Disabled person in real need

[P@triot]

That's very nice and commendable.

But...as of August this year, 8.7 million disabled workers are drawing SS disability. You may question if that many cases are valid if you like, but the premise of this thread is that no government help is really needed as charity will take care of them.

Ok...please explain to me which charities are going to take care of the every day needs of 8.7 million people. That includes rent, food, transportation, health care. Everything. How much money would it take to support them either until they recover enough to go back to work or for the rest of their lives if they are permanently disabled? Where will that money come from? Who will give it? How? Under what circumstances?

In 2010, the total amount given to charity in the United States was $290.89 billion. That's from all sources.

Political Calculations: Charity in America: The Donors

If every, single, solitary dollar of that charitable giving was redirected to just those 8.7 million disabled workers, it would amount to roughly $33,000 each. That should be enough, but it would require no giving to anything else, by anybody. That includes cancer research, churches (yes, apparently including tithes), little league, college funds...whatever.

Now...tell me again how they'll get by just fine with no government involvement?

The services needed by those in need are better delivered locally. It's not the remit of the federal government, nor are is the federal government competent to deliver cost effective, targeted, services. Put the issue on the shoulders of the states, not the idiots in DC.

The only difference is that you'd shift the burden to state government, instead of the federal government. It's still "government assistance," you know. I guess it's not a case of government having no role to play...it's just WHICH government, right?

And, a lot of the states are strapped for cash. Where's the money going to come from?

Are you a fucking idiot?!? Nobody is more "strapped for cash" than our federal government which is $16 trillion in debt!!! So answer your own question: Where's the money going to come from?

 

[JoeB131]

Nonsense, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid really care if I have healthcare, really they do!.....

But, Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan REALLY DO...right?

They don't want single payer, moonbats like Obama and you do.....

Except Obama never proposed Single Payer. (Which would actually solve a lot of the problem.)

 

[JoeB131]

The services needed by those in need are better delivered locally. It's not the remit of the federal government, nor are is the federal government competent to deliver cost effective, targeted, services. Put the issue on the shoulders of the states, not the idiots in DC.

The only difference is that you'd shift the burden to state government, instead of the federal government. It's still "government assistance," you know. I guess it's not a case of government having no role to play...it's just WHICH government, right?

And, a lot of the states are strapped for cash. Where's the money going to come from?

Are you a fucking idiot?!? Nobody is more "strapped for cash" than our federal government which is $16 trillion in debt!!! So answer your own question: Where's the money going to come from?

Taxing the 1% that has more wealth than the bottom 90%, to start with.

 

[gallantwarrior]

I've never heard of him, but he sounds like a wonderful young man with a kind heart to have done so much for this woman.

Tyler Perry is a very talented entertainer, I personally get a laugh from his comedy routines in which he portrays a feisty old matriarch, Medea.

 

[Oldguy]

Nonsense, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid really care if I have healthcare, really they do!.....

But, Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan REALLY DO...right?

They don't want single payer, moonbats like Obama and you do.....

In the interest of clarity and honesty, I must point out something you don't seem to be aware of, or you know it and won't allude to it because it might give the lie to your opinion:

Obamacare is NOT a single payer system.

 

[Oldguy]

First of all, where the fuck are the family and friends of those 8.7 million people?

I don't know. You tell me.

Second, we have the highest corporate tax rate in the world. We have income tax, property tax, sales tax, capital gains tax, and a LOT more. Despite that, we lead the world in charity. Just imagine what we could do if we weren't be taxed to death by communist liberals?

I don't know. Why don't you explain to me just how charity would be able to take care of all those millions if we reduced the tax rate?

Third, it is NOT the responsibility of government to care for anyone, regardless of your tear-dropping stories.

Really? Does that include disabled Veteran's? Does that include retiree's from the federal work force? Does that include current employees? You're spitting nonsense now...as usual.

Tell me...if the federal government doesn't have any responsibility to help care for the disabled, who does? What happens to those people if they don't or can't?

Your nice little story about somebody buying somebody a van doesn't solve the problem, does it?

 

[gallantwarrior]

Well I'll be DAMNED! Very real, very serious problems for those in need CAN be solved without any intervention by government whatsoever. Who knew?!?!

It's astounding how quickly every talking point and ideological belief by the left is just completely crumbling beneath them...

Actor Tyler Perry Donates Van to Woman With Cerebral Palsy Alicia Day After Hearing Hers Was Stolen | TheBlaze.com

That's very nice and commendable.

