Before There Was Welfare There Was Charity

reply to post by LDragonFire


Haven't seen any solutions in this thread from the other side of the argument except take more from paul to fund their social programs, which is the only thing that should be allowed to be funded.

I have offered a solution that has fell on deaf ears first off a job, second off shrink the size and power of government and get them off the American's back, but that just doesn't seem to work for them.

reply to post by neo96


What jobs? wal mart jobs? mcDonald jobs? many full time jobs in America don't pay a livable wage and people who hold them must also use and qualify for food stamps?

But its still the poors fault, right?

reply to post by LDragonFire


Who is hating on the poor?

IF anyone has read anything i have written on here I have been constantly hating on Government, which is what i always do.

Government created the welfare complex by various means of regulations,idiotic trade agreements,creating fiat currency via the federal reserve, and a whole list of other failed policies.

And people need to take a step back my first job was at $3,25 an hour a far cry to what it is now and what people are making isn't good enough?

That is insane those who came before us made even less, but still managed to live better, and if a person were to actually think about why that was. the value of the dollar held more, and government policies were not as stupid as they are now.

Everything that has been done for the "good of the people" have created the welfare complex and what is the solution?

More government that is insane, and a free market is a free market and someone flipping burgers does not deserve to be paid $20 and hour for doing so, because why?

That takes jobs away from other people who end up where?

On welfare and that person flipping burgers at Mcdonald's is making more than the average social security check and that welfare check.

reply to post by LDragonFire

You call people that receive food stamps plunderers?? You call the poorest in the country plunderers?

You ask this question in a thread that is undeniably, irrefutably, unarguably about charity versus "welfare" - which is accurately called socialists program - as if you're someone's six year old son.

You use this tactic, because it is all you have in your arsenal. You do not have any reasonable argument as to specifically why "welfare programs" work better than charity, you just insist that they do, and whenever I offer up evidence that "welfare programs" are not working as well as members in this thread are claiming it does, this gets ignored, and no intelligent discussion will be had of that evidence, and instead the "welfare" socialist program advocates will scream that those who are advocating private charity as the best solution to this nations welfare are called cruel, and heartless for this stance.

The declaration by you socialists is that private charity does not contribute to the welfare of a nation and that only government can do it, and you smugly pat yourselves on the back for believing you are so just and moral for declaring your social engineering programs work far better than free markets do, and this is the underlying form of this debate right here; charity versus government programs, free markets versus socialism. You make your emotional arguments and pretend because it is so emotional that this must make your beliefs right, because they feel so right and when those who disagree with you make their arguments you reject them without any effort at all to analyze that argument, you know it is wrong because it feels so wrong to you. So you, in unthinking outrage, ask if I think those who get food stamps are plunderers.

It is a given that I do not think this. I did not make a thread that was just about ending these socialist programs of government, I made a thread that before these socialist programs were in place there was a free market system of private charities. I have made the argument this system worked better than the socialist system in place, but you socialists ignore this and get all emotional and demand that because I am saying the private charity can do the job better than government of contributing to the national welfare by helping the poor. You pout and stomp and steam as if you're someone's six year old son and you scream:

I know Chrysler motor company has been bailed out multiple times by our government, I know GE doesn't pay taxes and our government Subsidies the oil and natural gas industry yet you wanna focus on the poorest people in the country....

You make this argument ignorantly believing that this some how shows how your government socialist programs work better than private charity. You scream with outrage that corporations are receiving government subsidies which, let's face it, is the equivalency of corporate "welfare", but ask us who are arguing in defense of a free market to simply just accept that we are wrong and you are right, because...well look! Look at all those corporations getting government money! See? This is why government has to give money to the poor because they give it to the rich! When the free market advocates try to explain to you that under free market conditions corporations could not receive government money, you get angry and think free market advocates are mean because if we cut out "welfare" for the rich, who will give "welfare" to the poor?

I am arguing that charity is better than your government "welfare" socialist programs because charity doesn't take its donations and give it to the rich. I am not talking about the legal fiction charities so heavily regulated by government today, I am talking about private charity as it was before the rise of the welfare state. I provided links to follow articles that speak directly to these brotherhoods, and charities that existed where communities looked after each other, but this has been a small part of the argument in this thread. No real discussion can be had on any suggestions that prior to the rise of the welfare state this nations welfare was far better off than it is today. Instead, you will throw your emotional outburst as if you are someone's six year old son.

Originally posted by neo96


That is insane those who came before us made even less, but still managed to live better, and if a person were to actually think about why that was. the value of the dollar held more, and government policies were not as stupid as they are now.

Can you show evidence or proof that the poor in the past had it better than now??

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux

Plunder is plunder, and among the plunderers it is always the same, they refuse to even entertain the idea that plunder is wrong, instead offering up negotiations like: "if the point of this thread is were broke and can't afford welfare I choose to save money by stopping all foreign aid, both economic and military for foreign countries".

