The Poorhouse: Aunt Winnie, Glenn Beck, New Deal

[lakhota]

An employee of Associated Charities, a private organization dedicated to alleviating poverty in the District of Columbia, met an old black woman carrying a basket of cinders near the in Southeast D.C. on a bitterly cold day in December 1896.

The woman "could not give street and number, but could 'fotch' the agent to her place," according to a case study labeled "Aunt Winnie" in one of the organization's annual reports from near the turn of the century. "Old age, with a heavy load on top and a strong wind blowing, made the walk a trying one. At last the 8x10 cabin was reached. In it was a stove in many pieces held together with wire, a bedstead with rags for mattress and rags for covering. From the leaky roof the floor was wet through and through."

Aunt Winnie, the report said, had no income save the 50 cents she made every two weeks for taking in the wash. In summertime she raised herbs and greens, but in winter she "suffered for food and fuel." Her children had all been sold away to slavery, and a nearby niece was too poor to offer any support. Her neighbors helped, providing money for the stove and cot, and a "colored friendly visitor was found to carry broth and other comforts to her." The neighborly charity wasn't enough to persuade the agent, who was essentially a private sector version of a social worker, that the old woman should be on her own.

"In the fall of '98 agent asked her to go into the almshouse, but she would not consent. During the storm in February '99, she was kept from perishing with a great effort. Every visit, and they were many, had to be made through snow up to the waist. It was during these visits that the promise was made that before another winter she would take refuge in an almshouse."

When the weather warmed, Aunt Winnie backed off her promise to go to the almshouse. The social worker started to play hardball.

"It would be hard to say which, the agent or the applicant, suffered the more, because through all this distress had sprung up a loving confidence and perfect trust that seemed cruel to deceive. Attention and assistance were withdrawn gradually."

It worked: In July, Aunt Winnie relented and said she'd go to the almshouse as soon she could sell her cabin. Nobody would buy it, so the social worker told her to tear it down and sell it for kindling. At 2 p.m. on Aug. 23, 1899, the social worker showed up in a wagon.

"he was sitting on her trunk, without a stick of the cabin to be seen. Without a murmur she dropped a courtsey to the bare spot where once stood the cabin and turned away. After an affectionate separation in the almshouse the agent came away feeling that for such a balmy day in August it was a trying task to perform, but for winter's blizzards, a blessed relief. In case of her death a promise has been made to her that the general secretary of the Associated Charities will keep her body from potter's field."

Aunt Winnie, whose story is preserved in the archives of the Historical Society of Washington, had been sent to an American institution that was by then some 300 years old and went by a variety of names: the county farm, the poor farm, the almshouse or, most often, simply the poorhouse. She would probably have been surprised to learn that more than a hundred years later, after the virtual eradication of elderly poverty, a powerful political movement would materialize with the mission of returning to the hands-off social policies that made the poorhouse the nation's only refuge for the jobless, the aged, the infirm and the disabled.

That movement's most outspoken proponent is Fox News host Glenn Beck, who doesn't merely pine for the pre-New Deal era in general, but regularly prevails upon his audience to recognize the particular genius of some of the period's presidents, whose ideologies of inaction he holds up as the American ideal.

Democratic President Grover Cleveland is one such hero. When Beck and guest Joseph Lehman were discussing the proper roles of welfare and charity this summer, Lehman noted that one "extreme [position] is, you've got welfare only as a last resort and all assistance is private."

It wasn't too extreme for Beck. "And this is where we actually were a hundred years ago," Beck said, rightly thinking -- or not -- of people in Aunt Winnie's situation.

"We used to be here. In fact, Grover Cleveland has this excellent statement. In 1887, President Cleveland said, 'Though the people may support their government, the government shall not support the people,'" Lehman responded.

"That's great," said Beck.

While lifting up presidents like Cleveland, he wants to tear down their successors. At Beck University, he offers a course titled "Presidents You Should Hate." Part one focuses on Woodrow Wilson, part two on Franklin Roosevelt.

Until those men rose to power, the political field belonged to politicians in the command of business. Cleveland, however, is a distant second in the Beck view of the world to Calvin Coolidge. Beck told his audience this August that Coolidge was Ronald Reagan's favorite president, and that he was "one of best presidents I think we've ever had that you don't know very much about."

Coolidge earned his place in Beck's heart for refusing to send federal help to the Gulf region during the Great Mississippi Flood of 1927. "And under 30 feet of water, hundreds of people died. This is the Katrina of the 1920s," said Beck. "And, to show you the difference in how far we've come with progressives, at the time that this happened, nobody was standing on their roof with signs saying, 'Help me.' They were helping themselves."

