerned about their policies’ true impact on the poor and struggling middle class. Call it progressive heart failure.
