I wouldn't be surprised if that's the case, EJ. Sadly in this day and age, the argument is defined by the extremes: Those people on one side that think that even though $5 trillion has been spent in the last 35 years trying to alleviate social inequalities and shown few if any meaningful results, the answer is to blindly throw more money at the problem. They're the ones who'll call you a racist if you state facts that don't support their theories. There are those on the other who feel that the solution is to ignore the problem and let everyone fend for themselves, build more jails, and everything will solve itself. They're the ones who call anyone who considers anyone a communist who agrees with anything a liberal has to say. Neither side has a forking clue, but they manage to control the debate, leaving the majority of people in the middle who try to look at things objectively with essentially no say in the matter.