Why Are Republicans So Relentlessly Cruel to the Poor?

[Tommy Tainant]

I'll repeat:

Conservatives tend to donate to their churches (tax deductable) which in turn, contribute a small amount of that back to actual charities. The predominant church in my area considers itself a charitable organization for the tax benefits but the actual amount of charity is about 1%.

You are confused Moon Bat.

Our church is a big contributor to feeding the poor and providing services in the community to those that really need it.

This next Sunday morning we will meet at the regular service time and go en mass to the grocery stores and buy food instead of having the normal worship service. We do that several times a year.

What are you going to be doing this Sunday morning Moon Bat, laying in bed?

The third weekend of every month my wife and I go to the grocery store and buy food and donate it to our church's food pantry. We also help to support an orphanage.

What do you do Moon Bat other than bitch that the rich are not being taxed enough?

Not knowing the specifics of your church, I'll try not to discourage your efforts to do good. However, from my experience GENERALLY, church charities shelter tax revenues that would go as far or farther in providing for the poor if they were collected.

Church charities are operated by non-paid volunteers. Give the money to the government and it would take 40 or 50 high paid civil servants to do the same thing.

From my mainstream standpoint.

I would find a charity handout from a foodbank to be humiliating.

But I would have no problem with welfare. There is a contract between the state and the individual that gives it respectability. I have paid into the welfare state for years and am entitled to its protection when times are tough.

The work of charities is admirable but essentially it is just a top up to the work of the state (all of us) in providing a safety net for those who have fallen on hard times.

We live in rich advanced countries where mechanisation and technology have made so many manual jobs redundant. But the people who did those jobs havent gone away. How we look after those people and their families is going to be a big test for us.

You know what? Everyone who takes a handout be it from government or from a food bank should be a little ashamed

By removing the stigma of shame from taking handouts we make it acceptable

Shame is a great motivator

No. That is a Victorian attitude that is primitive in the extreme. We live in a globalised age where people have limited control over their lives. And its going to get worse.
We need to be considering how we can better help these people as a priority.
If we dont you are going to have a huge underclass and you right wingers are going to need even more guns.

 

[Skull Pilot]

You are confused Moon Bat.

Our church is a big contributor to feeding the poor and providing services in the community to those that really need it.

This next Sunday morning we will meet at the regular service time and go en mass to the grocery stores and buy food instead of having the normal worship service. We do that several times a year.

What are you going to be doing this Sunday morning Moon Bat, laying in bed?

The third weekend of every month my wife and I go to the grocery store and buy food and donate it to our church's food pantry. We also help to support an orphanage.

What do you do Moon Bat other than bitch that the rich are not being taxed enough?

Not knowing the specifics of your church, I'll try not to discourage your efforts to do good. However, from my experience GENERALLY, church charities shelter tax revenues that would go as far or farther in providing for the poor if they were collected.

Church charities are operated by non-paid volunteers. Give the money to the government and it would take 40 or 50 high paid civil servants to do the same thing.

From my mainstream standpoint.

I would find a charity handout from a foodbank to be humiliating.

But I would have no problem with welfare. There is a contract between the state and the individual that gives it respectability. I have paid into the welfare state for years and am entitled to its protection when times are tough.

The work of charities is admirable but essentially it is just a top up to the work of the state (all of us) in providing a safety net for those who have fallen on hard times.

We live in rich advanced countries where mechanisation and technology have made so many manual jobs redundant. But the people who did those jobs havent gone away. How we look after those people and their families is going to be a big test for us.

You know what? Everyone who takes a handout be it from government or from a food bank should be a little ashamed

By removing the stigma of shame from taking handouts we make it acceptable

Shame is a great motivator

No. That is a Victorian attitude that is primitive in the extreme. We live in a globalised age where people have limited control over their lives. And its going to get worse.
We need to be considering how we can better help these people as a priority.
If we dont you are going to have a huge underclass and you right wingers are going to need even more guns.

Bull shit

And people have far more control over their lives now than in Victorian times.

and the best way to help people is to motivate them to help themselves not making them dependent on the largess of others

 

[Tommy Tainant]

Not knowing the specifics of your church, I'll try not to discourage your efforts to do good. However, from my experience GENERALLY, church charities shelter tax revenues that would go as far or farther in providing for the poor if they were collected.

Church charities are operated by non-paid volunteers. Give the money to the government and it would take 40 or 50 high paid civil servants to do the same thing.

From my mainstream standpoint.

I would find a charity handout from a foodbank to be humiliating.

But I would have no problem with welfare. There is a contract between the state and the individual that gives it respectability. I have paid into the welfare state for years and am entitled to its protection when times are tough.

The work of charities is admirable but essentially it is just a top up to the work of the state (all of us) in providing a safety net for those who have fallen on hard times.

