Welfare question for libertarians, conservatives

[norwegen]

What are we supposed to do with the people who can't fend for themselves? Let them starve in the street?

What did we do with them before the federal government started its "benevolence" programs?

Different time and irrelevant. The question is what should we do today. If you're a proponent of cutting off all recipients then you're in the extreme minority. I'm advocate of individualism and personal responsibility, but society does have a responsibility to provide some safety nets for the unfortunate. After all this is a civilized society. As a country do you think we'd be better off with people starving in the street?

Not irrelevant. People do not change that fast. Certainly not for the worse when the quality of life in a society generally improves over time.

 

[g5000]

Absolutely. If you walked down any street in the late 19th and 20th centuries before government run welfare, you'd see hundreds, if not thousands of dead people in the streets.

Change "dead" to "starving", and you would be 100 percent accurate. And the death rate among the poor was atrocious. There was a 30 percent infant mortality rate in some cities in 1900.

So keep up the sarcasm. You are accurately portraying actual facts.

 

[Dutch]

The problem with charitable giving today is that alot of the donations go to wastes of money like this:

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Absolutely. If you walked down any street in the late 19th and 20th centuries before government run welfare, you'd see hundreds, if not thousands of dead people in the streets.

Change "dead" to "starving", and you would be 100 percent accurate. And the death rate among the poor was atrocious. There was a 30 percent infant mortality rate in some cities in 1900.

So keep up the sarcasm. You are accurately portraying actual facts.

Lets see the stats of those that starved to death and just concentrate during the great depression era to make things simple.

Oh and of those infants that died how many died of starvation?

 

[Rocko]

The problem with charitable giving today is that alot of the donations go to wastes of money like this:

Well, to be fair, the government waste's it's fair share.

 

[g5000]

I don't know if you're joking or not. I hope you are.

Nope. Not joking. It's a fact. The private charities could not keep up.

Is government keeping up? Why is the poverty level increasing? and the percentage of people on food stamps?

Now that government has proved a failure, maybe another approach?

The quality of life for the poor is radically improved. No more kids working in coal mines. No more 30 percent infant mortality rates. No more roving bands of orphans living in the streets. And so forth and so on.

 

[Rocko]

Do you think people who are on welfare should get cash along with food stamps or not?

In another thread I saw that a few conservatives were vehemently giving these people any cash. I was a bit surprised. Personally, I consider myself a compassionate conservative and believe giving people on welfare a modest cash stipend is appropriate. Keep in mind food stamps don't cover some of the basic needs a person may have, such as clothing, laundry money, transportation, haircut, etc..

No.

The fraud that goes hand in hand with welfare would skyrocket with cash.

Welfare recipients already get cash.

 

[Jarhead]

Do you think people who are on welfare should get cash along with food stamps or not?

In another thread I saw that a few conservatives were vehemently giving these people any cash. I was a bit surprised. Personally, I consider myself a compassionate conservative and believe giving people on welfare a modest cash stipend is appropriate. Keep in mind food stamps don't cover some of the basic needs a person may have, such as clothing, laundry money, transportation, haircut, etc..

In my eyes, there is no reason not to give them cash as well as food stamps. It is our responsibility as a civilized nation to care for those that are in need.

Sure, some will game the system. But that is the price you need to pay to act in a humanitarian way.

I've had my poor days (that was when I started to understand the need for personal responsibility).

It sux to be poor.

 

[rightwinger]

The problem with charitable giving today is that alot of the donations go to wastes of money like this:

It is more than that, it is the amount of overhead charities run up just in fundraising. Excessive salaries of their CEOs. And the dependence of charities on a strong economy. Few donate in a poor economy and many more are in need

 

[ClosedCaption]

I don't know if you're joking or not. I hope you are.

Nope. Not joking. It's a fact. The private charities could not keep up.

Is government keeping up? Why is the poverty level increasing? and the percentage of people on food stamps?

Now that government has proved a failure, maybe another approach?

I dont know what you are doing right here but its definitely not defending your position or making a point

 

[TakeAStepBack]

It's bullshit is what it is. During the depression, which was of course a government and federal reserve caused depression, the total known starvation death count in NYC, was 20 people in 1930, and 110 in 1934. And THAT was during the worst economic conditions the coutnry ever saw until the federal reserve broke the fucker again in 2007.

The idea that there was thousands of starving, dying people in the streets is pure unadulterated nonsense. Its an appeal to emotion that lacks a logical world view, or any factual basis.

 

[Jarhead]

Nope. Not joking. It's a fact. The private charities could not keep up.

Is government keeping up? Why is the poverty level increasing? and the percentage of people on food stamps?

Now that government has proved a failure, maybe another approach?

The quality of life for the poor is radically improved. No more kids working in coal mines. No more 30 percent infant mortality rates. No more roving bands of orphans living in the streets. And so forth and so on.

You are correct.

Who do you give credit to for this?

 

[Redfish]

Well I don't think there should be welfare recipients, so...

What are we supposed to do with the people who can't fend for themselves? Let them starve in the street?

Heavens no. We obviously grind them up into dog food. I want my streets spotless.

Soylent Green

"Soylent Green is people!"

 

[norwegen]

Nope. Not joking. It's a fact. The private charities could not keep up.

Is government keeping up? Why is the poverty level increasing? and the percentage of people on food stamps?

Now that government has proved a failure, maybe another approach?

The quality of life for the poor is radically improved. No more kids working in coal mines. No more 30 percent infant mortality rates. No more roving bands of orphans living in the streets. And so forth and so on.

The irony.

So inviting.

 

[Zander]

Well I don't think there should be welfare recipients, so...

What are we supposed to do with the people who can't fend for themselves? Let them starve in the street?

It depends upon how you define "people who can't fend for themselves".....

I am all for helping children, cripples, and the physically or mentally ill.

 

[Trajan]

Well I don't think there should be welfare recipients, so...

What are we supposed to do with the people who can't fend for themselves? Let them starve in the street?

which gov. prgm do you want to address? welfare is not for those unable to work ala fend for themselves....if thats what you meant/intended.

for the record the cash is not that big a deal to me, its the clinton/gop welfare bill being watered down....I think they got it and the results where excellent.

 

[g5000]

A lot of money is being wasted. Welfare fraud is not even in the top ten.

 

[Dutch]

The problem with charitable giving today is that alot of the donations go to wastes of money like this:

Well, to be fare, the government waste's it's fair share.

I agree, but when someone is getting a tax break for donating to build a 100' tall Jesus statue it is not right. That's why that whole arguement about red state cons donating more to charity than the blue staters angers me. Writing off the 200 dollars you donated to carpet the rectory is not charity. Writing off three hundred dollars so someone from your parish can go to Uganda on mission is not charity.

 

[Redfish]

They should get EBT cards, but the card should only be good for purchases of rice, potatoes, beans, flour, milk, ground beef, and diapers.

And, if the person is able to work, the welfare should have a stated limit in months. If there are no jobs, then the person has to clean streets, paint public buildings, etc in order to get the EBT card. Either way the welfare ends in X months.

 

[R.D.]

Do you think people who are on welfare should get cash along with food stamps or not?

In another thread I saw that a few conservatives were vehemently giving these people any cash. I was a bit surprised. Personally, I consider myself a compassionate conservative and believe giving people on welfare a modest cash stipend is appropriate. Keep in mind food stamps don't cover some of the basic needs a person may have, such as clothing, laundry money, transportation, haircut, etc..

No.

The fraud that goes hand in hand with welfare would skyrocket with cash.

Welfare recipients already get cash.

Then I don't understand your question?

Not that I was aware of.