by teenyuck 38 Replies latest social current
No, just greed, supply and demand. I used to live in Akaska and prices for everything are outrageous, there was no need for the high prices just people trying to make a buck, since most things have to be brought in by boat.
People trying to make a buck, huh? The bastards. Who would have thought we'd see something like that in America of all places?!
Thier shouldn't be one person hungry in this country, or in need of physical care. I sometimes volunteer my time to a food shelter and I can't believe the people who come in for food, from adults to children......pitiful.
This brings up the whole issue of family responsibility. What happened to families being responsible for the immediate family members who were 1. Hungry 2. Homeless 3. Impoverished?
We, in the US at least, have turned into a Welfare State. The safety net of family is gone. Families no longer care for their own. They turn them away and tell them to apply to the state for aid.
Housing should not be subsidized by the gov. Period. If you cannot afford an apartment in the city you want, go to a cheaper city. Many immigrants lived in hovels, now called ghettos, and didn't complain. Many new immigrants are living the same way. Yet, a welfare family, (mom, 6 kids from 6 different men, all nameless, therefore responsibility free) demands better housing in a better neighborhood because people are shooting and dealing drugs in the neighborhood. The new immigrants deal with it, work hard at their low wage jobs and dream of a better life, that they know will come, by HARD WORK.
Welfare is a good, short term program. (or whatever it is called)
My short story:
When my father walked out, my mother applied for it. She had $17.36 in the checking account and no job. She got food stamps and about $25.00 cash a month to live on. (Actually, the Elders at the KH gave her the $212.00 to pay the mortgage the first month)
Without that *safety net* we would have been on the street. My mom's family had not spoken to her in years (except her old grand-mother, the one who called me teenyuck) and she was in her 70's and on Social Security. Mom could not ask her for money. There was no one else.
Anyway, she ended up finding a job as a secretary within a 2 months and we were off the dole.
Going to the store with food stamps, even in our rag-tag suburb, was very humiliating. I was 12, my sister 15. My mom sent us, on our bikes to do grocery shopping, or she would sit in the car and wait while we went in and bought food. She did not want to be seen with food stamps.
Without that program I don't know what would have happened to us.
My whole point in bringing this subject up was to try to show that no matter what side of the gov you are on and believe, the gov has grown way beyond what the US founding fathers intended it to be.
When the US gov tried to become the social conscience* of the people, they took away responsibility from the people. People became less inclined to give to local chairities and to their church. These social services that the government set up can never be as strong, as human, as compassionate as the local pastor/person in charge/of the local food bank/church/parish, etc. Many people volunteer at agencies, however, funding is very hard to come by. People are giving so much of it to the government, they don't have much more to give.
I am disgusted by big government. That is the main reason I lean republican. Since I left the JWs and started paying attention to politics, the republican *agenda* of smaller government was attractive. The problem now is that the repubs are not making the gov smaller, just lowering taxes; giving *faith based initiatives* was one of the worst ideas I read, after the government grants for performing arts- .
However, making government smaller is a huge task. Think about all the jobs at risk. Who is in those jobs? All those job-holders have a major interest in seeing big government stay the way it is. So the democratic agenda holds a big trump.
I really don't think the government owes me anything other than security (police/fire/borders), military, highways. I do believe in highways. They opened up the country to everyone, everywhere to easily go state to state. I believe we have Eisenhower to thank for that. Other than that, let me figure it out.
SFTT said:
Yes the government do owe us. They owe us to listen to us when we disagree with policy and they owe us to live in freedom and the right to run our own lives without camera's watching our every move.
This in interesting....in the suburb I live in, Gahanna, Ohio, they have installed *traffic flow* cameras. Supposedly they are to monitor traffic at red lights to watch how many cars are backed up and change lights accordingly. BULL SHIT. The mayor admitted the cameras are for people running red lights. While I am not an advocate of running red lights, in this suburb, this is ridiculous. It is not necessary. They are doing their Big Brother routine to intimidate people.
That is the kind of stuff that my tax dollar should not be used for. Security my ass.
I appreciate all the comments and feedback.