But...as of August this year, 8.7 million disabled workers are drawing SS disability. You may question if that many cases are valid if you like, but the premise of this thread is that no government help is really needed as charity will take care of them.

Ok...please explain to me which charities are going to take care of the every day needs of 8.7 million people. That includes rent, food, transportation, health care. Everything. How much money would it take to support them either until they recover enough to go back to work or for the rest of their lives if they are permanently disabled? Where will that money come from? Who will give it? How? Under what circumstances?

In 2010, the total amount given to charity in the United States was $290.89 billion. That's from all sources.

Political Calculations: Charity in America: The Donors

If every, single, solitary dollar of that charitable giving was redirected to just those 8.7 million disabled workers, it would amount to roughly $33,000 each. That should be enough, but it would require no giving to anything else, by anybody. That includes cancer research, churches (yes, apparently including tithes), little league, college funds...whatever.

Now...tell me again how they'll get by just fine with no government involvement?

Please explain to me why those 8.7 million people won't take care of themselves? The number of truly disabled people is minuscule. But because government has an extremely liberal definition of disability, there boatloads of people who can take care of themselves but who choose not to because they can poke their dickskinners out and have them filled with government bucks.

 

[gallantwarrior]

That's very nice and commendable.

But...as of August this year, 8.7 million disabled workers are drawing SS disability. You may question if that many cases are valid if you like, but the premise of this thread is that no government help is really needed as charity will take care of them.

Ok...please explain to me which charities are going to take care of the every day needs of 8.7 million people. That includes rent, food, transportation, health care. Everything. How much money would it take to support them either until they recover enough to go back to work or for the rest of their lives if they are permanently disabled? Where will that money come from? Who will give it? How? Under what circumstances?

In 2010, the total amount given to charity in the United States was $290.89 billion. That's from all sources.

Political Calculations: Charity in America: The Donors

If every, single, solitary dollar of that charitable giving was redirected to just those 8.7 million disabled workers, it would amount to roughly $33,000 each. That should be enough, but it would require no giving to anything else, by anybody. That includes cancer research, churches (yes, apparently including tithes), little league, college funds...whatever.

Now...tell me again how they'll get by just fine with no government involvement?

The services needed by those in need are better delivered locally. It's not the remit of the federal government, nor are is the federal government competent to deliver cost effective, targeted, services. Put the issue on the shoulders of the states, not the idiots in DC.

The only difference is that you'd shift the burden to state government, instead of the federal government. It's still "government assistance," you know. I guess it's not a case of government having no role to play...it's just WHICH government, right?

And, a lot of the states are strapped for cash. Where's the money going to come from?

The Fed is strapped for money, too. Or haven't been paying attention?

 

[driveby]

But, Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan REALLY DO...right?

They don't want single payer, moonbats like Obama and you do.....

Except Obama never proposed Single Payer. (Which would actually solve a lot of the problem.)

Still hiding behind that argument? ......

 

[gallantwarrior]

The services needed by those in need are better delivered locally. It's not the remit of the federal government, nor are is the federal government competent to deliver cost effective, targeted, services. Put the issue on the shoulders of the states, not the idiots in DC.

It would just mean the disabled would gravitate to muncipalities and states that have better benefits...

while businesses will gravitate towards places that have less.

Why is it every "Conservative" solution these days seems to involve meanspiritedness in the pursuit of profit?

That shift already takes place.
Why is it every "Liberal" solution these days seems to involve the mean spiritedness and criminality of robbing those who earn their keep in order make those who won't comfortable in their sloth and envy?

 

[eflatminor]

But...as of August this year, 8.7 million disabled workers are drawing SS disability. You may question if that many cases are valid if you like, but the premise of this thread is that no government help is really needed as charity will take care of them.

Invalid cases require charitable assistance? Whatever.

 

[uscitizen]

Well I'll be DAMNED! Very real, very serious problems for those in need CAN be solved without any intervention by government whatsoever. Who knew?!?!

It's astounding how quickly every talking point and ideological belief by the left is just completely crumbling beneath them...

Actor Tyler Perry Donates Van to Woman With Cerebral Palsy Alicia Day After Hearing Hers Was Stolen | TheBlaze.com

One act that helps one person completely crumbles the need of the many?
What a small view you have.

I gave $5,000 to a local foodbank a week ago. Yet they need so much more.

 

[driveby]

But, Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan REALLY DO...right?

They don't want single payer, moonbats like Obama and you do.....

In the interest of clarity and honesty, I must point out something you don't seem to be aware of, or you know it and won't allude to it because it might give the lie to your opinion:

Obamacare is NOT a single payer system.

