Stop the Gang Violence!



“Somebody said ‘why don’t we get a third party?’ and another one said, I think correctly so, ‘Why don’t we get a second party?’” - Ron Paul




Why THIS CRAP is not helpful:



AND ALSO THIS CRAP IS NOT HELPFUL:


I SHOULDN'T HAVE TO SAY A SINGLE THING ELSE.
But I will.

We stereotype each other to death in this country, and it's retarded. But that's not the point that I'm trying to make. I have a more ground shattering thought to share. So here goes. We hate each other kind of like the Capulet's and the Montague's. We hate each other like Wearwolves and Vampires. We hate each other kind of like the Bloods and the Crips. At the end of the day, we hate each other just..... because. Because we're supposed to. Because we always have. Because our supreme loyalty is not to ideological ideals, but to a PARTY.

I remember in 2003 when George Bush started to beat the war drums and we invaded Iraq, I knew that the war must be just. It had to be. It had to be the right move for America because George Bush was a republican, and damnit, the democrats, who opposed it, were my sworn enemies. They were just a bunch of pacifist ninnies.



I supported the war because my party supported the war. I read all of the things that my party told me to read, and I believed them because WE were the good guys, and the democrats were the bad guys. I had a bad feeling about it, a sort of sinking feeling in my gut that there was something fishy going on, but thank the state, my loyalty to my gang came before rational thought. I carried on supporting George W. and everything he did.

SO, my friends, how many of you start all of your political reasoning with that same sort of “which gang am I in?” mentality? My friend JP's recent FB poll (trust me it was totally scientific) discovered that 95% of Americans actually share the common core political guiding philosophy of "if My Side does it, it's okay. If the Other Side does it, it's bad."I read so many articles about the government shutdown that said things like “did the tea party win?” or “we won!” Who the hell is we? Lets just take a second and think about this, k?
What do democrat politicians and republican politicians actually disagree on in Washington? Social issues? Maybe, but most of the time they change their views depending on whats popular. Economic issues? Not really different, they all kind of like government intervention and fiat money. How about foreign policy? They both love war as long as their president was the one to start it. Big Business and Corporate interests? The BEST. Crony Capitalism? Check. The surveillance state? Check.
Lets just take Mitt Romney and Barack Obama, a couple of the golden boys of the two parties and compare them.

A few of their campaign contributors:

Now if you hadn't drawn all the necessary conclusions, here's another comparison chart:





It kind of looks like both dudes got a lot of money from the same places (big banks). But surely that doesn't mean they are going to agree on everything except funding PBS, right?

How about Obama and Romney on personal freedom? They probably disagree..... or not. Before signing the National Defense Authorization Act, Obama requested a provision be added that the president be given the authority to detain American citizens on American soil without a trial. How does Romney feel about that?
PRETTY GOOD! SCREW THE BILL OF RIGHTS!

Guess who started the ball rolling on this whole government spying shindig? Everyone's favorite pseudo dictator, George W. Bush. If you are a republican, you profess to think that big government is bad, that Obama is a tyrant, and that pretty soon we're going to be living in a tyranny run by socialists. It's too bad all of the people you elect are kind of cool with tyranny as long as they are the ones holding the reigns. If you are a Democrat, on the other hand, you profess to hate American imperialism and want our freedom of privacy protected. Why is it, then, that all the people you vote into office don't share your conviction? The house, the senate, the party leadership, the president... all of them supported the NDAA and the Patriot act.

Not only do both parties (in practice) support government tyranny at home, they both support imperialism and intervention abroad. Earlier this year when Obama was set on going to war with Syria, it was a bipartisan house that supported him. McCain, Lindsey, and Bohner teamed up with Pelosi and were all ready to play the “its not really war” game with Assad in Syria. Here's a great quote from Sen. Lindsey Graham, South Carolina Republican on this exact topic: “People are astonished that President Obama is doing many of the things that President Bush did, I’m not astonished. I congratulate him for having the good judgment to understand we’re at war.”


pictured above: "them"
Both parties also supported the bank bailouts of 2008. Yeah! Remember the Wall Street bailouts that started under George Bush? That was all bipartisan supported. Both parties voted to tax us and then pay for Wall Street's mistakes with our taxes. That whole “democrats stand up for the little man,” and “republicans are against government intervention in the economy,” is total poppycock. We are not living in a democracy any more. In a democracy you have choices. You have OPTIONS. In America, we have one option, and that option is the 1%.

