We must encourage the poor to work.

[MorningGlory]

the government is a giant beast and it isn't going away anytime fast. There is zero reason why we shouldn't use it to the best of our ability when it is beneficial. If this means that giving to a particular program helps the poor and sick better than I could do on my own, then I will stand behind it.

If I had the power, I would gradually dismantle all of the things socialists have done over the years until we were living in a society that looked more like America in the 1920s than today. I wouldn't end all welfare programs overnight, because people are too dependent on them, but would gradually move away from them by working to help lift those in poverty out of their condition. I think we are handling things wrong. The government is giving out checks for no work, and when that is not enough, their solution is to continue spending more.

1920's huh? Take a look around .... Banks completely out of control and as corrupt as they were prior to being bailed out... the treasury flooding the markets with too much money; the stock market fluctuating wildly for months - food kitchens feeding people who have never asked for help; more foreclosures in the the country than ever in history (including the Great Depression)... job lines for unemployment or to apply for a job. "Camp Grounds" with thousands of homeless families in some of the largest cities in our country; Recently, I saw 579 applications for an entry level position in finance... the college applicants looked just like the people with less education. The housing market in our area is showing some promise - in part that is due to the low home sales prices and foreclosures... At this point .... it looks uncomfortably like the 1920's ... just without the cute clothes.

Good points, sister. None of us were around in the 1920's of course, we have to rely on history books to tell us how it was (unless we have great grandparents who were around then) but I do see some parallels in today's world. I just pray things don't go as far as they did then

[MorningGlory]

the government is a giant beast and it isn't going away anytime fast. There is zero reason why we shouldn't use it to the best of our ability when it is beneficial. If this means that giving to a particular program helps the poor and sick better than I could do on my own, then I will stand behind it.

If I had the power, I would gradually dismantle all of the things socialists have done over the years until we were living in a society that looked more like America in the 1920s than today. I wouldn't end all welfare programs overnight, because people are too dependent on them, but would gradually move away from them by working to help lift those in poverty out of their condition. I think we are handling things wrong. The government is giving out checks for no work, and when that is not enough, their solution is to continue spending more.

1920's huh? Take a look around .... Banks completely out of control and as corrupt as they were prior to being bailed out... the treasury flooding the markets with too much money; the stock market fluctuating wildly for months - food kitchens feeding people who have never asked for help; more foreclosures in the the country than ever in history (including the Great Depression)... job lines for unemployment or to apply for a job. "Camp Grounds" with thousands of homeless families in some of the largest cities in our country; Recently, I saw 579 applications for an entry level position in finance... the college applicants looked just like the people with less education. The housing market in our area is showing some promise - in part that is due to the low home sales prices and foreclosures... At this point .... it looks uncomfortably like the 1920's ... just without the cute clothes.

Good points, sister. None of us were around in the 1920's of course, we have to rely on history books to tell us how it was (unless we have great grandparents who were around then) but I do see some parallels in today's world. I just pray things don't go as far as they did then

The 20s were a time of great prosperity, so much so they were known as the "roaring 20s." We prospered under the leadership of John Calvin Cooledge. What led to the crash were the policies of a progressive Republican, Herbert Hoover, and what made things worse were the policies of his successor, Franklin D. Roosevelt. What should have been a stock market correction turned into a depression. I stand by what I said. If I had it in my power to do so, I would return to the policies that existed in the 20s under Cooledge.

Butero, you are SO different!

[~candice~]

Nice in theory Butero, but the ideal conditions you describe don't exist right now. We must use what we have. If it suits me to use the government, then I will. I will not hold back giving donations to the government for those who are needy because they also have other policies I disagree with. At some stage we just have to be realistic and do what we can when we can and pray that the Lord will change things or take us home.

[Believer1997]

the government is a giant beast and it isn't going away anytime fast. There is zero reason why we shouldn't use it to the best of our ability when it is beneficial. If this means that giving to a particular program helps the poor and sick better than I could do on my own, then I will stand behind it.

