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.
Voluntary charity is a blessing.
Compulsory charity is a curse.
Government "taking" from one to "give" to another, under threat, duress, and/or coercion isn't voluntary charity.
Exactly! Government doesn't have a heart. A person being told they have to take care of others (through compulsory taxation) is not being a generous person. People-in-need need moral support first and foremost, not simply a hand-out from an indifferent bureaucracy. Years ago, all charity was provided privately. The socialists wanted to take power away from churches and charities because they knew they could control the proletariat by doing so.
People ask "why don't you give to charity since you believe in it so much?" Two-thirds of my taxes go toward social welfare programs. So basically 30% of my income. That's more than I would voluntarily gove, yet I have no personal connection or vested interest in those I am supposedly helping. In fact I resent it. How is that good for society?
A large portion of Americans seem to be against social programs even though it may be for the common good. When there is talk of the (on average) much better social programs in many European countries the general response is "well, they have to spend more on taxes". To which I ask.....so? If it meant far better health care, far better maternity leave, etc. isn't that worth it? Do not the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one?
They are only against social programs that benefit other people. When they or their family members need help, somehow they convince themselves that they are deserving of it.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,330 posts, read 54,411,082 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by dashrendar4454
Because many people don't like to pay for the decisions of others
Yet those very same people are often fine with spending MORE! $$$ to support an already bloated DoD budget that's often used for everything but defense.
Hypocrisy arises in this area as those who loves ones are in need of nursing home care will apply for Medicaid to offset the costs. These same people may however may rant and rave against those lower income folks that they perceive as gaming the system. Conservative politicians may rant against the lower-classes being on Medicaid, but just wait if they cut Medicaid nursing home expenditures. You will see the long-.term care lobby and middle-classes, especially those with elderly parents or disabled children, rise in anger.
Your question is a good one. It is more complex to answer if one is being honest with ones' self.
And farmers who hate welfare but love farm supports.
And Disney execs who hate welfare but fire US IT people to hire H1bs
etc
A large portion of Americans seem to be against social programs even though it may be for the common good. When there is talk of the (on average) much better social programs in many European countries the general response is "well, they have to spend more on taxes". To which I ask.....so? If it meant far better health care, far better maternity leave, etc. isn't that worth it? Do not the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one?
Because many Americans believe in the American Dream myth and still fancy themselves cowboys and pioneers of the old West. They can't believe life has changed from 1817 to 2017.
Exactly! Government doesn't have a heart. A person being told they have to take care of others (through compulsory taxation) is not being a generous person. People-in-need need moral support first and foremost, not simply a hand-out from an indifferent bureaucracy. Years ago, all charity was provided privately. The socialists wanted to take power away from churches and charities because they knew they could control the proletariat by doing so.
People ask "why don't you give to charity since you believe in it so much?" Two-thirds of my taxes go toward social welfare programs. So basically 30% of my income. That's more than I would voluntarily gove, yet I have no personal connection or vested interest in those I am supposedly helping. In fact I resent it. How is that good for society?
Its not about having a heart. Its about improving the lives of Americans, thereby improving America itself.
Vast generalizations like this are worthless. I support the idea of programs to help others but you have to take each program alone to decide whether they are good or not. Many times the programs do not do what they say they do.
Take the Homeowners Foreclosure relief program. The idea was a very good one and one that would have been a correct approach to the mess the government and the banks caused and I supported the idea. The problem was it was all a fraud.
That politicians have their own agenda's behind many of these programs is why so many trust none of them. This is not the fault of those who have learned to distrust these programs but rather it is the fault of those of us that support helping others but then refuse to condemn politicians that lie to us.
All of my friends and family have fed, clothed, and housed their families without any help.
I'm willing to help people in need. I'm not willing to help people who suck.
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.
