Walker on the phone with Fake Koch

[RGacky3]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/23/scott-walker-buffalo-beast-phone-prank_n_827058.html

This is awesome, It sounds absoltely legit.

Walker is going after ALL the unions, he see's this as an ideological fight, against the working class, "the finest moment of Ronald Reagen was firing the air traffic controllers, that was the begining of the fall of communism."

I love the Koch impersonator as well, that is EXACTLY what a corporate douch sounds like in my head.

Anyway, any more on this? Is it legit?

[Bud Struggle]

And you hear all of this and you still think the major American media (in this case AOL-Huffington Post) is slanted towards the Right?

These people hunt news.

[#FF0000]

And you hear all of this and you still think the major American media (in this case AOL-Huffington Post) is slanted towards the Right?

These people hunt news.

I don't think it's even a question that most of the media is slanted to the Right.

At least on radio and on television to some extent. Maybe it's different on the Internet.

[#FF0000]

Jesus Christ this guy is sitting there talking to this guy like he's giving a report to his boss.

[Bud Struggle]

I don't think it's even a question that most of the media is slanted to the Right.

At least on radio and on television to some extent. Maybe it's different on the Internet.


News =/= Commentary.

There's a difference.

[#FF0000]

News =/= Commentary.

There's a difference.

Yeah I agree. I'm not sure why you pointed this out though.

[Bud Struggle]

Yeah I agree. I'm not sure why you pointed this out though.

You have to read Gacks posts. He seems to thing that all the NEWS media is slanted to the right because of "Corporate machenations"--not just the commentary.

[#FF0000]

You have to read Gacks posts. He seems to thing that all the NEWS media is slanted to the right because of "Corporate machenations"--not just the commentary.

Ohhhh.

Well, to be completely honest, I don't think he's wrong when he says that. I've seen it. I've seen the New blatantly lie and distort facts. Fox reported on an attack on a humvee in Iraq. They said the humvee was attacked and marines returned fire, and left out the part about how a ton of civilians got wounded--Something every other station kept in. Then there was just the other day where they fudged the results of a Gallup Poll, saying that 66% of Americans wanted to get rid of Collective Bargaining while 33% did not, when in reality it was reversed.

Other networks do it too, obviously, and I don't think it's a mere "getting things wrong". I bring up Fox because, when it comes to lying to push an agenda, they are the absolute worst and most blatant exactly because they deny their agenda.

[Bud Struggle]

Ohhhh.

Well, to be completely honest, I don't think he's wrong when he says that. I've seen it. I've seen the New blatantly lie and distort facts. Fox reported on an attack on a humvee in Iraq. They said the humvee was attacked and marines returned fire, and left out the part about how a ton of civilians got wounded--Something every other station kept in. Then there was just the other day where they fudged the results of a Gallup Poll, saying that 66% of Americans wanted to get rid of Collective Bargaining while 33% did not, when in reality it was reversed.

Other networks do it too, obviously, and I don't think it's a mere "getting things wrong". I bring up Fox because, when it comes to lying to push an agenda, they are the absolute worst and most blatant exactly because they deny their agenda.

And I agree that Fox has a slant to the Right. But you can also say places like Huffington Post and NBC and CSMBC have a slant to the Left. I don't think it's always perfect--but there is a modicum of honesty in the reporting.

I saw this report in the thread title on NBC New with Brian Williams. No one is covering it up--and this was dug out of somwhere by someone and quite a few news agencies put it on the air.

No cover up here. Maybe it's not on Fox, but it's ON somewhere.

There's no "Corporate conspericy" here.

[Pretty Flaco]

stuff here

I saw the original mistake in your post. :p

Sorry, I've got nothin' significant to add.

[Bud Struggle]

I saw the original mistake in your post. :p

Sorry, I've got nothin' significant to add.

Yea--I guess I hijacked Gack's thread. He's gunna be pissed when he see it in the morning. :D

[L.A.P.]

Jesus Christ this guy is sitting there talking to this guy like he's giving a report to his boss.

Well isn't he?

[#FF0000]

And I agree that Fox has a slant to the Right. But you can also say places like Huffington Post and NBC and CSMBC have a slant to the Left. I don't think it's always perfect--but there is a modicum of honesty in the reporting.

Sure.


I saw this report in the thread title on NBC New with Brian Williams. No one is covering it up--and this was dug out of somwhere by someone and quite a few news agencies put it on the air.