The real plunder of america is that undeserving corps are getting bailed out from tax payer money, then the ceos' offshore the plunder to asia and keep the rest for bonuses. Currently at least 9 trillion is unaccounted for by the Federal Reserve and they don't really need to disclose anything cause apparently(major sarcasm folks) they are above the government in every possible way.

Yet you and all the other conservatives at best downplay all this or at worst completely ignore all of it. Many people are trying to make up excuses "my money is my money" and some are even threatening to use violence by gun against the government cause the government and people want them to contribute their fair share. The same people then want a 3 million strong army and tons of extra pork barrel spending eventhough the government funds keep drying up.

The hell with welfare. Rich people do NOT want to pay anymore and what little money is left over should go to the military to help finance more zionist colonisation schemes and perhaps even provoke world war 3 somehow.

I could care less about all the menckens and von misses. They were idiots of the lowest degree so stop using them as viable sources. I might as well use mickey mouse to convince you socialism is better than capitalism but you would not listen to me anyway.

reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux


Your thread claims that charity is better than welfare yet you provide a ton of opinion but no evidence. Evidence has been shown in this thread of corruption in charities. We all know charities existed before welfare, yet the people and government decided that it wasn't enough.

Its also common knowledge there are not enough jobs for everyone and that many of the jobs that are available require welfare to survive.

Do tell me your solution to this, or are you in favor of other extreme measure to limit the poor or peasant population?

reply to post by EarthCitizen07


You just simply refuse to listen to us. You are so blinded by your rage, so deaf by your ignorance that you cannot hear us insisting that the "income" tax has go, while your screaming "The real plunder of america is that undeserving corps are getting bailed out from tax payer money, then the ceos' offshore the plunder to asia and keep the rest for bonuses. Currently at least 9 trillion is unaccounted for by the Federal Reserve and they don't really need to disclose anything cause apparently(major sarcasm folks) they are above the government in every possible way. "

You apparently think that you can just ignore that I had just said, that under a free market those "undeserving" clowns wouldn't be getting any government assistance and no one else would either. You keep screaming in outrage that the rich are getting money from government but when I call that plunder you then turn around and scream that I am calling people using food stamps plunderers.

It would be funny if it weren't so tragic. The past two posts you've made have been stronger arguments as to why the socialist programs have to be ended that many of us have made in a while. Everything you are screaming about with obvious outrage is precisely why the welfare state has to come to an end.

reply to post by LDragonFire

What jobs? wal mart jobs? mcDonald jobs? many full time jobs in America don't pay a livable wage and people who hold them must also use and qualify for food stamps?

But its still the poors fault, right?

One of the big problems is that people feel they are owed a better life than the one they can provide for themselves. America doesn’t owe you anything and neither do your neighbors!

Stop buying into this “living wage” BS and make ends meet!! Find a way!! Be resourceful!! Get a roommate, work two jobs, make sacrifices, and work your way up in life like most other people you would consider “successful” have done!

Originally posted by LDragonFire
reply to post by neo96

 

What jobs? wal mart jobs? mcDonald jobs? many full time jobs in America don't pay a livable wage and people who hold them must also use and qualify for food stamps?

But its still the poors fault, right?

Those jobs exist for americans? Are you sure about that? The illegal mexicans have monopolised that sector a long time ago buddy. The only job available for americans is picking their nose, eating twice a day from welfare stamps, stealing their neighbors welfare checks, and throwing an extra tire on that "yes we can" fire promised by the kenyan obummer.

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by LDragonFire

 

What jobs? wal mart jobs? mcDonald jobs? many full time jobs in America don't pay a livable wage and people who hold them must also use and qualify for food stamps?

But its still the poors fault, right?

One of the big problems is that people feel they are owed a better life than the one they can provide for themselves. America doesn’t owe you anything and neither do your neighbors!

Stop buying into this “living wage” BS and make ends meet!! Find a way!! Be resourceful!! Get a roommate, work two jobs, make sacrifices, and work your way up in life like most other people you would consider “successful” have done!

Provide a level playing field, quit stacking the deck in the rich and wealthy s favor!!! Break up current monopolies, get corporations out of the federal government. Bring back a real free open market.

reply to post by LDragonFire

Can you show evidence or proof that the poor in the past had it better than now??

When i first got my license gas was .89 cents a gallon and my first job the average check was $150 during that time period that is now worth $278 bucks by inflation.

Prices were way cheaper.

Proof not really going to bother because nothing i come up with will be good enough,.

reply to post by neo96


I understand that in 1920 you could by a whole suit, belt, shoes, tie shirt pants and coat for a $20 dollar bill, and now you can barely buy a belt with the same $20, but I don't see what this has to do with the welfare debate here??

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
reply to post by EarthCitizen07

 

You just simply refuse to listen to us. You are so blinded by your rage, so deaf by your ignorance that you cannot hear us insisting that the "income" tax has go, while your screaming "The real plunder of america is that undeserving corps are getting bailed out from tax payer money, then the ceos' offshore the plunder to asia and keep the rest for bonuses. Currently at least 9 trillion is unaccounted for by the Federal Reserve and they don't really need to disclose anything cause apparently(major sarcasm folks) they are above the government in every possible way. "

If the income tax goes then who will fund neo's military? If the income tax goes then who will fund the jobless americans? Just because the vast majority of money is going to the wrong people does not negate the need for income tax, and especially does not negate the need for redistribution. Too much money has triclked up and it is high time it starts coming down.

You apparently think that you can just ignore that I had just said, that under a free market those "undeserving" clowns wouldn't be getting any government assistance and no one else would either. You keep screaming in outrage that the rich are getting money from government but when I call that plunder you then turn around and scream that I am calling people using food stamps plunderers.

Good lord....I did NOT start some silly thread demonising ALL the welfare recipients downplaying socialism for the rich and capitalism for the poor. Welfare is absolutely necessary even in the best of conditions, nevermind in these terminally sick conditions. Two wrongs do not make a right...have you not learned this yet?

It would be funny if it weren't so tragic. The past two posts you've made have been stronger arguments as to why the socialist programs have to be ended that many of us have made in a while. Everything you are screaming about with obvious outrage is precisely why the welfare state has to come to an end.

edit on 29-5-2012 by Jean Paul Zodeaux because: (no reason given)

I am not screaming buddy and hopefully I will never scream because I don't want to get banned from the site.

A welfare state within a capitalist system does NOT socialism make. It simply makes for capitalism with a welfare state. True socialism is when the workers own the means of production either completly or partially.

Read some marxist literature before you accuse me of silly things. You are the ignorant hypocrite!

reply to post by LDragonFire


It has everything to do with the welfare debate for the simple fact resources that are brought in to the country create jobs, and the products made from create jobs, and when they are sold over seas, they create jobs.

The value of the dollar means when it has less value they can't buy as much and the difference is made up by job loss.

Another element to that equation is the progression of technology as technology progresses means less people working, then figure in the population increases every year, which means more people better technology less jobs available for work.

When inflation occurs it takes more(dollars) to buy anything.

reply to post by LDragonFire

Provide a level playing field, quit stacking the deck in the rich and wealthy s favor!!! Break up current monopolies, get corporations out of the federal government. Bring back a real free open market.

I didn’t vote for Obama!!

Don’t blame me for your problems. I am managing to survive in the same conditions you are crying about without any assistance so what’s your major malfunction?

I agree with you on these points. The difference is that I won’t ask the government to take money from my neighbors and give it to me! I believe in EARNING a living. The system IS jacked up but don’t punish the people who are going to dig us out of this mess!!




I stole your pic, Neo!

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by LDragonFire

 

Provide a level playing field, quit stacking the deck in the rich and wealthy s favor!!! Break up current monopolies, get corporations out of the federal government. Bring back a real free open market.

I didn’t vote for Obama!!

Don’t blame me for your problems. I am managing to survive in the same conditions you are crying about without any assistance so what’s your major malfunction?

At least he is trying a little bit, which is MORE than what bush and cheney tried!

I think both capital hill and the white house should spend more time playing golf and hosting parties than thinking, because they have a low iq and create more problems than what they attempt to fix.

Originally posted by neo96
Another element to that equation is the progression of technology as technology progresses means less people working, then figure in the population increases every year, which means more people better technology less jobs available for work.

You have just made the biggest argument for why welfare is needed.

from the OP:

These laws made a distinction between those who were unable to work due to their age or physical health and those who were able-bodied but unemployed. The former group was assisted with cash or alternative forms of help from the government. The latter group was given public service employment in workhouses.

So what happens when there is no public work to be done? The answer is welfare. Old world charity just couldn't cut it so something else replaced it.

You think going back would be better but you didn't live in those times so you're really not in a position to say if it was better or not. You are just going off of your romantic ideal of what it was like. Funny thing is that old timers are always saying how much easier the younger generations have it. I think I'll take their version since they actually lived it.

reply to post by EarthCitizen07

At lest he is trying a little bit, which is MORE than what bush and cheney tried!

The economy was much better before Obama showed up. But you’re partially correct; Obama has GIVEN more than Bush.

Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.

I think both capital hill and the white house should spend more time playing golf and hosting parties then thinking, because obviously they have a very low iq and usually create many more problems than what they attempt to fix.

You may be onto something here!

reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux


Can you feel the wind as everything you say zooms over their collective heads?

They will keep stomping their feet and keep sticking their fingers in their ears because that is how they want it....they want the government nanny state, so they will not hear anything any of us say...just like a six year old.