It's the gateway and only because the Marxists in the democrat party don't have the balls to go all in on single payer, yet.....

 

[daveman]

The services needed by those in need are better delivered locally. It's not the remit of the federal government, nor are is the federal government competent to deliver cost effective, targeted, services. Put the issue on the shoulders of the states, not the idiots in DC.

It would just mean the disabled would gravitate to muncipalities and states that have better benefits...

while businesses will gravitate towards places that have less.

Why is it every "Conservative" solution these days seems to involve meanspiritedness in the pursuit of profit?

Your irrational hatred of capitalism aside (which is amusing in and of itself -- because it's capitalism that generates the money for your nanny state), why do you assume businesses will leave places with better benefits?

 

[daveman]

The only difference is that you'd shift the burden to state government, instead of the federal government. It's still "government assistance," you know. I guess it's not a case of government having no role to play...it's just WHICH government, right?

And, a lot of the states are strapped for cash. Where's the money going to come from?

Are you a fucking idiot?!? Nobody is more "strapped for cash" than our federal government which is $16 trillion in debt!!! So answer your own question: Where's the money going to come from?

Taxing the 1% that has more wealth than the bottom 90%, to start with.

I'm pretty sure you've been shown the math that proves even if you confiscate ALL the wealth from the 1%, not just their income, it won't fund your bloated government very long at all.

 

[daveman]

The services needed by those in need are better delivered locally. It's not the remit of the federal government, nor are is the federal government competent to deliver cost effective, targeted, services. Put the issue on the shoulders of the states, not the idiots in DC.

It would just mean the disabled would gravitate to muncipalities and states that have better benefits...

while businesses will gravitate towards places that have less.

Why is it every "Conservative" solution these days seems to involve meanspiritedness in the pursuit of profit?

That shift already takes place.
Why is it every "Liberal" solution these days seems to involve the mean spiritedness and criminality of robbing those who earn their keep in order make those who won't comfortable in their sloth and envy?

I've never understood why it's "greed" to want to keep money you've earned but not greed to want to take somebody else's money.

-- Thomas Sowell

The modern liberal is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for covetousness.

-- daveman

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.

-- C. S. Lewis

 

[Oldguy]

Please explain to me why those 8.7 million people won't take care of themselves? The number of truly disabled people is minuscule. But because government has an extremely liberal definition of disability, there boatloads of people who can take care of themselves but who choose not to because they can poke their dickskinners out and have them filled with government bucks.

Really? What IS the government (i.e. Social Security) definition of disability?

 

[Oldguy]

The Fed is strapped for money, too. Or haven't been paying attention?

And, the states have plenty? Or, haven't YOU been paying attention?

 

[Oldguy]

I've never understood why it's "greed" to want to keep money you've earned but not greed to want to take somebody else's money.

-- Thomas Sowell

The modern liberal is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for covetousness.

-- daveman

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.

-- C. S. Lewis

It is an unfortunate human failing that a full pocketbook often groans more loudly than an empty stomach. ---Franklin D. Roosevelt

 

[Ernie S.]

Well I'll be DAMNED! Very real, very serious problems for those in need CAN be solved without any intervention by government whatsoever. Who knew?!?!

It's astounding how quickly every talking point and ideological belief by the left is just completely crumbling beneath them...

Actor Tyler Perry Donates Van to Woman With Cerebral Palsy Alicia Day After Hearing Hers Was Stolen | TheBlaze.com

That's very nice and commendable.

But...as of August this year, 8.7 million disabled workers are drawing SS disability. You may question if that many cases are valid if you like, but the premise of this thread is that no government help is really needed as charity will take care of them.

Ok...please explain to me which charities are going to take care of the every day needs of 8.7 million people. That includes rent, food, transportation, health care. Everything. How much money would it take to support them either until they recover enough to go back to work or for the rest of their lives if they are permanently disabled? Where will that money come from? Who will give it? How? Under what circumstances?

In 2010, the total amount given to charity in the United States was $290.89 billion. That's from all sources.

Political Calculations: Charity in America: The Donors

If every, single, solitary dollar of that charitable giving was redirected to just those 8.7 million disabled workers, it would amount to roughly $33,000 each. That should be enough, but it would require no giving to anything else, by anybody. That includes cancer research, churches (yes, apparently including tithes), little league, college funds...whatever.

Now...tell me again how they'll get by just fine with no government involvement?

How much taxes were collected to pay for social "entitlements"? put those dollars back in the economy and charitable contributions will skyrocket. The money will also be more effective once several layers of bureaucracy are eliminated.