It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by daddyroo45
To me there is quite a bit of difference between promoting general welfare,and controlling the general welfare. I agree that the term promote the general welfare refers to the populace as a whole.Not just this minority or that minority. It has been a time honored tradition that you gain your work ethic from your parents.
When someone is raised in a situation where support is provided and not earned,what lesson do the children learn? Give up? They learn that staying in the system is the easiest way to get by. In a system that retards the ability for people to gain self respect,and self worth through accomplishment.
Alcholism,drug abuse,and low self esteem are the product. Giving able bodied people everything they need kills the independent spirit,and creates entitlement slaves.
The welfare state provides education, housing, sustenance, healthcare, pensions, unemployment insurance, sick leave or time off due to injury, supplemental income in some cases, and equal wages through price and wage controls. It also provides for public transportation, childcare, social amenities such as public parks and libraries, as well as many other goods and services. Some of these items are paid for via government insurance programs while others are paid for by taxes.
Most advanced nations are not true welfare states, although many provide at least some social services or entitlement programs. These goods and services are generally available only to certain people who meet eligibility requirements. However, those that meet the prerequisites are guaranteed -or entitled to- benefits as a right. This type of system is frequently referred to as a “safety net,” which is designed to help the most vulnerable.
The welfare state is socialist in nature. It redistributes wealth by heavily taxing the middle and upper classes in order to provide goods and services for those seen as underprivileged. However, even countries that don’t typically subscribe to socialism offer at least some form of safety net, most of which continue to expand.
One example is the United States, which according to many European countries, is found lacking when it comes to altruism in government. The truth is that the welfare state on a federal level is the antithesis of personal liberty, at least according to the U.S. Constitution, which enumerates specific powers granted to the federal government. The Tenth Amendment grants all other powers to the states, “or to the people.” This means that individual states should be in charge of their own welfare programs, rather than the central government.
While some nations believe that creating a welfare state is the proper role of any central government, few have managed to create efficient systems. They are unable to provide equitably for all their citizens, often leaving those most in need with the least. Rationing of goods and services also becomes a major problem when too many people depend on the welfare state.
All advanced societies view helping people who literally cannot help themselves as decent, humane, and necessary. Yet, another serious issue with the welfare state philosophy is that many people who are capable of caring for themselves have no motivation to improve their lives when they can depend on the government to provide for them. This often breeds resentment amongst those who do work when they are forced to pay for people who do not, via ever-increasing taxes.