If I had the power, I would gradually dismantle all of the things socialists have done over the years until we were living in a society that looked more like America in the 1920s than today. I wouldn't end all welfare programs overnight, because people are too dependent on them, but would gradually move away from them by working to help lift those in poverty out of their condition. I think we are handling things wrong. The government is giving out checks for no work, and when that is not enough, their solution is to continue spending more.

1920's huh? Take a look around .... Banks completely out of control and as corrupt as they were prior to being bailed out... the treasury flooding the markets with too much money; the stock market fluctuating wildly for months - food kitchens feeding people who have never asked for help; more foreclosures in the the country than ever in history (including the Great Depression)... job lines for unemployment or to apply for a job. "Camp Grounds" with thousands of homeless families in some of the largest cities in our country; Recently, I saw 579 applications for an entry level position in finance... the college applicants looked just like the people with less education. The housing market in our area is showing some promise - in part that is due to the low home sales prices and foreclosures... At this point .... it looks uncomfortably like the 1920's ... just without the cute clothes.

Good points, sister. None of us were around in the 1920's of course, we have to rely on history books to tell us how it was (unless we have great grandparents who were around then) but I do see some parallels in today's world. I just pray things don't go as far as they did then

The 20s were a time of great prosperity, so much so they were known as the "roaring 20s." We prospered under the leadership of John Calvin Cooledge. What led to the crash were the policies of a progressive Republican, Herbert Hoover, and what made things worse were the policies of his successor, Franklin D. Roosevelt. What should have been a stock market correction turned into a depression. I stand by what I said. If I had it in my power to do so, I would return to the policies that existed in the 20s under Cooledge.

Butero, you are SO different!

The "Roaring" Twenties didn't roar as much in the heartland of our nation and among the people who were already poor and struggling. The only thing many of these ordinary country people had going for them was being able to raise enough food to feed themselves. For the speculators, bankers and brokers - the champagne flowed and everything was just peachy .... that kind of living eventually has to come to an end..... there were consequences that helped to contribute to the meltdown then as now.

[MorningGlory]

Nice in theory Butero, but the ideal conditions you describe don't exist right now. We must use what we have. If it suits me to use the government, then I will. I will not hold back giving donations to the government for those who are needy because they also have other policies I disagree with. At some stage we just have to be realistic and do what we can when we can and pray that the Lord will change things or take us home.

The problem is though that funds given to the poor through government are NOT donations; they are taken directly from our paychecks, whether we agree or not. At least that's the way it is here.

[~candice~]

Nice in theory Butero, but the ideal conditions you describe don't exist right now. We must use what we have. If it suits me to use the government, then I will. I will not hold back giving donations to the government for those who are needy because they also have other policies I disagree with. At some stage we just have to be realistic and do what we can when we can and pray that the Lord will change things or take us home.

The problem is though that funds given to the poor through government are NOT donations; they are taken directly from our paychecks, whether we agree or not. At least that's the way it is here.

I wasn't talking about welfare, never was. I started this by talking to Dave about donations / giving [i.e. voluntarily, from post tax earnings] to the government. Things like the Haitian earthquake appeal. Bushfire and flood appeals, etc etc etc.

If I think that it is meritious to give to the government, I will.

It got blown out of proportion to suggest that the government would take care of all of the needs of the poor / sick etc, and become a dereliction of duty. This ain't the case.

It is simply that sometimes, the government does an OK job at these things, in issues I think warrants giving, and I see no reason to reinvent the wheel and give directly in those cases. I can't buy drugs and give it to people on the street, it have no ability to do that. It is inefficient to get on a plane and hand deliver clothing to people in Ache or Haiti. But if my government can, then why not?

[~candice~]

Nice in theory Butero, but the ideal conditions you describe don't exist right now. We must use what we have. If it suits me to use the government, then I will. I will not hold back giving donations to the government for those who are needy because they also have other policies I disagree with. At some stage we just have to be realistic and do what we can when we can and pray that the Lord will change things or take us home.

You give donations to the government??? I have never heard of that. Do you have a choice in the matter? What happens if you decide not to donate? If we were talking about giving donations, I would be fine with things, but we are not. We are talking about the government taking my hard earned money with the threat of jail if I don't let them. That is not making a donation.