Whatever the victims of the flood may have done, Wall Street certainly helped itself during Coolidge's reign from 1923 to 1929. The Dow ran from under a hundred to a high of nearly four hundred. Corporate profits and consumer debt soared. Coolidge slashed taxes. By 1929, the top 0.1 percent had income equal to 42 percent of all Americans and held 34 percent of all the savings -- while eight in ten had no savings at all.

Those eight-in-ten people without savings had no cushion against the economic crashes that relentlessly afflicted the economy and had no relief against the one calamity that is entirely foreseeable: old age.

"Most people, unless they were well-to-do, had two options," said University of Pennsylvania historian Michael B. Katz. "One was living with their kids, the other was the poorhouse."

Much More: www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/29/the-poorhouse-aunt-winnie_n_802338.html?page=1

[marshabar1]

Much better to join the Borg than to live and die free.

Is suffering and death really inevitable or could big government put an end to all that if only we would turn over the reins completely and stand quietly with our hands out?

Didn't work too well for the Russian Borg.

************************

Over 24 million Russians live in poverty


Published: 28 August, 2009, 17:30
Edited: 27 January, 2010, 21:14




The number of poor people in Russia has risen by 1.5 million people and now amounts to 24.5 million – which is more than 17 per cent of the country’s population, the Federal Service of State Statistics (Rosstat) says.

That is a 1.1 per cent rise year on year, and at year-end in 2008, 13.1 per cent of Russia’s population was living below minimum subsistence income – six million fewer people.

As for the minimum subsistence income itself, in the first quarter of 2009 in Russia, it officially amounted to $160 a month, with slight changes for different social groups – $174 for the working population, $128 for the retired and $154 for children.

rt.com/news/russia-poverty-statistics/

[lakhota]

What does Russian poverty have to do with this thread?

[marshabar1]

The article indicates that progressivism alleviates the suffering of the poor. Reality indicates it does not.

[Deleted]

Dec 29, 2010 22:31:36 GMT -5 @marshabar1 said:

The article indicates that progressivism alleviates the suffering of the poor. Reality indicates it does not.

You can say that again, we are in tough times, but I'd still take my chances that a person with at least a 2 year degree has about a 99% chance of not being in poverty in America. Educaton is the key, not politicians or social welfare programs.

[lakhota]

The article indicates that progressivism alleviates the suffering of the poor. Reality indicates it does not.

Whoa, that's too bizarre for me...

[ungenteel]

<<The article indicates that progressivism alleviates the suffering of the poor. Reality indicates it does not>>

Per chance you have a fact to support that contention???

[Tennesseer]

Some 43.6 million (American) people were living in poverty last year (2009) – the highest number since 1959, five years before President Lyndon Johnson declared his War on Poverty.
www.csmonitor.com/USA/Society/2010/0916/US-adds-3.8-million-more-to-ranks-of-the-poor-as-poverty-rate-jumps

[marshabar1]

Dec 29, 2010 22:38:19 GMT -5 ungenteel said:

<<The article indicates that progressivism alleviates the suffering of the poor. Reality indicates it does not>>

Per chance you have a fact to support that contention???

Per chance you would read the article and figure out what you think it says.

[ungenteel]

<<Per chance you would read the article and figure out what you think it says.>>

HuH?? Presidents Cleveland and Coolidge are supposed to be relevant dialogue regarding this statement

<<The article indicates that progressivism alleviates the suffering of the poor. Reality indicates it does not>>

gimme something current ... your suggesting that i read the article seems like a cheap deflection

[burnsattornincan]

Her children had all been sold away to slavery


Wasn't slavery abolished something like 40 years before this story? In any case, a pathetic defense in the illegal act of wealth confiscation by a soon to be "abolished" government.

[lakhota]

Mr. Burns, you should brush up on your slavery history.

BTW, the first sentence describes her as "an old black woman" in 1896.

What year did slavery end in the united states?

answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20061115154043AAdTzX2

[burnsattornincan]

So that makes it 31 years to be exact Mr. googlemeister. You would think the former slaves would have found their way back home after all that time.

[burnsattornincan]

Despite your very impressive qualifications as a Barrister, your knowledge of American slavery is somewhat wanting.

Thank you Mr. deminmaine for your first point however on your second you have misjudged terribly. First of all my knowledge of the subject wasn't too bad considering I noted that American slavery had ended some 40 years before the compelling tale. This without googling. I cast some doubt on the explanation of her plight was due to the 2 sons being sold as slaves some 30+ years earlier. You ASSUME they could not find their mother for whatever reasons. I'm not willing to make that assumption and of course we will never know the true story.

[Shirina]

I see some people are still sticking to their social Darwinism stance on how a great nation should conduct itself. As long as the rich have theirs, I guess, and we should all make sacrifices, dontchya know, so the rich can have even more.

