I Am My Brother's Keeper

What defines America is the Constitution and the ability of its people to continue on the legacy of a Constitutional Republic defined by the Constitution.

 

Ugh. As if it needs to be made a law until you observe it.

We have a right to a standard of living as Americans. And this right includes people not dying on the street from hunger. Sorry- but it's an ethical right all Americans deserve. One party supports people dying on the street from hunger in America and the other supports the poorest of us all.

I guess to you it's a political agenda but to me it is an imperative humans should be allowed to inherently have. And "don't worry- it will take care of itself" is not good enough...

It is up to you to decide. But realize, you're more than XYZ123 on an anonymous site... you are a person with an opinion.

 

You want to be your brother's keeper or you are? This says nothing about anyone but yourself.

 

There is you and there is me. There is no we. Stop roping other people into your collective.

 

^^huh?

No, you have a right to yourself, your body, and inalienable freedoms, but not to a standard of living. You have the right to work for that and learn the joy of creating something from your own two hands and abilities until the government comes and steals close to 40% of it.

If people had more money in their paychecks they would care for their neighbors again. That's hard to do when the government steals most of your money between federal and state tax. People helping other people out of the goodness of their hearts inspires community. What you want is some sterile, inefficient handout like a bird feeder.

No, not at all. I don't like the Republicans but they don't want people dying in the streets, nor do the Democrats do the poor any favors. They've crippled them and shoved them aside into project housing ghettos where good people live in fear and fall to hopelessness and cultural poverty.

Humans are allowed to inherently have. They are not allowed to inherently have what belongs to others, people who worked for the money they have and could use that money for their own families.

There are not enough rich in the US to redistribute the wealth, so you are taking from the middle class to feed the lower classes when you ought to be empowering the lower classes with individual attention and community support.

I'm a person who would like to see the poor fed, but I would like to see them fed by local organizations that can offer them individual attention.

 

Yes...I agree. The corporate rich would never be wasteful nor engage in fraud, and certainly couldn't be blamed for being anybody's brother.

 

You folks just don't get it. The point is to have a standard of living in America that's higher than in other nations- it's as simple as that. Welfare is meant to raise us all up a notch so no one dies from the cold or an empty belly and it's as simple as that. Now compare what we spend on welfare to what we spend on the military... it's pennies on the dollar by comparison, and it's just that simple.

 

I get it completely.

Defending the country (preferably as far from here as possible is a legitimate function of government.

Appeasing moochers is not and never was a legitimate function of government.

BTW, according to http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/
Military spending is only 28% more on defense than welfare. We spend about as much on our failing educational system as on defense.

You don't get to make up the numbers, sport.

 

Good Economic Policies, Freedom, Action and Technology is what brings people out of the gutter... Not Taxation that transitions over to that of the Welfare State. If you're so willingly to go with this idea then you send your entire paycheck or give yourself over to the Government to do as it pleases with you but, leave us out of your "grand" plans. I'm going to help my family, friends and those who I deem need help.

 

I hope you all continue to do well in this failing economy lest you fall and have to be picked up by the welfare system. And I can't even imagine what world you think we're in where we don't need one.

 

I'm a Java Programmer... Something that actually requires real work, thought and ability to become. The only time I'll find myself needing welfare is when I have no hands and feet.

 

A welfare system was a "nice to have" back in the 50s and 60s when America's economy was dominant and costs could be passed on. Today, America has to compete like everyone else, costs cannot be passed along, so welfare is just a boat anchor around our workers' necks.

 

You seem to be purposely misunderstanding me. I am NOT saying that a welfare system may not be needed. I am saying that if you feel you need such a system, you need to establish it through your state government. The federal government is not authorized to undertake such action.

 

"General welfare" is in the preamble which is not considered enforceable.

Welfare is not one of the enumerated powers given to the federal government.

 

The weak and feeble deserve no refuge.

Nothing is given. Only earned.

 

I don't disagree that the federal government has the power to tax. How else would it provide for a navy, build post roads, etc?

 

We should all look out for our neighbors, but most elected officials don't react that way. Once they get in office, its all about what they can get for themselves and not how they can help the people who elected them. We should all have the same health care and benefits that our congressmen have. I think average Americans do a good job about stepping up to the plate to help their neighbors. Maybe someday Washington will do the same.

 

So much nonsense so little time. If one examines carefully the story of the Sheep and the goats in Matthew 23 one discovers that it establishes a personal reponsibility for charity.

It says you saw me Hungry and you gave me something to eat. It does not say you saw me hungry and made sure frank fed me.

It says you saw me thirsty and you clothed me. It does not say you saw me naked and made sure jane gave me something to wear.

 

Here is the way I see it. if a person is drowning I have an obligation to throw them a life preserver. If they don't grab it and they die am I at fault. I want to help all of those who can't help them selves but those that won't even grab the life preserver get what they get.

 

Why would you assume that giving money to the government would cure the ills of the poor? Government people are at least as corrupt as business owners. But the free market is self-correcting, the government is not.

 

I get along with people everyday. We happily trade goods and services in mutually beneficial transactions. I am not sure forcing someone against their will to give me something as some sort of wealth osmosis is a goods means to pursue a peaceful co-existence. There is already a system that works, nature.

 

You don't get it. The Welfare state is effectively lowering that standard of living. You can't have prosperity by destroying the cause of it.

 

The welfare state is not caused by poor people, it is caused by unregulated and unchecked Capitalism. You are blind. The very engine of Capitalism which you support is the very cause of the current conditions which you despise.

 

I think we should get the state out of the charity business because its doing such a bad job of it and screwing people up in the process.

Before we had a big government, we had the churches and charities to assist the poor and those who were down on their luck. We should simply go back to that, because it worked.