As Ron Paul said in his farewell address to congress, "One side doesn't give up one penny on military spending, the other side doesn't give up one penny on welfare spending. Both sides support the bailouts and the subsidies for the banking and corporate elite, and the spending continues as the economy weakens and we spiral down further and further." Those are the facts of the situation. Stop blaming the tea party, stop blaming the bleeding heart liberals. If you were a democrat before, stop calling the tea party "them." If you were a republican before, stop calling people like Mitt Romney and Senator Lindsey "Us."  And the next time you think about posting that meme that shows how all democrats are potsmoking bums or how everyone in the tea party belongs to the klan, do us all a favor and don't.

We, the normal people, all hate to see special interests use the government as leverage to destroy their competition. As it turns out, the tea party and Occupy Wall Street movements were born from the same parents, Wall Street and Washington.




Yeah. Turns out we were on the same side all along. So lets stop fighting each other and start fighting the establishment. THEY are the "them." Not the dude with the coexist bumper sticker or the "don't tread on me" flag. THEY are.

What Pope Francis Actually Said

If you've read any news about the pope in the last few months, you know that they usually look something like this:

Vatican City- Pope Francis, dressed in simple robes made from bedsheets, setting aside the usual papal wardrobe which costs hundreds of thousands of dollars said in an off the cuff comment this morning that the Church is not really necessary at all anymore and really is more of a social cloud for people who want to feel good about themselves. “We believe in following your conscience.” said the Pontiff. We have interpreted this, of course the way we want to hear it. This is now a codified, ex-cathedra (whatever that means) dogmatic decree that every Catholic instantly must adhere to as reported by this news agency –we are not biased at all by progressive agendas. This is in stark contrast to Pope Benedict XVI, who said that only those whose names are in the registry of a Catholic Church and are fluent in ecclesiastic Latin could have any hope for salvation. Benedict made this decree while simultaneously kicking a kitten and taking food from a starving child before climbing into his papal Lamborghini.


Lets go ahead and slap a Vatican flag decal on the front, we can do that right?


The news never gets Pope Francis right, or Pope Benedict for that matter. They listen only for what they want to hear. So it is with the news articles that came out today declaring, like this one, that Pope Francis has “assured atheists that you don’t have to believe in God to go to heaven.” The author of this article doesn't give two craps what Pope Francis actually said. He's just fanning the flames of controversy. If you want to get your heart broken for Jesus and for all of humanity, go read the letter Pope Francis actually wrote here. Because I also know that I’m totally not normal and that normal people don’t usually read papal letters, I’m going to just give you a few of the quotes from this unbelievable saint of a man. These are all gems from his letter to Eugenio Scalfari, the founder of “La Repubblica” newspaper. I’ll let Pope Francis speak for himself:

Pope Frikkin Francis

"Sup."
              Where does faith come from?
“For me, faith is born from the encounter with Jesus. A personal encounter, which has touched my heart and given direction and new meaning to my existence. But at the same time an encounter that was made possible by the community of faith in which I have lived….Believe me, without the Church I would not have been able to encounter Christ, also in the awareness that the immense gift that faith is kept in the fragile earthen vessels of our humanity.”

               Who is Jesus? Is he a power hungry tyrant who came to destroy those who oppose him?
“[The question] ‘Who is he’” refers to Jesus’ identity, is born from witnessing an authority that is different from that of the world, an authority that is not aimed at exercising power over others, but of serving them, of giving them liberty and the fullness of life. And this to the point of putting at stake one’s own life, to the point of experiencing incomprehension, betrayal, rejection, to the point of being condemned to death, of sealing the state of abandonment on the cross. But Jesus remains faithful to God, to the end.
And it is precisely then... that Jesus shows himself paradoxically as the Son of God! Son of a God that is love and that wishes with all His being that man, every man, discover himself and also live as His true son. This is, for the Christian faith, the certificate of the fact that Jesus is risen: not to triumph over those who rejected him, but to attest that the love of God is stronger than death, the forgiveness of God is stronger than any sin, and that it is worthwhile to spend one’s life, to the end, witnessing this immense gift”

               Did Jesus come to cut his followers off from the rest of the world?
“In other words, Jesus’ offspring, as presented by the Christian faith, is not revealed to mark an insurmountable separation between Jesus and all others: but to tell us that, in Him, we are all called to be children of the one Father and brothers among ourselves. The singularity of Jesus is for communication, not for exclusion.”