We live in rich advanced countries where mechanisation and technology have made so many manual jobs redundant. But the people who did those jobs havent gone away. How we look after those people and their families is going to be a big test for us.

This is very telling of the leftist mentality.

You would be humiliated by taking food from people that freely offer it to you, but not humiliated by taking food from people that may not have it TO give to you?

You miss the point Ray. I have no right to the charity handout. I do have a right to the welfare because I have paid into it since I first started work. Its a right not a discretionary gesture.

Do you really think that's it? Okay, then what if you were a lifelong contributor to the charity about to offer you food? Would you feel guilt taking their food then????

Thats a very unique circumstance Ray. I dont know. I take a pride in paying my way and the independence that gives me.
Heres a thought on that issue. I might have paid into that charity but my neighbour hasnt. He is still entitled to welfare. Its his right and it gives him a little more dignity than charity handouts.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Church charities are operated by non-paid volunteers. Give the money to the government and it would take 40 or 50 high paid civil servants to do the same thing.

From my mainstream standpoint.

I would find a charity handout from a foodbank to be humiliating.

But I would have no problem with welfare. There is a contract between the state and the individual that gives it respectability. I have paid into the welfare state for years and am entitled to its protection when times are tough.

The work of charities is admirable but essentially it is just a top up to the work of the state (all of us) in providing a safety net for those who have fallen on hard times.

We live in rich advanced countries where mechanisation and technology have made so many manual jobs redundant. But the people who did those jobs havent gone away. How we look after those people and their families is going to be a big test for us.

This is very telling of the leftist mentality.

You would be humiliated by taking food from people that freely offer it to you, but not humiliated by taking food from people that may not have it TO give to you?

You miss the point Ray. I have no right to the charity handout. I do have a right to the welfare because I have paid into it since I first started work. Its a right not a discretionary gesture.

Do you really think that's it? Okay, then what if you were a lifelong contributor to the charity about to offer you food? Would you feel guilt taking their food then????

Thats a very unique circumstance Ray. I dont know. I take a pride in paying my way and the independence that gives me.
Heres a thought on that issue. I might have paid into that charity but my neighbour hasnt. He is still entitled to welfare. Its his right and it gives him a little more dignity than charity handouts.

Welfare IS charity

 

[Tommy Tainant]

Not knowing the specifics of your church, I'll try not to discourage your efforts to do good. However, from my experience GENERALLY, church charities shelter tax revenues that would go as far or farther in providing for the poor if they were collected.

Church charities are operated by non-paid volunteers. Give the money to the government and it would take 40 or 50 high paid civil servants to do the same thing.

From my mainstream standpoint.

I would find a charity handout from a foodbank to be humiliating.

But I would have no problem with welfare. There is a contract between the state and the individual that gives it respectability. I have paid into the welfare state for years and am entitled to its protection when times are tough.

The work of charities is admirable but essentially it is just a top up to the work of the state (all of us) in providing a safety net for those who have fallen on hard times.

We live in rich advanced countries where mechanisation and technology have made so many manual jobs redundant. But the people who did those jobs havent gone away. How we look after those people and their families is going to be a big test for us.

You know what? Everyone who takes a handout be it from government or from a food bank should be a little ashamed

By removing the stigma of shame from taking handouts we make it acceptable

Shame is a great motivator

No. That is a Victorian attitude that is primitive in the extreme. We live in a globalised age where people have limited control over their lives. And its going to get worse.
We need to be considering how we can better help these people as a priority.
If we dont you are going to have a huge underclass and you right wingers are going to need even more guns.

Bull shit

And people have far more control over their lives now than in Victorian times.

and the best way to help people is to motivate them to help themselves not making them dependent on the largess of others

Nobody wants to be beholden to charity or the state so I dont get the "motivation" angle. the motivation is already there.
I suspect that you mean that you want to punish people for falling on hard times. That takes us back to the Victorian work house that Dickens was railing against in Oliver Twist.

Can I also add that when I say "nobody" I do recognise that there are a few who work the system. But they are statistically insignificant and should not be used as an excuse to punish the poor.

 

[Markle]

" Under this model, seniors would receive the value of their Medicare benefits in the form of a government contribution to purchase the private health insurance plan of their choice."

Sheesssseee!!!!!!!!!!

I have Medicare Advantage and use the same HMO I had for decades.

Once again you deflected from the FACT that the cost is unsustainable.

Once again...for you slowly.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

From my mainstream standpoint.

I would find a charity handout from a foodbank to be humiliating.

But I would have no problem with welfare. There is a contract between the state and the individual that gives it respectability. I have paid into the welfare state for years and am entitled to its protection when times are tough.

The work of charities is admirable but essentially it is just a top up to the work of the state (all of us) in providing a safety net for those who have fallen on hard times.