If it doesn't suit me to use the government, then I will continue to fight to elect people that agree with me, with the hopes of dismantling the welfare state.

Yes, purely voluntary giving to aid needs organised by my government. Your gov doesn't do that?

[Believer1997]

Nice in theory Butero, but the ideal conditions you describe don't exist right now. We must use what we have. If it suits me to use the government, then I will. I will not hold back giving donations to the government for those who are needy because they also have other policies I disagree with. At some stage we just have to be realistic and do what we can when we can and pray that the Lord will change things or take us home.

You give donations to the government??? I have never heard of that. Do you have a choice in the matter? What happens if you decide not to donate? If we were talking about giving donations, I would be fine with things, but we are not. We are talking about the government taking my hard earned money with the threat of jail if I don't let them. That is not making a donation.

If it doesn't suit me to use the government, then I will continue to fight to elect people that agree with me, with the hopes of dismantling the welfare state.

Yes, purely voluntary giving to aid needs organised by my government. Your gov doesn't do that?

Yeah, we do it - we just call it Taxes and they are voluntary, actually. If you don't wish to pay them - that's fine and you will be the guest of the government in a neat little apartment for several years.....

[Believer1997]

the government is a giant beast and it isn't going away anytime fast. There is zero reason why we shouldn't use it to the best of our ability when it is beneficial. If this means that giving to a particular program helps the poor and sick better than I could do on my own, then I will stand behind it.

If I had the power, I would gradually dismantle all of the things socialists have done over the years until we were living in a society that looked more like America in the 1920s than today. I wouldn't end all welfare programs overnight, because people are too dependent on them, but would gradually move away from them by working to help lift those in poverty out of their condition. I think we are handling things wrong. The government is giving out checks for no work, and when that is not enough, their solution is to continue spending more.

1920's huh? Take a look around .... Banks completely out of control and as corrupt as they were prior to being bailed out... the treasury flooding the markets with too much money; the stock market fluctuating wildly for months - food kitchens feeding people who have never asked for help; more foreclosures in the the country than ever in history (including the Great Depression)... job lines for unemployment or to apply for a job. "Camp Grounds" with thousands of homeless families in some of the largest cities in our country; Recently, I saw 579 applications for an entry level position in finance... the college applicants looked just like the people with less education. The housing market in our area is showing some promise - in part that is due to the low home sales prices and foreclosures... At this point .... it looks uncomfortably like the 1920's ... just without the cute clothes.

Good points, sister. None of us were around in the 1920's of course, we have to rely on history books to tell us how it was (unless we have great grandparents who were around then) but I do see some parallels in today's world. I just pray things don't go as far as they did then

The 20s were a time of great prosperity, so much so they were known as the "roaring 20s." We prospered under the leadership of John Calvin Cooledge. What led to the crash were the policies of a progressive Republican, Herbert Hoover, and what made things worse were the policies of his successor, Franklin D. Roosevelt. What should have been a stock market correction turned into a depression. I stand by what I said. If I had it in my power to do so, I would return to the policies that existed in the 20s under Cooledge.

Butero, you are SO different!

The "Roaring" Twenties didn't roar as much in the heartland of our nation and among the people who were already poor and struggling. The only thing many of these ordinary country people had going for them was being able to raise enough food to feed themselves. For the speculators, bankers and brokers - the champagne flowed and everything was just peachy .... that kind of living eventually has to come to an end..... there were consequences that helped to contribute to the meltdown then as now.

And where has the welfare state gotten us? We still have people struggling. We have a high rate of unemployment. We have a huge national debt. We had a meltdown in spite of the regulations. Jesus said the poor would be with us always. There are no policies we could implement that would end poverty. All we wind up doing is causing people that could have made it on their gross income to find themselves unable to pay their bills on their net income, and a bunch or beurocrats creating a dependency class of people who feel like they have to vote for them to keep the checks coming. In the meanwhile, those in office live high on the hog off of our money. Even if Candice doesn't mind donating to the government so people like Obama can eat $100 per ounce steak dinners while being entertained by Charley Pride, I do. Obama and these beurocrats are not my god, and I don't look to them for my sustenance. I am not cowering in fear that one day I might need them. How in the world did people get by before the welfare state? They had families that helped them out. There were charities that helped out.