               What about the Jews? Are they condemned to hell because they didn’t accept Jesus?
“What I can say to you, with the Apostle Paul, is that God’s fidelity to the close covenant with Israel never failed and that, through the terrible trials of these centuries, the Jews have kept their faith in God. And for this, we shall never be sufficiently grateful to them as Church, but also as humanity. They, then, precisely by persevering in the faith of the God of the Covenant, called all, also us Christians, to the fact that we are always waiting, as pilgrims, for the Lord’s return.”

               What of atheists? Does God forgive them even if they don’t believe in him?
“First of all, you ask me if the God of Christians forgives one who doesn’t believe and doesn’t seek the faith. Premise that – and it’s the fundamental thing – the mercy of God has no limits if one turns to him with a sincere and contrite heart; the question for one who doesn’t believe in God lies in obeying one’s conscience. Sin, also for those who don’t have faith, exists when one goes against one’s conscience. To listen to and to obey it means, in fact, to decide in face of what is perceived as good or evil. And on this decision pivots the goodness or malice of our action.”

               Is there absolute truth or is truth relative?
“Now truth, according to the Christian faith, is the love of God for us in Jesus Christ. Therefore, truth is a relationship! So true is it that each one of us also takes up the truth and expresses it from him/herself: from his/her history and culture, from the situation in which he/she lives, etc. This doesn’t mean that truth is variable or subjective, quite the opposite. But is means that it is given to us always and only as a way and a life. Did not Jesus himself say: ‘I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life’?”

               When men cease to exist, will the idea of God disappear along with him?
“God – this is my thought and this is my experience, but how many, yesterday and today, share it! – is not an idea, even though very lofty, fruit of man’s thought. God is reality with a capital ‘R.”

               And about the church:
“Believe me, the Church despite all the slowness, the infidelities, the errors and sins she could have committed and can still commit in those that accompany her, has no other sense or end but that of living and witnessing Jesus: He who was sent by Abba “to preach good news to the poor, to proclaim release to captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord” (Luke 4:18-19).

With fraternal closeness,
Francis”

               The Tear Jerker:

Pope Francis signed this letter to Eugenio Scalfari, a non believer, “with fraternal closeness.” No formality, no papal bull or decree or title, just "Francis." That is just awesome. That, more than everything else is the Pope  answer to all the questions Scalfari asked him- We are all brothers. Someone hand me a tissue immediately.


Split my Chin WIDE Open


Above Basswood Falls



Oh unconquerable cataracts,
Water piling over rocks and crags,
Rushing dash-smash and cast
High your vapors.
Ever do you empty yourself to fill up another.
Look how peaceful!
Look how tranquil!
The glassy pool below rests content
Your truest bedfellow.
You never hold back your happy gift,
Grip-clutch or clench
And you would cease,
Dry and die, and so would she.

And if in icy winter,
The one below, your love, should freeze,
and refuse your self-pouring
life giving streams,
Ever patient do you wait.
She melts to you,
She always melts to you.

Friday Bay


Friday Bay pt 1.

Blow bash, ye untired winds,
And find me yet upon the lake.
Though these waters roll and shake,
I only sink to bathe my sins,
To learn my heart once more to swim,
My head to follow in its wake.
Oh Soul! Cut free your anchors,
Forsake all your ties
To risk upon the fearsom depths, out I fling,
Till like the Son of Man did once in Galilee
I may sleep and dream amidst a stormy sea.

Friday Bay pt 2.

Lash me down!
Lash me down here a bed!
Let the spray wash and salt this bread,
Typhoon rain whip and blow break
Upon my brow
Ye windy sirens coo and call –
Ye are but hens!
Yes, despair's a storm
A melancholy song,
A wave tide surge and pull,
“Come deeper and sink-swallow salty water,”
She coos and coos.
Bawk on carrion comfort!
I'll list not, and not be listed.
I'll not be counted a wreck and sink.
Bawk on!
But morning breaks on your eastern back.
I'll weather you yet,
Lashed here to Christ, my mast and bed.
Sleep my soul, sleep.

