Another post over on The Otter Limits got me thinking, but this time about welfare. There are those that see welfare programs as a bad thing. That they are entitlement programs that do nothing to actually help people out of poverty. These arguments have their merits and too often the welfare system is one that gets abused and it turns into a way of life that stifles instead of lifts up, but does that mean that it should be abandoned completely?
It is my belief that one of the core functions of the government is providing a safety net for the citizenry. This is done through labor laws, anti-trust / anti-monopoly laws, and through welfare programs.
I believe that we have a collective moral responsibility to each other to help those who have fallen. I see this as part of the social contract and one of the best ways to do this is through government programs. Anyone that knows me or has read this blog with any regularity knows that I trust the government about as far as I can throw it. The last thing I want is even more intrusion into our lives, but I don’t think programs like Food Stamps or WIC do that. These programs have helped millions of people through very tough time and to stay afloat. I’m not really sure how that can be seen as a bad thing.
Do the welfare programs in this country need reform? Absolutely. Should they be eliminated? No. Obviously the government can’t make someone a success and that isn’t the government’s job, but it can help in giving someone a hand up so that they can better themselves and lead a productive and meaningful life. Is this how it actually works out? No, but that doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t work to make it that way.
4 comments:
So if I understand you correctly... you don't see helping the poor or providing a "safety net" for citizens as something churches, charities, non-profits and donations should provide (which they already do) but as something the federal and or state government should provide ...paid for not by donations or from volunteers but with increased mandatory taxes and taken from those working and earning a living who suddenly won't be able to donate to charities due to paying higher taxes... ultimately eliminating the need or ability for charities to function.
Thus the elimination of charity and faith based help, replaced with socialism and government control based 'help'.
Just as government run healthcare will eliminate private competition.
I never said that Red but nice try at putting words into my mouth.
I will agree on one point here Dave.
I agree that the enactment of labor laws and anti-monopoly laws were a good thing.
Welfare programs I think were a good idea in theory and that the people that first thought them up had noble intentions. However, we all know what they say about good intentions.
The problem with these programs, however, is that they have gotten to a point where they are not hand ups, they are hand outs. They are not used any longer to allow people to better themselves. The people that are on these programs (generally) have no desire to get off these programs.
I do not think, as I mentioned in the comments you left on the blog you are referring to in this post, that the federal government needs to provides these services. I do think it is well within the rights of the states individually to provide these services if they so choose to.
However, in the case of the states providing these services. I do not think that they alone should be 100% responsible for providing for the poor and hungry. I think a large part of the responsibility should fall on the people of the country.
I believe as Red pointed out that non-profit organizations, churches and the various charities are the way in which we as the people collectively provide for this needed assistance.
Ultimately, I believe that tax reform in this country could solve many of the problems facing our country and I believe that if the tax system is thoroughly reformed, the less people will expect assistance from the federal and state governments and if ever put in a place where help is needed, will look toward the various non-profit organizations that are in operation.
Okay... then let me quote you.
"It is my belief that one of the core functions of the government is providing a safety net for the citizenry."
I see no mention of charities, churches or non-profits here... do you?
If the core function of the government is to make sure everyone succeeds... and that doesn't mean socialism, then please tell me what it does represent?
Dave... we must preserve the right to fail and the opportunity to rise above it... a government tax based safety net does just the opposite.
Post a Comment