You need to get over what O had for dinner, harping on it endlessly isn't going to get it 'un-eaten'... - I'm sure previous presidents had some of the same cuisine at sometime during their tenure(s) also. His predecessors didn't eat bread and water for 8 years each. I'm glad you don't look to bureaucrats for help and sustenance ... none of us should.

[~candice~]

the government is a giant beast and it isn't going away anytime fast. There is zero reason why we shouldn't use it to the best of our ability when it is beneficial. If this means that giving to a particular program helps the poor and sick better than I could do on my own, then I will stand behind it.

If I had the power, I would gradually dismantle all of the things socialists have done over the years until we were living in a society that looked more like America in the 1920s than today. I wouldn't end all welfare programs overnight, because people are too dependent on them, but would gradually move away from them by working to help lift those in poverty out of their condition. I think we are handling things wrong. The government is giving out checks for no work, and when that is not enough, their solution is to continue spending more.

1920's huh? Take a look around .... Banks completely out of control and as corrupt as they were prior to being bailed out... the treasury flooding the markets with too much money; the stock market fluctuating wildly for months - food kitchens feeding people who have never asked for help; more foreclosures in the the country than ever in history (including the Great Depression)... job lines for unemployment or to apply for a job. "Camp Grounds" with thousands of homeless families in some of the largest cities in our country; Recently, I saw 579 applications for an entry level position in finance... the college applicants looked just like the people with less education. The housing market in our area is showing some promise - in part that is due to the low home sales prices and foreclosures... At this point .... it looks uncomfortably like the 1920's ... just without the cute clothes.

Good points, sister. None of us were around in the 1920's of course, we have to rely on history books to tell us how it was (unless we have great grandparents who were around then) but I do see some parallels in today's world. I just pray things don't go as far as they did then

The 20s were a time of great prosperity, so much so they were known as the "roaring 20s." We prospered under the leadership of John Calvin Cooledge. What led to the crash were the policies of a progressive Republican, Herbert Hoover, and what made things worse were the policies of his successor, Franklin D. Roosevelt. What should have been a stock market correction turned into a depression. I stand by what I said. If I had it in my power to do so, I would return to the policies that existed in the 20s under Cooledge.

Butero, you are SO different!

The "Roaring" Twenties didn't roar as much in the heartland of our nation and among the people who were already poor and struggling. The only thing many of these ordinary country people had going for them was being able to raise enough food to feed themselves. For the speculators, bankers and brokers - the champagne flowed and everything was just peachy .... that kind of living eventually has to come to an end..... there were consequences that helped to contribute to the meltdown then as now.

And where has the welfare state gotten us? We still have people struggling. We have a high rate of unemployment. We have a huge national debt. We had a meltdown in spite of the regulations. Jesus said the poor would be with us always. There are no policies we could implement that would end poverty. All we wind up doing is causing people that could have made it on their gross income to find themselves unable to pay their bills on their net income, and a bunch or beurocrats creating a dependency class of people who feel like they have to vote for them to keep the checks coming. In the meanwhile, those in office live high on the hog off of our money. Even if Candice doesn't mind donating to the government so people like Obama can eat $100 per ounce steak dinners while being entertained by Charley Pride, I do. Obama and these beurocrats are not my god, and I don't look to them for my sustenance. I am not cowering in fear that one day I might need them. How in the world did people get by before the welfare state? They had families that helped them out. There were charities that helped out.

You need to get over what O had for dinner, harping on it endlessly isn't going to get it 'un-eaten'... - I'm sure previous presidents had some of the same cuisine at sometime during their tenure(s) also. His predecessors didn't eat bread and water for 8 years each. I'm glad you don't look to bureaucrats for help and sustenance ... none of us should.

What I voluntarily give to the government doesn't go the the politicians at all, Butero. It's got nothing whatsoever to do with my leader . I could equally give to an NGO.

I swear some people hate socialism so much they read with blinkers on and the mere wiff of supporting the government can send them into an anti-socialism pro capitalism frenzy.