In 1962, Michael Harrington wrote The Other America: Poverty in the United States. Harrington’s book was a catalyst for President Lyndon B. Johnson’s war on poverty . Harrington explained that in the early 1960s, amid the affluence of post-war America, between 40 million and 50 million citizens of the United States were poor. In the early 1960s, the U.S. had a significant poverty problem.

Over the next five years, Congress passed legislation that provided federal help for education, launched Social Security , Medicare, and Medicaid, expanded housing subsidies, created urban development programs, instituted employment and training programs, and started food stamps. Johnson is the father of welfare. By the end of Johnson’s time in office, U.S. appropriations for health , education, and welfare tripled in real terms. In 1970, federal welfare spending exceeded 15% of the federal budget. Today, spending on welfare programs consumes over 60% of federal spending. In 50 years, welfare spending has increased by 600% in real terms. Welfare spending drives the current deficit crisis.

So what to do about it?

Well, just a few days ago, Princeton sociologist Matthew Desmond launched his latest book, Poverty, by America. Desmond is popular with the far Left because he participated in the now-infamous 1619 Project, which involved numerous historical distortions. He argues that over 30 million Americans live in poverty and that another 30 million live in near poverty. Most provocatively, Desmond says the majority of Americans benefit from poverty and are responsible for poverty through day-to-day actions. He highlights not tipping, for example, and through political choices. According to Desmond, poverty exists because poverty serves the majority of Americans.

Desmond is wrong. Badly wrong.

For a start, Desmond is wrong in his assertion that poverty continues to plague the nation. According to poverty experts professors Bruce D. Meyer and James X. Sullivan, real poverty has largely been eradicated . Based on consumption patterns, real poverty afflicts less than 5% of the population, half the rate asserted by Desmond. The poor in America have air conditioning, televisions, adequate living space, and, most importantly, are not starving. Importantly, the truly poor are most often suffering from mental illness, including addiction.

Put simply, the war on poverty is largely won.

Desmond's ideology is likely guiding his alternate reality. He proposes, for example, that the U.S. adopt the progressive dreams of confiscatory tax rates, massive redistribution, high minimum wages, broad tariff barriers, and powerful labor unions. Desmond wants to create a European social welfare state where statism, not creative dynamism, is the ideal.

Unfortunately, Desmond does not acknowledge that as the power of the state expands, national welfare declines . He does not acknowledge that the U.S. tax system is the most progressive among wealthy nations. He does not acknowledge that high minimum wages kill jobs and prejudice against the least skilled and thus those most needing of a first job. Desmond does not acknowledge that powerful unions are cartels that reduce employment and often productivity. He does not acknowledge that tariffs benefit the few, harm the many , and, over time, reduce productive investment. He does not acknowledge that more welfare breeds a culture of dependency .

So, yes, Desmond is wrong. But why do progressives believe him? Perhaps because, for progressives, loyalty to the cause is more important than the truth. For progressives, power is the goal.

James Rogan is a former U.S. foreign service officer who later worked in finance and law for 30 years. He writes  a daily note  on finance and the economy, politics, sociology, and criminal justice.