Beck can sit around all day talking about how great it was to live in the early part of the 20th Century, but his knowledge of social history seems woefully lacking. I mean, wouldn't anyone here rejoice at the idea of living in a company-owned house, your wages paid with company money which was legal tender only in company owned stores where prices were deliberately set too high to force workers into debt which, in turn, caused de facto indentured servitude?

Who said slavery ended in 1863? It didn't. In fact, it expanded to enslave millions of whites, Latinos, and Asians, as well. A large number of urban factory employees working for the industrial crime lords of the day were slaves in every way but in name. In all honesty, their plight was worse than slavery, for at least the masters of old gave slaves food, clothing, and shelter. What did the industrial crime lords give their slaves? A pittance wage that forced people to live 15 to a room in urban slums.

Beck has no clue what he's talking about. Beck University? Seriously?

[magichat]

Didn't unions fix many of the problems Shirna without Federal Government intervention?

[burnsattornincan]

Aha ha ha hahahahaaha

I fail to see the humor. Your entire rest of the post didn't really say anything. Of course there is going to be some hardship in a society of millions of people. There is hardship everywhere at any given moment. Attempting to abolish it is futile. It has only been made worse as now you have millions and millions of generational welfare recipients who have no desire or reason to work. What do you think about a single welfare recipient having a child? Another child? And another? More and more to feed, house, clothe, provide healthcare. It is completely out of control, cannot continue indefinitely and when it finally comes to an end by sheer fiscal reality there will be more suffering than what has ever been seen before. That is how good deeds can sometimes end up.

[lakhota]

Dear Mr. Burns,

Your self-aggrandizing hyperbole makes you appear uninformed. Maybe you could try mixing in some hard facts with your hip-shots? Just a thought...

[steff]

For those that think children sold into slavery could just find their parents after the end of the Civil War, it should be noted that when the children were sold, there was no forwarding address or knowledge of where said children ended up. Most slaves had no last names, no addresses, no marriage licenses, no birth certificates, no paperwork to match up to find their children they had been separated from. The parent could have been on a plantation in the Carolinas, and their children sold to a plantation in Mississippi. And again, the parents were not told where their children were being sold to.

So how exactly was everyone supposed to "find their way home"?

[workpublic]

OK so slavery was her reason. what's today's welfare culture's?

[Shirina]

It has only been made worse as now you have millions and millions of generational welfare recipients who have no desire or reason to work.

I see that you, like many others of your ideology, maintain a stance of target hypnosis. You're so focused on the scammers and fraudsters that you refuse to see the millions who actually need welfare. Sometimes I believe it is simply easier on your conscience to assume that most people (millions and millions) are just lazy. If you can convince everyone that welfare recipients are merely people who are avoiding work, it makes you look less like a sociopath when you want to get rid of government assistance.

[lakhota]

Amen, Shirina!

[burnsattornincan]

Sometimes I believe it is simply easier on your conscience to assume that most people (millions and millions) are just lazy.

I don't need to ease my conscience about anything. I do not assume millions and millions are just lazy, I know this is a fact. Having known welfare recipients here and there I can tell you that every single one of them was fully capable of doing some kind of work. If you ask me, the ones that really need the help are people living on the street. Most of them suffer from some kind of disorder such as schizophenia or delusions. The ones that are just drug addicts don't get a whole lot of pity from me. That is their choice. So I maintain my stance on the entire welfare concept. You open a door and there is no telling how many are going to come through it. It is not possible to know for 100% certainty that someone should receive welfare unless it is blatantly obvious there are disabled. All others are frauds.

Mr. Lakhóta, are you attending New Years Eve mass?

[lakhota]

Mr. Lakhóta, are you attending New Years Eve mass?

Not to my knowledge... Are you?

[burnsattornincan]

No, not me. I'm about as non religious as you can get.

[ungenteel]

Righties who feel abhorrent about welfare seem to have two alternatives ... allow people to die in the street .. or make the gummint the employer of last resort .. righties, pick one

[burnsattornincan]

Ok, die in the street. Have a great and Happy New Year, I'm off to get completely roofed. Ta ta.

Dalton McGuinty Burns

[lakhota]

You left off the Esquire...

[burnsattornincan]

Thank you Mr. Lakhóta. Actually I left off "III".

[Shirina]

First of all, if your living conditions are so bad then join the military.

The military doesn't take just anyone contrary to belief. Many of the same things that will keep a person from working are the very same things that will cause one to be rejected by the military. Incidentally, many low ranked soldiers both qualify for and use welfare.

Military members and their families are using more food stamps than in previous years – redeeming them last year at nearly twice the civilian rate, according to Defense Commissary Agency figures

www.military.com/news/article/more-troops-relying-on-food-stamps.html

Seriously, if you want a job that will pay a living wage there is one out there waiting for you.

Are you implying there is a labor shortage in this country?