No cover up here. Maybe it's not on Fox, but it's ON somewhere.

There's no "Corporate conspericy" here.

Ah I see what you're saying now.

But still I disagree! I think it's really naive to say that the news don't lie by ommission if not lie outright. I think we can agree on that.

[Os Cangaceiros]

And I agree that Fox has a slant to the Right. But you can also say places like Huffington Post and NBC and CSMBC have a slant to the Left. I don't think it's always perfect--but there is a modicum of honesty in the reporting.

That's just obstructing the reality of the situation, just like the whole "conservative vs. liberal" dichotomy obscures the reality of the USA's social & political environment. The reality is that media outside the internet is wholly owned by a handful of major corporations including Viacom, Time Warner and News Corp, and that media/journalism is run like a business (which it is). Stories are filtered through the corporate hierarchy...there's a crappy-but-somewhat-informative documentary about this online called Orwell Rolls In His Grave (2003).


There's no "Corporate conspericy" here.

There's no conspiracy; it's right out in the open. Media is a major business that's controlled by a handful of multinational conglomerates who run their enterprises for profit, not any kind of vaunted ideas regarding journalistic intergrity.

[CleverTitle]

Amazing that Walker could actually screw up on this level. How stupid do you have to be? All it took was a man calling up claiming to be Koch. Amazing.

[#FF0000]

There's no conspiracy; it's right out in the open. Media is a major business that's controlled by a handful of multinational conglomerates who run their enterprises for profit, not any kind of vaunted ideas regarding journalistic intergrity.

Exactly. Calling it a "conspiracy" isn't quite fair or accurate. It's just business.

[Skooma Addict]

People obviously should not get their "news" from the mainstream sources. These sources are dumbed down so morons can understand them. It doesn't even matter if ones news source is one sided as long as the source realizes this. For example I subscribe to The Economist which is a decent source of news. It openly admits to being pro-market and doesn't pretend otherwise. The readers then take this into account.

[Ocean Seal]

Jesus Christ this guy is sitting there talking to this guy like he's giving a report to his boss.


Wait, let me fix this.


Jesus Christ this guy is sitting there giving a report to his boss.

There we go.

[Property Is Robbery]

Beautiful.. goddamn beautiful!

[RGacky3]

Beautiful.. goddamn beautiful!


I loved that, its such a cartoonish example of a plutocrat douchbag, but hey it worked.

But if this sound clip starts spreading, its gonna be major damage to Walker, for pretty mcuh exposing what we already know he is.

[RGacky3]

Ok its confirmed, the tape was real (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/23/scott-walker-prank-call_n_827370.html). It was so clownish and just so blatent that I almost did'nt believe it was real.

[Jimmie Higgins]

Ok its confirmed, the tape was real (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/23/scott-walker-prank-call_n_827370.html). It was so clownish and just so blatent that I almost did'nt believe it was real.Ha, well the US ruling class has a lot of hubris - they aren't used to people actually challenging them on their shit.

Neoliberal Capitalism is like Mubarak or the other dictators... three decades of telling people that there is no alternative and they actually start to believe their own hype (propaganda) and then find it easier to believe that there's LSD in the coffee than people would actually challenge the status-quo.

[Baseball]

Ha, well the US ruling class has a lot of hubris - they aren't used to people actually challenging them on their shit.

Neoliberal Capitalism is like Mubarak or the other dictators... three decades of telling people that there is no alternative and they actually start to believe their own hype (propaganda) and then find it easier to believe that there's LSD in the coffee than people would actually challenge the status-quo.


It would seem that the protesters in Madison are "Mubarak." After all, they are protesting to defend the old system that people in an election just a few months ago voted to change.

It is understandable that Egyptians who order pizza to the protesters in a sign of solidarity are confused on the subject. Not so for Americans who think that defending the system is a sign of revolution.

[Jimmie Higgins]

It would seem that the protesters in Madison are "Mubarak." After all, they are protesting to defend the old system that people in an election just a few months ago voted to change.
1) Mubarak got 97% in the last election - pretty big mandate for him too.
2) The same logic could equally be applied to Obama - since Republicans feared that he would bring about socialism, and he still won the election, we must have a mandate for Socialism in the US and the tea-party is Mubarak:rolleyes: When tea-partiers fight to preserve corporate-run healthcare, they must be Mubarak. When the Democrats and Republicans try and save the staus-quo of Bush's tax cuts... they must be Mubarak.
3)The protesters, unlike Mubarak, do not have power, do not have paid thugs, police, and a military, they do not receive tanks and tear-gas and billions of dollars from the US government.


It is understandable that Egyptians who order pizza to the protesters in a sign of solidarity are confused on the subject. Not so for Americans who think that defending the system is a sign of revolution.Defending the system? The same system that has been restricting union rights for oh 30 years now? The system that threatened to use armed forces to break unions - not just in Wisconsin, but against ILWU members by GW Bush, and so on.

The protesters are not fighting to keep the status quo - because the staus quo for the last 30 years has been a one-sided class war resulting in the gutting of most services for the poor, attacks on education, less job security, longer and harder work, stagnating wages, attacks on union rights, and massive inequality. It's true that this is a defensive, not offensive, fight, but it's a fight for a democratic right. The fact that workers are fighting this time instead of taking it is a break from the status quo.

Also your claim is contradicted by the fact that one of the results of the protests in Egypt has been the formation of independent trade-unions and a consequence of the protests, Egypt has seen a strike wave.

This is why supporters of Capitalism fear actual democracy and do everything they can to insulate power from the majority of the population through bureaucracies and archaic parliamentary procedure or just straight-up dictatorships and police states. When you have a system based on inequality and exploitation of the majority... democracy is scary.

But people are beginning to challenge their fear of the thugs paid by Mubarak as well as the intellectual-thugs paid by people like the Koch brothers.

[#FF0000]

It would seem that the protesters in Madison are "Mubarak." After all, they are protesting to defend the old system that people in an election just a few months ago voted to change.

Walker had no mandate to try and push this legislation through -- he didn't win by that large a margin at all.

[PhoenixAsh]

It would seem that the protesters in Madison are "Mubarak." After all, they are protesting to defend the old system that people in an election just a few months ago voted to change.

It is understandable that Egyptians who order pizza to the protesters in a sign of solidarity are confused on the subject. Not so for Americans who think that defending the system is a sign of revolution.


What a stupid notion.

Mubarak just existed in a vacuum? He just is and always has been? No...he came to power and made his rule possible....amongst other things by fucking the unions.

If anything the protesters in the US aretrying to stop another Mubarak from becoming.

[Baseball]

1) Mubarak got 97% in the last election - pretty big mandate for him too.

I see- the electoral system of Egypt under Mubarak is no different than what exists in Wisconsin and the USA.
Let us at least refrain from absurdities, please.


2) The same logic could equally be applied to Obama - since Republicans feared that he would bring about socialism, and he still won the election, we must have a mandate for Socialism in the US

The logic isn't that the protesters should not object to major changes. The logic is that they are fighting to defend the old system and the old ways of doing things.


and the tea-party is Mubarak:rolleyes: When tea-partiers fight to preserve corporate-run healthcare, they must be Mubarak. When the Democrats and Republicans try and save the staus-quo of Bush's tax cuts... they must be Mubarak.

You are the one who drew the comparisons to Mubarak. I simply suggested that such a comparison would be more accurate directed elsewhere.



Defending the system? The same system that has been restricting union rights for oh 30 years now?

What rights have been restricted for the past 30 years?




The protesters are not fighting to keep the status quo - because the staus quo for the last 30 years has been a one-sided class war resulting in the gutting of most services for the poor, attacks on education, ect.

Are you for real? There is more money being spent on the "poor" and education than there was 30 years ago. Its true there is less job security, but that is due to the major structural changes that have occurred in the economy and in life since 1980 (gee whiz, you are reading this via one of those changes now).


Also on top of your above idiocy about "the system" is the fact that one of the results of the protests in Egypt has been the formation of independent trade-unions and a consequence of the protests, Egypt has seen a strike wave.

Fair enough. Perhaps this will be an impetus for capitalist reforms. After all, this 2011 revolts was kicked over as a result of insufficient capitalism- a fruit vendor was not permitted to sell without government permission.

[Nolan]

It would seem that the protesters in Madison are "Mubarak." After all, they are protesting to defend the old system that people in an election just a few months ago voted to change.

It is understandable that Egyptians who order pizza to the protesters in a sign of solidarity are confused on the subject. Not so for Americans who think that defending the system is a sign of revolution.

That's rich because many of his voters are in Madison...and not with the tea party, either.

[Baseball]

Walker had no mandate to try and push this legislation through -- he didn't win by that large a margin at all.

So what? He received 50%+1 of the vote. What percentage of the workers have to support socialism in order for IT to be considered a mandate?

[RGacky3]

Show me where in his campain he proposed taking away collective bargaining rights?


The logic isn't that the protesters should not object to major changes. The logic is that they are fighting to defend the old system and the old ways of doing things.


They are fighting to not go back to a time where workers had NO rights.


What rights have been restricted for the past 30 years?


The right to unionize, which has been restricted by corporate America for decades, because Reagen stopped enforcing on the books labor laws.


Are you for real? There is more money being spent on the "poor" and education than there was 30 years ago.

Source? Also per poor person? or overall since theres a LOT more poor people?


After all, this 2011 revolts was kicked over as a result of insufficient capitalism- a fruit vendor was not permitted to sell without government permission.

Do you REALLY believe that the protesters in Eygpt wanted MORE capitalism? Honestly???

[Jimmie Higgins]

I see- the electoral system of Egypt under Mubarak is no different than what exists in Wisconsin and the USA.
Let us at least refrain from absurdities, please.Then don't compare a popular movement for rights to a dictator, backed by a military force, attempting to restrict rights.


You are the one who drew the comparisons to Mubarak. I simply suggested that such a comparison would be more accurate directed elsewhere. A leader of a state threatens to use armed state guards to prevent any mobilization or protest to his attempted policy... that's Mubarak as well as Walker.


What rights have been restricted for the past 30 years?Unions have been under assault since the 1970s, judges have passed injunctions to prevent labor actions, right-to-work laws have been passed, and so on. Workers rights, unionization, and working class wages and living standards have all see stagnation or decline - at the same time inequality has reached Guilded-Age levels in the US.

Hell worker-rights are so weak right now that my job makes us work 8 hours without an official meal or bathroom break - we're supposed to "take it when we can" but of course ignoring a customer because we're taking a shit will get us in trouble too. Wal-Mart is another example, making workers work FOR FREE for fear of not being able to complete the require tasks and being replaced.


Are you for real? There is more money being spent on the "poor" and education than there was 30 years ago.Per-capita or lump? As I remember, public mental health services are gone, Bill "Socialist" Clinton "ended welfare as we know it", Affermative Action (which I received even though I am white - there were programs for low-income students, you see) has been eliminated in many if not all public institutions, a University of California education which used to cost a few hundred per year in the 1960s but now costs twice as much ($10,000) as it did when I was in school a decade ago ($4,200)... should I go on?


Its true there is less job security, but that is due to the major structural changes that have occurred in the economy and in life since 1980 (gee whiz, you are reading this via one of those changes now). The internet created less job security? What about the lack of job security in the 1930s - that was because of NAFTA and the internet? Damn, back then they had to line up each morning to get a job in some industries... this changed when they fought for the right to organize. Now none of these industries operates this way - except farm-labor which does not have the federal right to unionize... hmm. So the internet created migrant labor, interesting theory.


Fair enough. Perhaps this will be an impetus for capitalist reforms. After all, this 2011 revolts was kicked over as a result of insufficient capitalism- a fruit vendor was not permitted to sell without government permission.He was a college educated fruit-seller who didn't even want to be selling fruit. The fucking problem IS capitalism and the cronyist neo-liberal regime of Ben-Ali who raked-in tourist money and IMF development loans while people starved and remained unemployed.

Most of these countries all have gone from Nationalist dictatorships (what capitalists and some stalinists call "socialism") like Nasser's government to a neoliberal model. Mubarak was known as the ruler who privatized the national industries in Egypt. People are protesting the conditions caused by modern capitalism, not trying to win MORE!

Christ, the neoliberals have been running the show for a generation and their followers don't even know what they have been able to achieve! Before the collapse, every good thing was because of neoliberal capitalism... now after the crash, apparently Alan Greenspan wasn't ever involved in economic policy, Clinton and Bush and Regan didn't deregulate anything or cut government programs... for fuck's sake, I feel bad for you, learn some history, it wasn't even that long ago. Search wikipedia for "New Democrats" or "Neoliberalsim" - please!

