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.
One of the tenants of the conservative movement seems to be lowering government spending through the limitation of social welfare programs. Understanding that there is often waste and abuse in these programs but also acknowledging that these programs (which run the gamut from Headstart to AFDC to food stamps) have children as a major or even primary beneficiary, is it selfish to want to eliminate these programs as is often espoused on here?
An offshoot to the frequently written argument on CD that people need to "take care of themselves" seems to be "I don't want my money to take care of anyone else." Isn't this selfish? Would this be a better country if we had a more community oriented approach and all took care of eachother?
I agree completely. I think a lot more people on in this country are willing to work to get money, however the free market is dependent on unemployment to keep wages low.
I think at the very least, the conservative extremisms that many people on here seem to support, make us a weaker country.
i don't really believe a true conservative, is basing the movement on selfishness...
when you get comments like you're refering to, "take care of themselves" or I don't want my money to take care of anyone else", those comments stem from seeing people abusing the welfare system...which basically allows people capable of taking care of themselves, not to do so, b/c they in essence don't have to.
the idea is, to truly help people in need, that don't have the capability to help themselves. i think both liberals and conservatives can agree there. how we help those people is where the arguements stem from...
One of the tenants of the conservative movement seems to be lowering government spending through the limitation of social welfare programs. Understanding that there is often waste and abuse in these programs but also acknowledging that these programs (which run the gamut from Headstart to AFDC to food stamps) have children as a major or even primary beneficiary, is it selfish to want to eliminate these programs as is often espoused on here?
An offshoot to the frequently written argument on CD that people need to "take care of themselves" seems to be "I don't want my money to take care of anyone else." Isn't this selfish? Would this be a better country if we had a more community oriented approach and all took care of eachother?
Ooooh you are off-base with your subject title. It seems like being charitable is a bumper sticker for the general liberal population.
"People who reject the idea that "government has a responsibility to reduce income inequality" give an average of 4 times more than people who accept that proposition. Liberal family household's income averages 6 percent higher than conservative families but on average, conservative-headed households give 30 percent more to charity. Conservatives donate more time and give more blood."
There's more here from the study if you care to read it:
But the big predictor for altruistic behavior is religion. The way I see it, conservatives give their own money to charity and libs want the state to do it for you.
And what do you call it when some want to take what does not belong to them, either to keep for themselves or to give to others? The issue for most conservatives is that it is forced and demanded and people take on an attitude of entitlement. No, it is not selfish not to think that others are not ENTITLED to what one owns. If you believe that it is selfish you would give away all of your worldly possessions more than just what you need to live on. Let us know when you do, until then you are equally 'selfish'.
FWIW....conservatives are more generous than liberals when it comes to giving money to charity although liberal households earn more. Conservatives donate more of their time to charity....they even give blood more!! Aren't liberals just being selfish?
Based on the controversial language used to define the line between liberalism and conservatism as "government has a responsibility to reduce income inequality" I'm having some doubt about the quality of these numbers. In addition, since conservatives tend to be members of religious organizations more often than liberals, and fees, dues, and donations paid to these organizations are included in the term "charitable giving" as defined in the study, I'd bet you'd find a different result if religious organizations were excluded from charitable giving numbers and you looked strictly at secular charities...
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,358,694 times
Reputation: 40731
Quote:
Originally Posted by NCyank
And what do you call it when some want to take what does not belong to them, either to keep for themselves or to give to others? The issue for most conservatives is that it is forced and demanded and people take on an attitude of entitlement. No, it is not selfish not to think that others are not ENTITLED to what one owns. If you believe that it is selfish you would give away all of your worldly possessions more than just what you need to live on.
What do you call it when it's taken from you and spent on things like missiles never used? Is it not just paying the price to live in a society that can defend itself? If that's OK what's so horrible about also trying to make that society more liveable with things like infrastructure, affordable healthcare, education, etc?
Social programs (welfare, foodstamps, housing, medical) are supposed to be a safety net to help people temporarily until they get on their feet or back on their feet.
When it becomes a lifestyle and the demands from those programs become greater than just food, clothing, shelter, healthcare (cellphones for example) then the programs have gone amuck.
There's also many restrictions within those programs to keep those people living like that as the minute they earn a bit more than the limit but really not enough to make it on their own they are thrown off the programs.
The programs need to get back to their roots...a temporary helping hand, not a lifelong way of life you hand to your children.
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.
