Quote:
Originally Posted by bigrobwoot
Well, I haven't looked at this thread in a couple days, and there is a lot there to process. I'm not going to address each point, cuz it will take too long, and it'll make my brain hurt.
Let me see if I can summarize my opposition. Everyone has a story. I don't see why taxpayers should be forced to pick up the pieces. That's what charities are for, not governments. If you don't have enough shame to ask the government for a handout, then ask it of your peers. Go to your church and ask that they have a fundraiser because you fell on hard times. Ask people who WANT to give, don't ask the government to make us give.
That is my problem with most of the government-run help programs. Welfare, WIC, unemployment, and government-run health insurance/healthcare, etc. are all great in theory. The problem is, people have no shame anymore. There is no shame in asking for help, so there are a lot of people that have no desire to ever get off of them. If everyone was a respectable person, and only took what they needed to get back on their feet, that would be great. The problem is, these lazy good-for-nothings stay on these programs their whole lives, with no shame for it. This increases the anticipated costs, which means more taxes to pay for it. Or worse services.
For example: I just got home from Raley's. In line in front of me was a single mother using WIC. Fine, that is what it is for, to help single mothers down on their luck. Then, I started to think about the situation. It is 12:30 on a Monday, and instead of looking for work to get off of all of the goverent aid, she is shopping in sweatpants. There is no reason for her to try to do better, in her opinion.
Stuff like that disgusts me. If this is too off-topic for the healthcare thread, I'll make a new thread if you want.
|
So, you had a detailed conversation with that woman, learned her backstory, her problems, her family history, and came to the conclusion that she's a lazy good-for-nothing person.
Or did you just make that assumption based on her sweatpants?
How do you know she's a single mother? How do you know she doesn't have Monday's off? How do you know whether or not she's got a work preventing disability? How do you know she doesn't have 5 kids which is too much to handle in addition to a job after her husband was killed in Iraq? How do you know she's not on WIC because she's suddenly caring for her sister's kids after her sister went to jail for meth?
My point is there are a million things you don't know about someone to make the assumption they're a lazy good-for-nothing disgusting person just because they're shopping on food stamps in sweatpants on a Monday at lunch time.
Unless you're a heartless bastard, I bet if you spent an hour chatting with that lady you'd end up buying her lunch.
And I can't understand your point about shame. You suggest people have too much shame to ask the gov't for a handout. Then you suggest people don't have any shame and therefore any gov't handouts will be abused.
And private charity is a wonderful concept. The problem is, unless they've been there, people don't naturally have an urge to give much to charity. (How much of your monthly income do you contribute to private charities?) And because of the limited giving to charity, charity organizations are perpetually unable to serve the demand. This is why taxes to pay for baseline social services work much better, as it spreads out the burden across many people making the burden very small for each individual while making it much easier for the social programs to reach the people that need them.