*I am using Social Conscience here in the sense of services your local parish or wealthy benefactor would traditionally provide or set up and local volunteers staffed.
Teenyuck.
Thanks for a great thread!
You brought up a good point about family responsibility. Some people, especially in Britain, expect the State to look after them. I know guys I went to school with who have NEVER had a job. They can afford to run a car and expect hand-outs at every turn.
But government should be there to protect the people from outside enemies, and provide a safe environment inside the country. What we are getting at the moment is a government that wants to dictate how people live. Issues like the parents right to smack their own child are being discussed in the commons as well as other issues that should be left to the parents to decide.
Teenyuck.Thanks for a great thread!
Thanks Search....I think we agree on more than we disagree!
Teenyuck,
You bring up a point about family responsibility that is interesting. One of the points I respect about the Mormons is that when a member shows up asking for financial or material aid, one of the VERY first questions asked is if they've been to see their family. If they haven't, they send you packing. Only after the family has turned you down or help all they could will the LDS church throw money your way.
That's a very good question . I like the fact that people from other countries are making comments but the fact of the matter is that most other countries haven't made the issue of freedom and personal responsibility the center of constitutional law in the fashion that the US did after liberation from europe . The government owes us the right to live as we choose and the right to representation . I think they owe us to make life easier for americans by putting american interest first and the world interest last .I am really surprised that the reparations people haven't replied to this thread .
Well, I'd at least have some respect for the Republican party if they were the Republican party of old that really did believe in small government. However, they believe in welfare just as much as the Democrats do; except that their welfare goes directly to super-rich corporations who cannot handle their finances correctly (or really do, but hide the money anyway). If they took the strong stance against the people who pay for their electoral victories as they do the poor, then maybe I wouldn't have the urge to gag everytime they talk about "small government".
In addition to a strong defense, I think the government should subsidize education. Many people in the past have been able to acheive the "American Dream" despite their less than wealthy backgrounds because of the availabilty of government susidized free public schools and low cost secondary education. Hell, I'm one of those persons, and once I'm through with college I personally will have no problem in giving my tax money to help further this cause. Despite some well-documented short comings in the public school systems (especially the inner city types of which I was a part of), not only has government subsidized education been more positive than negative overall, but one might argue that an educated populace is just as much of a "compelling government interest" as having a strong national defense.
I'm also for universal healthcare (which will probably get me in trouble in an otherwise Libertarian thread ). Perhaps a relatively cheap one like the one proposed by Howard Dean, but as long as it ensures that every citizen has access to quality health care. Our tax situation would obviously be a lot better if a great deal of government spending on other areas were cut ( like the aforementioned corporate welfare. Just a very small sampling here: http://www.progress.org/2003/tcs140.htm ).
So even with basic things like education, healthcare and social security, our taxes could still be cut by a great deal if we spent less on programs that conservatives never seem to talk about. Those welfare programs for the rich take up way more money than the stuff we throw at the poor (which I do largely agree need to be fixed as well. Clinton's welfare reform was a very good step).
Since the government in reality is the "the people" (and not necessarily an evil monolith with a mind of its own ), the question really is what do we owe ourselves?
cronboy said
"I'm also for universal healthcare (which will probably get me in trouble in an otherwise Libertarian thread ). "
You really want the Federal Government to decide who gets what treatment? And will the drug companies continue to research possible new drugs if they can not make a profit?
Teenyuck, I believe you would make a good Libertarian. The Republican Party really is not about smaller government anymore. They seek to control what is moral and good for the population and Bush is the one that wants to increase the size of Medicare with prescription drugs.
It is now to the point in the US that to get elected you need to hand out as much possible to your base. Where will it end? If I were a young person born after 1970 in the US, I would not count on getting Social Security. There is no such thing as a Social Security Trust Fund. Just US Government IOUs.
According to H. S. Dent the US will have another Great Depression starting in the 2008 to 2010 timeframe.
In this so called Democracy, the Government owes me the respect of LISTENING very carefully to all opinions and then deciding the best course based on that.
My children and grandchildren however, will OWE the Government this:
