Ms. Ehrenreich's conclusions seem to be a gulf apart from mine. The largest disparity I observed was in education and family dysfunction. The two go hand in hand. Eliminating poverty is a noble goal but the socialist methods of doing so such as taxing the rich, implementing socialized medicine, throwing out bigger social nets to reel in those gone astray, are not going to be very effective.

Internet penetration in the poor zone is nearly non-existent. The schools are dismal, the teachers often unqualified and there is almost no parent involvement. A failing family in a failing school district doesn't change the matrix of the poor. Drugs take out huge numbers of both kids and parents and restrict participation in both.

Giving tax cuts to the rich doesn't do anything directly for the poor either. The poor are unlikely to be skilled enough or polished enough socially for many jobs that are created by business tax cuts.

The racial make-up kicks in as well. From my own observations Hispanic poor are more likely than others to still be family-centric and have a higher work ethic. This serves them well and I have seen many span the bridge from the ghettos to the lower middle class or even the upper middle class. The urban centers overrun by Mexican illegals have, for the most part, become more peaceful than some of the former residents, bue in no small part to the family cultural factor. If they had smaller families it would do them a world of good, but another cultural barrier is at work.

There are no easy answers but the focus on strengthening the middle class is paramount. Middle class tax cuts, emphasis on more competitive sources for each child education - these are my observations. I would sooner see free custom laptops with wireless, webcameras, and printers distributed that serve solely as access to a network of free private schooling than anything else in the poorest sectors. Too many kids don't go to school or quickly quit school once they get past the primary grades. Too many kids are alone with nothing to do at home and emerge on the street. As you well know, libraries serve well, but there is a whole segment of the poor sector that never will set foot through the doors of a library or take advantage of the learning, knowledge therein. Education is not competitive. It NEEDS to be competitive. Each teacher must be as gung-ho as a commisioned saleperson. The best way to do that is to pave the way for private schools to thrive. Religious schools would soon be outnumbered if the government seriously placed educating EACH individual in the society seriously and placed money and legislation towards this goal, intelligently.

Sure I know why it's NOT done. Competition scares many who feel they can't compete and would lose what they have. The public sector attracts many for whom competition is anathema.

But this needs to be changed. Competition is good. Competition works and it works best when saddled with the morality of the middle class. Those for whom neither indulge or fend for yourself are the lifelong mantras.