We live in rich advanced countries where mechanisation and technology have made so many manual jobs redundant. But the people who did those jobs havent gone away. How we look after those people and their families is going to be a big test for us.

This is very telling of the leftist mentality.

You would be humiliated by taking food from people that freely offer it to you, but not humiliated by taking food from people that may not have it TO give to you?

You miss the point Ray. I have no right to the charity handout. I do have a right to the welfare because I have paid into it since I first started work. Its a right not a discretionary gesture.

Do you really think that's it? Okay, then what if you were a lifelong contributor to the charity about to offer you food? Would you feel guilt taking their food then????

Thats a very unique circumstance Ray. I dont know. I take a pride in paying my way and the independence that gives me.
Heres a thought on that issue. I might have paid into that charity but my neighbour hasnt. He is still entitled to welfare. Its his right and it gives him a little more dignity than charity handouts.

Welfare IS charity

It isnt. I have paid into the national insurance fund all my working life. It has always been there for me and my neighbours.

Nothing is free.

When I am in trouble it will be there for me.

 

[Cecilie1200]

If you don't have a gun the poor should be able to take your house from you. Since we're going to have a conservative mindset...Then it is only fair.

No, honey, the Gaia-given right to take other people's money by force is enshrined in LEFTIST thought. Just look at their attitude toward taxes.

 

[Cecilie1200]

but they give more to charity than liberals??

I'll repeat:

Conservatives tend to donate to their churches (tax deductable) which in turn, contribute a small amount of that back to actual charities. The predominant church in my area considers itself a charitable organization for the tax benefits but the actual amount of charity is about 1%.

You are confused Moon Bat.

Our church is a big contributor to feeding the poor and providing services in the community to those that really need it.

This next Sunday morning we will meet at the regular service time and go en mass to the grocery stores and buy food instead of having the normal worship service. We do that several times a year.

What are you going to be doing this Sunday morning Moon Bat, laying in bed?

The third weekend of every month my wife and I go to the grocery store and buy food and donate it to our church's food pantry. We also help to support an orphanage.

What do you do Moon Bat other than bitch that the rich are not being taxed enough?

Not knowing the specifics of your church, I'll try not to discourage your efforts to do good. However, from my experience GENERALLY, church charities shelter tax revenues that would go as far or farther in providing for the poor if they were collected.

Church charities are operated by non-paid volunteers. Give the money to the government and it would take 40 or 50 high paid civil servants to do the same thing.

From my mainstream standpoint.

I would find a charity handout from a foodbank to be humiliating.

But I would have no problem with welfare. There is a contract between the state and the individual that gives it respectability. I have paid into the welfare state for years and am entitled to its protection when times are tough.

The work of charities is admirable but essentially it is just a top up to the work of the state (all of us) in providing a safety net for those who have fallen on hard times.

We live in rich advanced countries where mechanisation and technology have made so many manual jobs redundant. But the people who did those jobs havent gone away. How we look after those people and their families is going to be a big test for us.

And there you have the problem with government "charity" in a nutshell: it encourages jackasses like you to think it's respectable to take money belonging to other people, that you're entitled to it, and you need never feel embarrassed about being a leech.

 

[Flash]

[Q


I would find a charity handout from a foodbank to be humiliating.

.

My goodness gracious. We wouldn't want a welfare queen to be "humiliated" now would we?

I am humiliated every time I have to pay my damn taxes knowing that the government is taking my money by force and giving it away to welfare queens.

Your use of the phrase "welfare queen" is telling. Most of your tax money goes to subsidising millionaires and corporations so that might be a comfort to you.

You are barking up the tree there Sport.

I am against all domestic and foreign welfare, subsidies, entitlements and bailouts. The government should never be in the business of taking money from somebody that earned it and then giving it away to somebody that didn't earn it.

 

[Cecilie1200]

This is very telling of the leftist mentality.

You would be humiliated by taking food from people that freely offer it to you, but not humiliated by taking food from people that may not have it TO give to you?

You miss the point Ray. I have no right to the charity handout. I do have a right to the welfare because I have paid into it since I first started work. Its a right not a discretionary gesture.

Do you really think that's it? Okay, then what if you were a lifelong contributor to the charity about to offer you food? Would you feel guilt taking their food then????

Thats a very unique circumstance Ray. I dont know. I take a pride in paying my way and the independence that gives me.
Heres a thought on that issue. I might have paid into that charity but my neighbour hasnt. He is still entitled to welfare. Its his right and it gives him a little more dignity than charity handouts.

Welfare IS charity

It isnt. I have paid into the national insurance fund all my working life. It has always been there for me and my neighbours.

Nothing is free.

When I am in trouble it will be there for me.

What the FUCK is this "national insurance fund" you think exists that you paid into to entitle you to a check from welfare?

