Posted on 12/20/2020 5:01:46 AM PST by Kaslin
A wise man once said, “In my youth I traveled much, and I observed in different countries, that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer.” That man was Benjamin Franklin.
He further said, “I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it.” Franklin’s words are as relevant today, as they were in 1766.
A Government that Provides All?
When a government, or particular politicians promise to give everything to everybody, in the long run, they actually help no one. Growing dependent on an all-powerful government leads to socialism, a form of serfdom, and to a predictable decline in the human spirit.
Yes, in every society, some individuals will need help all the way through life. Fortunately, they are few in number. Some individuals will need assistance for a defined period of time. It is not prudent, however, to have such individuals remain in a state of dependency.
Quickly Metastasizing
Dependency is like a cancer. Once it takes hold, it becomes increasingly difficult to shake off. Things are done for you, and handed to you, and soon one loses the ability to take appropriate action. Government checks arrive regularly and, oh my, isn't that convenient? For those who have been dependent for too long on an over-doting government, the ability to fend for oneself, carve out a path, work for a livelihood, and become part of the economics mainstream becomes more and more elusive.
The paradox confronting those who truly believe that carefully designed long-term welfare programs are the hallmarks of a benevolent, compassionate, and socially awoken society is that they invariably diminish the lives of those whom they believe they are benefitting. This has been shown time and time again.
For a government assistance program to be effective, it must be applied correctly, for a limited duration, in coordination with other programs that assist in lifting recipients in a way so as to make them self-sufficient. Any program that lingers beyond a practical amount of time serves as a disincentive for those receiving the benefits to succeed on their own. We've seen this most recently with the lockdown payments. In a few cases, the amount distributed to workers prompted them to not go back to work. They were given too much at a time and found themselves demotivated to once again earn their keep.
To Whom Much is Given
For many years, Tom Tuohey was the director of a charitable organization based in suburban Chicago that raised funds for the disadvantaged. Tom recalls helping to medically outfit a new home for Darrell, a paralyzed African-American in Chicago. The ultra-expensive home was designed to assist him to move and function from room to room as easily as possible.
A problem quickly resulted because Darrell had no incentives associated with the program: He simply was given everything he needed. Although the gift wasn't from the government, the results were much the same. Tom laments that Darrell became less engaged and less inclined to do things on his own. Curiously, he also became less appreciative of the huge gift bestowed upon him.
Tom painfully acknowledges his lack of awareness to consider the importance of human motivation and incentive back then. Everyone, as recipients of charitable funds, goods, or services, benefits best by having a stake in the game: For the continuation of a program benefits, recipients must be responsible for measurable participation, accomplishment, or behaviors.
Tom learned that in many ways, Darrell soon was less well-off than before receiving the medically outfitted home. His weight shot up enormously. His vitality diminished. His enthusiasm for life had visibly plummeted, even dwelling within this carefully crafted home. In all, it was an emotionally draining experience for Tom, who was so personally invested in the success of the program. He vowed to never engage in such a venture again, without ensuring that recipients had responsibilities in association with the assets they had been given.
Dependency Happens
So it is with each of us. We need to recognize that what is given to us, all too often, leads to complacency, apathy, dependency, or all three. As such the notion of taking the reigns of our own fate slips further out of reach.
Necessity is the mother of invention
But welfare in the U.S. does have strings...and they run straight to the Democrat Party. Vote for the Democrats and you’ll get your fix.
Sure it does.
It helps the bureaucracy.
Nuff said.
Welfare should be treated like a loan. It’s supposed to help you get back on your feet. When you do get back on your feet, instead of a tax refund, it goes to pay back your “loan”.
Only people who should continue to get welfare, are ones who are physically or mentally incapable of working.
EBT cards should be programmed just for a limited amount of dry beans and rice. It would fix the obesity epidemic.
So true.
At one time the churches were the source of help for the poor. Now the left is eliminating Christianity and taking the place of the churches and the family.
Parasites eventually kill the host. And the Host is the tax payers.
Maybe we should require implanted birth control, with monthly verification testing, to remain on welfare. For all women of all races in the USA: On the government dole? No more babies.
How about no EBT cards period—just bags of beans and rice, directly handed out.
Imagine if subsistence welfare became truly subsistence:
Three hots and a cot in poverty wards, basic medical, bad teeth pulled, no food cards, no cell phones, no TVs, no smart devices, no pornography, curfew for entry, birth control implants required & monitored, mentally ill go to sanitariums (we’ll need to open/re-open many), tules for banishment, etc.
- one cannot get something for nothing
- one must give in order to get
- there is always a way and something for a person to give
- the law of radiation and attraction determines what and how much one gets
- think positively because like attracts like
Bump 4 l8r
You get the behavior you reward.
See tag line.
LBJ’s Great Society was huge success.
It destroyed the black family structure and made minorities wards of the fedgov and lifetime Dem voters.
The only difficult part for Dems now is acting surprised when they shoot each other up.
Only trouble is, people can easily find unscrupulous doctors who will sign documents falsely claiming that the patient is physically or mentally incapable of working. I've known people who did this. Word gets out, and more and more people "scam the system." There's no shame in this now. People brag about it and teach their friends how to do it. People who really do need help are often denied, treated with suspicion, and/or made to jump through hoops because there is so much cheating.
No. People in need should go to charities, churches, food banks, friends, and family for help.
And no more voting. People on welfare should not be able to vote themselves more welfare, paid for by others.
i agree with that!!
No voting until you pay back the welfare you needed to get through, would be the way I would make it.
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.