Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There is nothing in the world stopping private citizens from donating to local food banks and helping out those family members, friends, neighbors whom they know need help. People can provide in multitudes of ways that do not require the federal government to steal from the pockets of the productive in efforts to "redistribute" the wealth.
Ya know, this made me think of the bystander effect. We all sit idly by and assume that poor people are being taken care of by the gov't via taxes. We all pay taxes, and we all know welfare is relatively easy to get, so we choose to do nothing ourselves to help those who are in need. The bystander effect basically says that when there is a group of people witnessing something bad happen (someone being poor, in this instance), we assume someone else has already done something to help, therefore, we don't need to offer to help as well.
Liberals like to say there is not enough charity to go around for those in need. Well, perhaps if we eliminated all sources of welfare, there would be, as the bystander effect would be reduced and we would have a little extra money to give.
Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.
stop welfare...make it WORKFARE
but there we go again..using that 4letter word that liberals hate...WORK
What good is it to teach a man to fish {work}, when there are no fishies {jobs} to be had?
Nice idea, but what are they going to do on workfare? Remember, it would be counter productive to have them doing work that would deprive others of their jobs.
I am not disagreeing with you, I would like to see them work too, but just how are we going to do it? .....in a cost effective way?
"No one should suffer because they lack {fill in the blank}" should be prefaced with "No one should be compelled to labor for the benefit of another, so that..." because slavery is not an acceptable solution to the ills of mankind.
I have yet to find a socialist who wasn't generous with other people's money.
Voluntary charity is a blessing.
Compulsory charity is a curse.
What good is it to teach a man to fish {work}, when there are no fishies {jobs} to be had?
... how are we going to do it? .....in a cost effective way?
The easiest way to create jobs is to eliminate the barriers that government has placed, via national socialism. Employers with fixed budgets cannot afford to hire more, nor can customers afford to buy goods and services - all due to the hidden overhead imposed by government.
There is tremendous need, which means there is tremendous demand, but that demand cannot be met, because there is a lack of a medium of exchange to facilitate trade.
America is in the midst of a money drought (or more accurately, a "currency" drought).
Personally, I would like to see "voluntary" sterilization required after child number two. You want to continue getting benefits......the mother and father must agree to sterilization. If you refuse, you lose your benefits......and if you do not provide for your children.....they will be taken away and adopted out. A policy like this would solve the problem.
But, that will never happen, because in this country, people believe procreating is a "God given right" and is sacred and untouchable.
Actually, that IS basically what happens already.
1) Medicaid will pay for sterilization after the third child. In Florida, there were signs all over the place advertising sterilization (and birth control) at the public health department.
2) Children ARE taken away and adopted out if the parents are not caring for them. That's what child services is for, to ensure the well-being of children.
Procreating IS a God-given right but as I have said before, with rights come responsibilities, and if you're not up for the responsibilities, you shouldn't take advantage of the right you've been given.
No functioning brain ~ no baby. If it cannot survive outside of the womb ~ it is not a baby.
Why are conservatives trying to defund Planned Parenthood?
Planned Parenthood provides the means to obtain safe sex.
How rational is THAT?
Liberals push sex education and easy access to contraceptives.....conservatives try to restrict both.
Liberals to not "push" abortion. Liberals push for education, BC and a woman's right to choose.
Defunding Planned Parenhood and children's programs is not the answer.
All of this is completely off topic.
Besides, the brain is already functioning in utero by about 8 weeks. At 24 weeks, and sometimes a little earlier, a baby can be viable outside the womb.
1) Medicaid will pay for sterilization after the third child. In Florida, there were signs all over the place advertising sterilization (and birth control) at the public health department.
2) Children ARE taken away and adopted out if the parents are not caring for them. That's what child services is for, to ensure the well-being of children.
Procreating IS a God-given right but as I have said before, with rights come responsibilities, and if you're not up for the responsibilities, you shouldn't take advantage of the right you've been given.
"He said individuals have a moral responsibility to help the poor."
Why are all these "Christian" individuals complaining about helping the poor then?
Because we can help the poor on our own, not have the gov't take our money and decide who is worthy of it.
Logic is not YOUR friend, apparently, and neither are comprehension skills b/c this has been said time and time again all over these boards, including on this thread.
Ya know, this made me think of the bystander effect. We all sit idly by and assume that poor people are being taken care of by the gov't via taxes. We all pay taxes, and we all know welfare is relatively easy to get, so we choose to do nothing ourselves to help those who are in need. The bystander effect basically says that when there is a group of people witnessing something bad happen (someone being poor, in this instance), we assume someone else has already done something to help, therefore, we don't need to offer to help as well.
Liberals like to say there is not enough charity to go around for those in need. Well, perhaps if we eliminated all sources of welfare, there would be, as the bystander effect would be reduced and we would have a little extra money to give.
So if we eliminated the social safety net, all of a sudden people would voluntarily help people that they normally despise? That is, the poor?
I was doing yard work last week, some guy asked me if I need help, I thought that was nice, so I talked with him, seemed like a nice enough guy, found out he was poor, not working etc. So I offered to give him a ride to Lowes home improvement where they are hiring, or to walmart who is also hiring, or even Wendy's who is also hiring, and I know the managers too.....he looked at me like I had 5 heads and said but if I get a job they will take my welfare away.
this is the mentality of the poor today
give me, give me..I will make more babies..give me more
This is far more common than liberals would like to believe. We hired one lady who actually asked if we could pay her under the table so she could keep her UE. We said no way and she complains every single shift about having to work and how she can't pay her bills.
John Stossel did a piece on freeloaders and the same thing was shown...he offered people work (people standing on the street with a "will work for food" sign) and they turned him down every time. One guy showed up at his house to do yard work, that's it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