Lino's Epic Science Battle Against the Evil Flasks




The D'Ambrosio's, for the most part, have never been an intensely science mathy left brainy organizy family. After the first three kids graduated with degrees in literature, philosophy, and then literature, it has been left up to Cristina and Nick to do something piratical with their lives. Everyone thinks Nick will do great things.
(he actually got an A in algebra).

He's going to go far in life.

 It seems that out of all the siblings, I am the absolute worst at the practicals. I'd like to tell you a story to illustrate my own inability, and by doing so, entertain you greatly.

My sophomore year at Ave, I promised my mother I would get A in biology. She laughed. It was not exactly a vote of confidence. Who could blame her though? Class was Monday Wednesday Friday at 8:15 in the morning. I still don't get up that early. Let alone for lecture hall powerpoints on the inner workings of ATP. But I was not dismayed. Professor Davis wasn't exactly consistent with his role calls. On the first day of class, he told us that his tests would be similar to the tests on the study disk that came with our $200 biology text book. I decided studying that test instead of going to class would be a far more efficacious method of inquiry. After taking the first test and scoring far higher than any of my class going classmates, I stopped going to class entirely. I was made. This was going to be such a great semester. But alas, there was one biology period I couldn't get away with missing, or faking. Lab.

Yes, lab was my greatest fear, my greatest nemesis,  the one class that I couldn't talk, study, or charm my way around. Applied science. The place where exact measurements, test tubes, bunson burners, dead organs, putrid orders, and chemical fires abound. Here, there was no hiding my absolute inability. After failing to measure 54 ounces with my pipette on the first day of lab, I was forsaken by my classmates. I was abandoned, cast aside, tossed to the wolves-the wolves being my good friend and fellow lab failure, Daniel Schnaider.



Now, all the labs called for groups of three. The way it broke down, for each lab project, there would be 5 groups of three and one group of two. Guess who was the group of two every time? The two people who seemed to be constantly breaking flasks, setting desks on fire, and in general causing great terror in the classroom.I still have many battle scars from that time, and every time I see a test tube I grab the nearest inoculating loop and go on a postal rampage, but outside of the PTSD induced nightmares, my psychiatrist tells me I'm recovering well.


One war story, however, stands out among the rest. One fateful Thursday, Schneider and I looked at each other awkwardly as all the other lab members found their groups. General Davis stood before the group to give us today's battle briefing. Today, we would be cutting up spinach leaves with a hole puncher, putting them in a flask with 4 ounces of water, sucking the air from them (so they would sink to the bottom), and recording how long it took for the leaves to re-oxigenate (or whatever) and rise back to the surface. It's among the greatest mysteries of the universe. We were privileged to get to solve such an enigma. “Before you begin, my students,” he said, “when you go to the vacuum to suck the air out of the flasks, make sure you are wearing your eye protection. I've never see it happen in all my 20 years of teaching, but flasks have been recorded to shatter when the vacuum is activated.”

Stop me if you know where this is going!

So Daniel and I rush to the fight, punching holes in our five spinach leaves like there is no tomorrow. We aren't the first to get all 50 spinach circles, but we aren't the last. Upon our completion, Shnaider gleefully rushed to the vacuum, but alas, like so many young lads, he rushed headlong to his demise. Not fast enough, in slow motion, I reached out for his shoulder, yelling “Shnaider, you forgot your eye protection!” (I've always been a bit too concerned with safety, it's a bit of a character flaw).
I was too late.

He connected the flask to the vacuum and flipped that fateful switch. He was only 20 years old. 

He was JUST A BOY!

The flask exploded.

When I say exploded, I mean exploded. The class was shocked. It was all confusion for what seamed like an eternity. A girl screamed, men ducked under desks, and I fell over onto the floor laughing so hard that I almost peed my pants.

The general was less than enthused. “What the hell did you do Schneider?” Schneider still stood there in shock, holding the tip of the flask, his white lab coat covered in little spinach circles. “And you, D'Ambrosio, wipe that silly grin off your face. You have 50 more spinach circles to cut.” I stopped laughing immediately. “DAMNIT SCHNEIDER!” I yelled. “It took us an HOUR to cut that many!”