If you really want to be an apologist for capitalism, at least get a sub to the Economist or Wall Street Journal or something and educate yourself in the contemporary policies and theories of the people and system you support. Even these institutions know that inflated food prices (thanks to allowing staple crops to be speculated on - a new rule put int effect a little while ago) is one of the major sources of anger in these uprisings.

[Dean]

And I agree that Fox has a slant to the Right. But you can also say places like Huffington Post and NBC and CSMBC have a slant to the Left. I don't think it's always perfect--but there is a modicum of honesty in the reporting.

I saw this report in the thread title on NBC New with Brian Williams. No one is covering it up--and this was dug out of somwhere by someone and quite a few news agencies put it on the air.

No cover up here. Maybe it's not on Fox, but it's ON somewhere.

There's no "Corporate conspericy" here.
No, there is no real slant to the right, and it is expressed by the absence of significant media attention to left-leaning protests of all kinds, as well as the lack of in-depth reporting on the low effective corporate tax rate, the rising (manipulated) consumer price index and the lack of focus on government graft with significant corporations - including these very media outlets.

You'd be outright lying, or completely delusional to think that this doesn't reflect a fundamental bias to the right-wing.

[PhoenixAsh]

So what? He received 50%+1 of the vote. What percentage of the workers have to support socialism in order for IT to be considered a mandate?


And that is why democracy sucks in a two party system....its NOT democracy if you can vote for only two people.

Also...being voted into office does not mean you can press through anything you like and obviously he is beholden to lobby groups. Which is also pretty much undemocratic.

BTW....

I do not know where you get the notion that change from old to something new is always good and its revolutionary to support it...but its pretty much the most stupid idea I have ever, ever heard espoused by someone. Revolution means radical change of system. If the system does not change for the better than you prevent actions which make it turn for the worse. That is not reactionary...its reactionary to try and change things back to the situation in the INdustrial Age...which is what the Koch brothers and their cronies want. THEY are trying to turn back time. Its NOTHING new what they are trying to do...it has already been done...and because of socialists things changed. Even in the US.
Now socialism is not perceived as a threat anymore they want to change it back.



Also

...more money being spend on the poor than 30 years ago? Yes...perhaps...because there are more of them. Go figure.

[RGacky3]

and its not a vote if your vote has no impact on the actual public policy, its like being able to vote for the kings jester.

[Baseball]

and its not a vote if your vote has no impact on the actual public policy, its like being able to vote for the kings jester.

And often does one INDIVIDUAL vote impact public policy?

And yet its an advancement to extend this into the economic realm?

[RGacky3]

I did'nt mean one individual vote, even majority votes.

[Baseball]

And that is why democracy sucks in a two party system....its NOT democracy if you can vote for only two people.

How many is the magic number? three? 13? 27?
Is what has been happening in your neighbor Belgium a crowning success story of democracy? Or is the inability to form a functioning government considered irrelevent to discussing democracy?

Somebody once said a functioning democracy requires two pillars. The first one is a two party state. The second is a general consensus


Also...being voted into office does not mean you can press through anything you like and obviously he is beholden to lobby groups. Which is also pretty much undemocratic.

A "lobby" group is a group of people who wish their government to do certain things. It is the absolute standard of democracy.




I do not know where you get the notion that change from old to something new is always good and its revolutionary to support it..

I had found it amusing that the protesters were defending the old system and characterizing a man who had been in office for about six weeks as a "Mubarak."



.
..more money being spend on the poor than 30 years ago? Yes...perhaps...because there are more of them. Go figure.

Yep. Well the USA has had a tremendous amount of immigration to it over the past 30 years- both legal and illegal. Stands to reason the numbers of poor people would go up.

[#FF0000]

Somebody once said a functioning democracy requires two pillars. The first one is a two party state. The second is a general consensus

That guy sounds like a moron. :mellow:


A "lobby" group is a group of people who wish their government to do certain things. It is the absolute standard of democracy.


A group or group of people who have a lot of clout because they have a lot of money.

Yeah that doesn't sound like it could lead to corruption or anything.

Which reminds me! The Koch bros. spent a couple, maybe tens, of millions on Walker's campaign in Wisconsin. In this anti-union bill he's pushing, there's a clause that would allow for the no-bid sale of some state-run power plants. Guess who owns the companies that just so happen to be in the very best position for taking advantage of this lucrative deal and achieving an energy monopoly?

