Posted on 07/11/2012 1:20:10 PM PDT by DannyTN
...The chart below compares average social spending with adjusted per capita GDP growth since 2000. ...
(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...
True.
AWESOME!! LOL
Actually what I did, was to use an extreme example to show you that not everything and everybody you are accusing of covetiousness is truly guilty of covetiousness.
And while I agree that you're statistics are indeed scary. The fact is that those statistics starting in 2008 have become suddenly much worse. And they've done so because our economic house is not in order.
We've not pursued an energy policy that would leave us independent and not subject to an oil price shock. We knew the dangers of that since the early 70's but we sat on our hands.
We've also pursued stupid trade policies that have allowed communist countries like China to purchase our manufacturing capability and drive up our unemployment.
It's not the safety net's fault, nor is it mostly people becoming dependent on the safety net and refusing to leave it that is the cause of those scary statistics. It's that we put ourselves in a position to have a very weak economy that was then tanked by another oil price shock. So surprise, when you do that safety net usage increases. And we better fix the economic house before the safety nets break us. (Some dependency does occur and we need to fix that.)
An earlier poster alluded to putting buckets under the leaks but not fixing the roof. We need to do both. Fix the economy and keep people from starving in the meantime.
No you don't. But, like it or not, we in America find ourselves in the position of having the power of Caesar's sword. We are in the position of the King or the Ruler. "We the People" are the rulers of this great land.
With that comes all the responsibility of rulership. And our reign as rulers will live or die based in part on how we treat the poor and needy as rulers.
If we shirk our responsibility and say charity has no place in government and trod down the poor all the while claiming as an excuse that Christian individuals also have that responsibility, then I expect that our reign will come to an end.
And once again, we don't need to be stupid about it. We don't need to allow fraud or encourage fraud. We don't need to encourage dependency. We can't give more than we can afford. And we need to maintain a strong economy in order to help others.
Besides, Social Security and Medicare and most unemployment is not truly charity, but rather poorly managed government insurance programs for which people paid insurance premiums. Medicaid, food stamps, and probably a myriad of smaller programs are charity.
Thanks for your great comments. I generally agree.
You are insanely stuck on the false belief that government programs are a net positive. These programs are NOT charity at all -- they are out and out welfare handouts.
I personally know of a number of people who are scamming the Food Stamp and WIC programs. They have relatives inside the system that tell them how to do it to get the benefits. I am sure this is repeated over and over throughout the government These are people making good money.
The vast majority of the money goes to people that are in no way suffering as they did, say in the depression.
Charity at it's root is a voluntary giving of one's time or money to help others truly in need.
Food Stamps, Medicaid, etc were constructed for two reasons -- to increase the Democratic voter base and increase the power of the State.
Any rational person who cherishes I Constitution should be appalled at any program at the Federal level dispensing so called private charity It goes against everything our Founders believed in.
So you've reported these people right? Or are your morals such that you can stand down while people rob the system while you decry the fact that any of the poor are getting help?
Have you ever read through the acts of the first 4 to 5 congresses? They gave food to the Indians. They voted for disaster relief. They gave land away like crazy. They authorized help for people who had suffered damage from Indians. They provided funds for many windows, orphans, invalids usually those that were linked to the revolutionary war. But often by specific name. Even setting up an education fund for the son of a slain General.
What's more, There's even a record of them mandating health care and mandating purchases. This one is a few years further down the road in 1790, but 14 of the 20 constitution framers still in congress voted for it and none objected on constitutional grounds.
Early Congressional mandates for healthcare and gun purchases
I don't like the mandates and was hoping they would be ruled unconstitutional, but to imply the framers weren't charitable ignores history.
Yes, we called and placed an anonymous complaint well over a year ago. Nothing happened as of yet.
Or are your morals such that you can stand down while people rob the system while you decry the fact that any of the poor are getting help?
You speak with the heart of someone who belongs at the DUmp. You will NEVER understand that these programs are NOT setup to help the poor. They are setup to increase the power of the State and make people beholden and dependent on the State.