He was unapologetic. Said something about how he almost died or some crap. I wasn't moved. We spent the next hour trying to cut new holes out of our already torn up leaves. By the time we finished, most of the other groups had already finished the experiment and gone off to run amok. Schnaider was just about to get up to take the flask over to the vaccum, when I heroically volunteered to take his place and risk my well being at ground zero. “I better take this one, Schnaider,” I said, “I don't want to be here cutting holes out of spinach for the rest of the day.” I grabbed the flask and swaggered over to the vacuum. I attached its rubber mouth to the vaccum, and just as I was about to flip the switch, I thought the following thought: “Dr. Davis hasn't seen this ever happen in all 20 years of his teaching? What are the chances it would happen twice in one day?”

Yeah. Who wants to guess what happened next?



It was Schneider's turn to laugh. I wasn't wearing eye protection ether. The general was PISSED. This was the 8th flask we'd broken up to this point. He told us that we were single highhandedly funding Flasks Inc, and that he would stand for no more tom foolery. If only he knew the truth- that Schneider and I simply were the worst two students that he had ever had in 20 years of teaching. There was no mischeif happening here, no malicious intent. We just were really, really bad at biology. And now, our five spinach leaves were history.

Ahhhh that was a knee slapper. History! I crack myself up.

We had no more leaves, and by this time, the other groups were well on their way to curing cancer. They had thrown their spinach leaves away eons ago. But I was not to be kept down! Oh no! Not this man. I once saw a motivational poster that said “when the going gets tough, the tough get going,” and I was going! I refused to surrender this lab to a few green smears that once were spinach! Cue inner dialogue. “It probably doesn't matter what kind of leaves we cut up,” I thought to myself, “This is a photosynthesis lab, after all.”I nodded to myself in agreement, and then casually walked over to the windowsill, upon which stood several different species of flower. I had never seen any of them before. I stole a few leaves from one plant (which seemed overy leafy), and brought them over to Schnaider. He was ever the observant bastard, and upon seeing them, he spouted “Dr. Davis, aren't these leaves from your plant over there?!” There has never been another moment in my life where I have wanted to kill a man so much.

This was a close second, though.
Dr Davis lost his cool. He yelled at me, told me that we were the worst students he'd ever had- which apparently is no exaggeration- and filled me in on the details. Apparently the plant I had stolen the leaves from was an endangered species that grows only on the Island of Simoa. Taking leaves from it at its infant stage could be deadly. This was the only specimen of its kind in America, and I had just delivered its death sentence. He dismissed us early that day. We never did get to solve that great mystery, about which we all wonder desperately. 

Mommy, how long does it take for photosynthesis to oxygenate a leaf of spinach?
Let's be real. It's every child's first question, isn't it?



