re: The Conservative Myth of a Social Safety Net Built on Charity

quote:

---

I'm not for starvation per se, but hunger itself has always been nature's prime motivational factor...



...well, that and getting laid.

---

That's scarcity for you. Scarce goods, scarce time. What will you do with it?

quote:

---

for eradicating all forms of government payments to individuals including unemployment insurance (for a limited amount of time), all food stamps, etc., Social security?

---

quote:

---

unless youre ok with homeless/starving people lining the sidewalks of our cities.

---

Would you rather them stay inside on the sofa eating chips, drinking cold drinks and watching Ellen?

quote:

---

From tariff walls to the continental railroad system to the educated workforce coming out of land-grant schools, the budding industrial power of the United States was always joined with the growth of the government.

---

Hearty lulz.

Tariffs helped build prosperity? For who? Makers of competing products, certainly not consumers.

Railroads were, at least at the beginning, government boondoggles, enjoying enormous protection and subsidization. It was not until well into the latter half of the 19th century that railroads were economically viable ventures for private investors.

quote:

---

Wasn't just the church people used to rely on this thing called, family.

---

Churches, family, and fraternal organizations. The Elks lodge used to be a major provider if healthcare to its members. The Shriners still provide free healthcare to many.

Government is NOT the only way.

quote:

---

He's pointing to the fact that they've never been anything like what some libertarians envision when they describe private charities and their ability to supplant the government.

---

Indeed. And in 1979 almost no one knew what email was, much less demanded it. Using the past to justify future failure isn't very "progressive".

I am opposed to government welfare programs on principle, but I am realistic enough to understand that they will never go away. Few government programs ever do.

Welfare programs should be reserved strictly for the neediest and most helpless among us. For those who are not completely incapable of work, welfare should have a time limit. It is horrible that we have multiple generations in this country who grow up on welfare.

The article states that charity doesn't get people out of poverty. To the person who wrote that article I say show me someone who got out of poverty through welfare.

As another poster stated, welfare should, at best, best a holdover for someone who is truly trying to make a better life.

Given the choice, I would rather the percentage of my tax dollars that go to welfare be returned to my so I can send them to the charities of my choosing, knowing that a lot more of my hard-earned money will reach those I hope to help.

Neither welfare, nor charity, get people out of poverty. I don't believe that either can ever do that. They're meant to help people until they can be independent.

i know this is overused on this board, but that excerpt is a classical, prototypical strawman.

first, i still don't know who these mythical "conservatives" are; and secondly, i don't know anyone who articulates any halcyon pre-"safety net" years in that way. no one.