As I said, the vast majority of the money dispensed by the programs are an absolute waste of hard-earned taxpayer money. These programs are NOT designed to be efficient of careful with our money.
Just think if more money was left in the private hands, how much more people would have to give to those truly in need. Then again, you seem to be of the mindset that activist government at the Federal level is moral and helpful to the needy.
Good for you!
You will NEVER understand that these programs are NOT setup to help the poor. They are setup to increase the power of the State and make people beholden and dependent on the State.
I think you are way too cynical. These programs were set up to help the poor, not increase the power of the state. Yes, they are sometimes abused, and some people including program directors need to go to prison for turning a blind eye to fraud. There needs to be better audits, independent audits, published of each of these programs to ensure proper controls and fraud prevention.
As I've said repeatedly, we don't need to be stupid about how we help the poor. But I do think we have an obligation to help.
People asking for help defraud churches and individuals too! Churches have had to band together to help identify and stop some of that abuse. What if they all just threw up their hands and said, we can't help because some people abuse it?
Abuse is a failure to manage the program properly, it's not an excuse to shirk duties.
OMG, linking from the far leftist site, PolitFact. I read through some of the links and the reasoning applied by the author is typical of a far-left Statist. To compare acts that involve those in the employ of the government or contracted to the government to today's health care mandate compelling private citizens purchase health care is the height of leftist brainwashing.
You have truly revealed yourself to be a DUmp comrade. You are no friend of Liberty nor of our Constitution.
What is welfare today, what is Obamacare today is nothing at all what the intent of what was described in some of your links.
The arrogance of the author of that piece should be an insult to anyone who cherishes Liberty and the believe in the individual.
Anyone with half-a-brain knows that PolitiFact is nothing but a far-left outfit whose only purpose is to attack Conservative beliefs. Thanks so much for revealing yourself :) It made my day to know that you worship at the Alter of State Power -- now I understand why you post what you do.
I stand with the Founders in believing that government is a necessary EVIL.
I am not cynical. I just try to look at reality. I have studied the works of Friedman, Ludwig von Mises, Hayek and others. They provide reasoning and facts to show that government is good at only a very few things. Charity is not one of them. There needs to be better audits, independent audits, published of each of these programs to ensure proper controls and fraud prevention.
Again, it sounds good but you do realize that the worse aspect of these programs is not the fraud. It's the fact that it purposely ensnares and dehumanizes millions of able bodied citizens. These government programs destroy the will to work for millions, it destroys the humanity for millions, it robs hard-working Americans of the fruits of their labor. Is that not evil?
As I've said repeatedly, we don't need to be stupid about how we help the poor. But I do think we have an obligation to help.
agreed. I believe ONLY private charity is true charity. People asking for help defraud churches and individuals too! Churches have had to band together to help identify and stop some of that abuse. What if they all just threw up their hands and said, we can't help because some people abuse it?
Huh? Fraud exists in all institutions, private or public. I can guarantee that the fraud in private charities will NEVER approach the fraud of government systems.
The main point about private charities is that they would NEVER dispense help to people who don't need it. They would be very careful with the money.
They would never KNOWINGLY dispense help to people who don't need it. But neither should government if it's set up right.
This is an 8 year old's excuse. "I can't wash dishes because I don't get them clean." BS. Government can absolutely do this well if it is set up right. Measure the effectiveness and independently audit and change management unless and until it gets better.
If it's set up right, it shouldn't do that.
And again, we aren't talking about the government insurance programs like SSA, Medicare, or Unemployment where people paid premiums right?
We're talking now about just the true welfare programs such as Food Stamps and Medicaid. Where dependencies occur, we need to look at that and fix it. I don't believe that "we can't". That we can't is not an acceptable excuse to kill it.
It's hard to make a case that people have become emotionally dependent on food stamps when unemployment is 25%. Some people are going to be less employable than others and will be on the side lines until employment drops to 5%.
Shirking responsibilities is not conservative. I'm for lean accountable government, but I'm not for shirking.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.