 

[Flash]

[Q

Nobody wants to be beholden to charity or the state so I dont get the "motivation" angle. the motivation is already there.
I suspect that you mean that you want to punish people for falling on hard times. That takes us back to the Victorian work house that Dickens was railing against in Oliver Twist.

Can I also add that when I say "nobody" I do recognise that there are a few who work the system. But they are statistically insignificant and should not be used as an excuse to punish the poor.

There are plenty of bitches that think they are entailed to free government handouts.

Here is just one of them. One that voted for that Obama asshole.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

[Q


I would find a charity handout from a foodbank to be humiliating.

.

My goodness gracious. We wouldn't want a welfare queen to be "humiliated" now would we?

I am humiliated every time I have to pay my damn taxes knowing that the government is taking my money by force and giving it away to welfare queens.

Your use of the phrase "welfare queen" is telling. Most of your tax money goes to subsidising millionaires and corporations so that might be a comfort to you.

You are barking up the tree there Sport.

I am against all domestic and foreign welfare, subsidies, entitlements and bailouts. The government should never be in the business of taking money from somebody that earned it and then giving it away to somebody that didn't earn it.

Well its back to the nub of the OP. I believe that my world is better because I have provided for myself and my neighbour. You only care about your own situation. That is why you need guns and gated communities.

 

[Flash]

[Q

It isnt. I have paid into the national insurance fund all my working life. It has always been there for me and my neighbours.

Nothing is free.

When I am in trouble it will be there for me.

So the filthy ass government forced you to pay into a system and you may or may not have got some value for it and you have high taxation as a result.

How about the concept of freedom where the government doesn't tell you how to run your life or take your money by force and give to somebody else? A concept of personal responsibility where you determine your own health care instead of some stupid bureaucrat whose boss is a corrupt politician elected by special interest groups? Have you ever envisioned that?

 

[Tommy Tainant]

[Q

Nobody wants to be beholden to charity or the state so I dont get the "motivation" angle. the motivation is already there.
I suspect that you mean that you want to punish people for falling on hard times. That takes us back to the Victorian work house that Dickens was railing against in Oliver Twist.

Can I also add that when I say "nobody" I do recognise that there are a few who work the system. But they are statistically insignificant and should not be used as an excuse to punish the poor.

There are plenty of bitches that think they are entailed to free government handouts.

Here is just one of them. One that voted for that Obama asshole.

So thats one.

 

[Flash]

[Q

Well its back to the nub of the OP. I believe that my world is better because I have provided for myself and my neighbour. You only care about your own situation. That is why you need guns and gated communities.

It is called "personal responsibility". I am much better suited to look after my on welfare than some stupid bureaucrat. I will help my neighbor if I feel it is necessary. I don't need some filthy ass government weenie telling me how to run my life.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

[Q

It isnt. I have paid into the national insurance fund all my working life. It has always been there for me and my neighbours.

Nothing is free.

When I am in trouble it will be there for me.

So the filthy ass government forced you to pay into a system and you may or may not have got some value for it and you have high taxation as a result.

How about the concept of freedom where the government doesn't tell you how to run your life or take your money by force and give to somebody else? A concept of personal responsibility where you determine your own health care instead of some stupid bureaucrat whose boss is a corrupt politician elected by special interest groups? Have you ever envisioned that?

Britain had "freedom" for centuries before the arrival of the welfare state. It was shit.
Children were sent up chimneys ,veteran sold match books in public squares and the old and sick died in workhouses.
The biggest employment in Victorian London was child prostitution.
Essentially what you are saying is "Im all right so fuck you".
Its not a moral stance and not a Christian one either.

 

[Flash]

[Q

So thats one.

There are tens of millions of those shitheads in this country and they are the ones that vote for the filthy ass Democrats that give them the free stuff. Despicable, isn't it? We can thank our Brit friend for bringing them over as slaves, can't we?

 

[Flash]

[
Britain had "freedom" for centuries before the arrival of the welfare state. It was shit.
Children were sent up chimneys ,veteran sold match books in public squares and the old and sick died in workhouses.
The biggest employment in Victorian London was child prostitution.
Essentially what you are saying is "Im all right so fuck you".
Its not a moral stance and not a Christian one either.

I know you Euros think Freedom, Liberty and self determination sucks. That is why we told you to go screw yourselves back in 1776.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

[
Britain had "freedom" for centuries before the arrival of the welfare state. It was shit.
Children were sent up chimneys ,veteran sold match books in public squares and the old and sick died in workhouses.
The biggest employment in Victorian London was child prostitution.
Essentially what you are saying is "Im all right so fuck you".
Its not a moral stance and not a Christian one either.

I know you Euros think Freedom, Liberty and self determination sucks. That is why we told you to go screw yourselves back in 1776.

Freedom and Liberty for some, but not all, as I recall.