Koch Industries!

Really, you are the most naive person I've ever met.


Yep. Well the USA has had a tremendous amount of immigration to it over the past 30 years- both legal and illegal. Stands to reason the numbers of poor people would go up.

It's not just about the number of "poor people", champ. It's about the ratio of pay and the fact that the richest people in the country have been getting richer and richer at an outrageous rate. Wages have declined and stagnated in the US and Mexico, and this decline coincides with the decline of unions.

But what about immigrants!?

Well, if all workers had access to unions, then whether or not they were an immigrant wouldn't have all that much to do with anything, assuming they get all the union perks.

[#FF0000]

Baseball is a Mubarak because he is stubbornly defending a 200 year old system.

hurr durr

[Thug Lessons]

Walker had no mandate to try and push this legislation through -- he didn't win by that large a margin at all.

You would know about man dates. It's you. You are. I should know. I own a mansion, and a yacht.

[PhoenixAsh]

How many is the magic number? three? 13? 27?

That does not matter...its simply more than two.

Look. You can hide from the reality all you want. The fact of the matter remains that if you can vote for only two parties their agenda is the party agenda. There is no negotiation, there is no alternative, there is no political disourse other than over margins.

Either you have a mayority or you do not and there is no middle ground.



Is what has been happening in your neighbor Belgium a crowning success story of democracy? Or is the inability to form a functioning government considered irrelevent to discussing democracy?
Do you understand the situation in Belgium and the mayor issue of succession and splitting up the country in two independent states...one rich...one poor...that is playing out there right now?

Not to mentoin the fact that there are in fact two parliaments in Belgium...and that indeed it is NOT a functioning democracy because, amongst other things, of the Halle-Brussel-Veelvoorde issue...which you probably know nothing about.

Your country...which is trillions of dollars in debt does NOT have a functioning government. If you think it does you should start taking meds. So do NOT try to evade the issue by deflecting.



Somebody once said a functioning democracy requires two pillars. The first one is a two party state. The second is a general consensus
Well...in the US they have managed to fuck that up big time...now didn't they. (http://www.usdebtclock.org/)




A "lobby" group is a group of people who wish their government to do certain things. It is the absolute standard of democracy.
A lobby group should, in a functioning democracy, not be able to buy the politicans. And that is what this is...no matter how you spin it....it is and always will be corruption.




I had found it amusing that the protesters were defending the old system and characterizing a man who had been in office for about six weeks as a "Mubarak."
Yes...because Mubarak has always been more than 30 years in office...and that was his only fault :rolleyes:

It wasn't also one of his political ambitions to crush the unions....because....believe it or not...people actually had more issue with that and the rest of his policies than him remaining in power for so long.



Yep. Well the USA has had a tremendous amount of immigration to it over the past 30 years- both legal and illegal. Stands to reason the numbers of poor people would go up.Don't give me that crap.

Your population of immigrants both legal and illegal is estimated about 12 million....which is roughly the same as the year before.

While you have 48 million people living below the poverty line. That is an increase of a whopping 12% from 2010....so immigration has very little to do with it.

You have an unemployment rate of 10%....and the increasing amount of foreclosures on middle class citizens who can not be able to pay of their debts.

Yet...the US still manages to spend...trillions of dollars to fund wars (http://costofwar.com/en/)

[RGacky3]

How many is the magic number? three? 13? 27?
Is what has been happening in your neighbor Belgium a crowning success story of democracy? Or is the inability to form a functioning government considered irrelevent to discussing democracy?

Somebody once said a functioning democracy requires two pillars. The first one is a two party state. The second is a general consensus



The magic number is whatever transfers public opinion into public policy, thats how you know a democracy is working.


A "lobby" group is a group of people who wish their government to do certain things. It is the absolute standard of democracy.


Except these lobby groups essencially hand the government over to monied interests, I don't have a lobby ... Do you? You know who does though, the banking industry. So nower days lobby groups are essencially the way the super rich control policy.


Yep. Well the USA has had a tremendous amount of immigration to it over the past 30 years- both legal and illegal. Stands to reason the numbers of poor people would go up.

THATS the connection your making??? The financial crash, mass layoffs, mass unemployment, people getting their houses and savings crashed, no, its not that, its immigrants flooding the system ...? Really?

People arn't becoming poor??? look out side man.