A Reply to Common [Catholic] Objections Against the Free Market. 2


    Objection #2
     Without the state helping to redistribute resources, a wealthy class will hold on to the means of production and will keep the poor from being able to climb out of poverty.
    "A society in which the ownership of the means of production is confined to a body of free citizens, not large enough to make up properly a general character of that society, while the rest are dispossessed of the means of production, and are therefore proletarian, we call Capitalist. Note the several points of such a state of affairs. You have private ownership ; but it is not private ownership distributed in many hands and thus familiar as an institution to society as a whole. Again, you have the great majority dispossessed but at the same time citizens, that is, men politically free to act, though economically impotent... It is a necessary inference that there will be under Capitalism a conscious, direct, and planned exploitation of the majority, the free citizens who do not own by the minority who are owners.” (The Servile State by Hillare Belloc)
        Hillare Belloc is basically saying that in a capitalist society, without state intervention, class disparity cannot be solved. The wealthy will hold on to the means of production, and the poor will remain “economically impotent.” GK Chesterton and many other Catholic thinkers have argued this and advocated for the means of production to be distributed more evenly around the economy. Belloc, Chesterton, and all others who think this way are incorrect in their assumption that the rich will always hold capital tight. Yes, wealthy people will seek to do this at times. However, this sort of class warfare sort of argument only works if the means of production are limited. Underlying Belloc's argument is a flawed concept of wealth that smacks of Mercantilism. Capital is as limited as there are problems in the world to be solved – that is to say wealth is unlimited. As long as people want a better life style and have desires for comforts, new experiences, and more effective methods of producing, there will always be more money to be made.
The only real way to limit the hands that wealth belongs to is by state intervention. In the free market, for instance, if a bank makes mal-investments and goes bottom up, it's assets are sold at low prices, and competitors can enter the market more easily. Those that don't have the buying power they would normally need to enter into the competition, now are more able to. However, when there is a state in place that has the power to intervene, those banks/companies that failed to utilize their resources effectively go to that state begging and pleading saying “we are too big to fail!” And then the state uses the money it stole from us via taxation to buoy up these firms. In the free market, no such safety mechanism for the rich would exist. A rich man can fail just as easily and just as spectacularly as a poor man. Only the state provides a method for limiting the distribution of resources. This is what happened in 2008, when republicans and democrats both voted to bail out the banks and car companies. All of those resources should have been sold off to new competing firms (good for poor people) for a fraction of the price.
        The rich, however, are not the only ones who use the state to discourage innovation and limit wealth. The poor of America have learned that they can use the state to punish the success of some by taxing the rich more and by suing those with resources. By definition the state does not support itself. It only relies on what it takes from others. Anyone, then, can lobby the state to steal from one group and give to another. That is what a state does. So when literally everything is an opportunity to sue, the people of a nation live in absolute fear of one another. We get used to it here, but just think of how much the fear of a lawsuit has on American life. The fact that a McDonalds as to put “careful, cup may be hot,” on their cups is a prime example of the poor doing the opposite of what Belloc argues will happen in a free market. The gun of the state is the weapon by which man steals his brother's assets. As Murrey Rothbard puts it, when one uses the state to steal from producers, that act subtracts from production instead of adding to it. “The "political means" siphons production off to a parasitic and destructive individual or group; and this siphoning not only subtracts from the number producing, but also lowers the producer's incentive to produce beyond his own subsistence. In the long run, the robber destroys his own subsistence by dwindling or eliminating the source of his own supply. But not only that; even in the short run, the predator is acting contrary to his own true nature as a man.” As I have already shown in the above paragraph, the free market is perfectly capable of regulating itself. Bad ethics is bad business and is never actually sustainable. Without help from the state, such businessmen as those who caused this past recession always fail, and their resources are divided amongst the less affluent, competitive man. What then does the state do? Only turn man against himself by providing an easy means of piracy.
         So how does the standard of living rise, then, if not by the force of a gun? It rises when Dave the Peasant decides that he is going to save his resources and pool them together, to say, buy a plow and a pair of oxen. When he does this, he no longer needs to dig with a hoe. He gets more work done with the plow than he ever could have with a hoe. Dave's standard of living has just been raised. He now produces way more food, and maybe another man in the community, lets call him Jeff, no longer needs to farm in order for every one to get fed. Jeff figures that the other farmers need plows and that he is just the man to build them. He now builds plows, which makes plows easier to get. Now other farmers can afford them.         You see, a lot more work can get done by a man with a forklift than a man with a horse cart. Of course you had to work 13+ hours a day back in the industrial revolution, everything was still being done by hand! It wasn't government restrictions that changed the situation, it was the desires of generations of men to provide a better life for their families. It takes time for the standard of living in a community to rise up, but there are no shortcuts. It is supreme ingratitude to steal the thanks from these men women and children, from whom we've inherited the standard of living which we now enjoy, and give it to self important politicians. Economic calculation is always open for the poor man. we ought not penalize him for succeeding. Every state law and regulatory burden is an obstacle to the poor man's emancipation. No, Belloc, and the Church, misunderstands economics when they claim that resources will always be distributed only to the rich in a free market system.
        Moreover, it is not possible to force employers to pay employees higher wages by government inflation. Such measures are unsustainable. If you owned a factory in 1920 and the state came and said to you, you must provide your employees an air conditioned working environment, you would have shut down. Well, now this is something that we all take for granted. If the government stopped telling companies to air condition their work places, would all companies immediately stop air conditioning their buildings to save money? No, of course not. Why? Because they are competing for employees. If one company has air conditioning, and another does not, which job is more preferable? A company that does not have an air conditioned work place must pay employees more in order to work there. A man might decide that he wants higher wages more than he wants air conditioning, and that is his business. Far be it from us to tell that man that he must take lower wages and force his employer to air condition.
       No, free association and free exchange of resources is the answer to poverty, not the cause of it.