Does anybody believe that the current welfare state is actually helping anybody? I just read a stat that would say no. Back in 1950 1 in 12 people were in poverty and the government spent less than 10 billion on welfare. Today 1 and 6 are in poverty and we spend over 300 billion. That is calculating inflation. So I ask again, is welfare really helping people or does it make them a slave? Doesn’t a welfare state create an environment that takes a persons ambition away? I know what you’re thinking, I don’t care about poor people. That isn’t the case. The case I am posing to you is this, “helping people” is not in the job description of the government. I believe that this burden should fall on the family, church, synagogue, mosque, chapel or temple. In a sense it is us to taking care of us, not via the government. We need to start taking a personal look at those around us and start helping each other. Quit waiting for the government, who doesn’t know what your neighbors needs and help them. We need to quit looking for the hand out and be the hand out. That is the change that will help America and those of our neighbors who are in poverty. As my dad would say, we need to be a “community”. THAT is being an American.
Thomas Paine
-
you said what...
ReggieRocket on Waterboarding vs. Abortio… pbatus on Barack Hussein Obama: Say it L… pbatus on Who Am I Really?!?… pbatus on Who Am I Really?!?… pbatus on Who Am I Really?!?… -
Recent Posts
-
Blog Stats
- 20,454 hits
Actually, this is where I must differ with you Patriot. Welfare does help many people. It helps liberal politicians stay in power. There is a group of politicians that say they want to help people, but in all reality, they just want to keep them down and dependent on them.
I hear it all the time from their constituency. “What are they (government) going to do for me?” Not, what am I going to do for myself? Can you believe that JFK said, “Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country?” He was a democrat! Whatever happened to that democratic party? JFK would be kicked out of their party today. Have you noticed politicians running for office today want to look like JFK, but nobody quotes him?
Take this tax relief that is coming in May. The entitlement, dependent culture really believes the government is giving them something! Oh, yes, welfare supports an entire culture of people….liberal politicians could not live without it!
By some estimates, the poverty rate was as high as 50 percent in the late 19th century. By 1928, it was around 20 percent, when Herbert Hoover declared:
We all know what happened just over a year later: the Great Depression. During the 1930s, poverty rates were again above 40 percent. By 1950, in the wake of the War, the poverty rate had fallen to around 30 percent (nowhere near the 8 percent you suggested).
Pastor Hawkins mentioned Kennedy. It was JFK who laid the groundwork for the War on Poverty and the aid programs enacted by his successor in 1964. By that point, the poverty rate had declined to Hoover-era levels: 19 percent. A decade later, in 1973, the number bottomed out at 11.1 percent, the lowest in our history. It rose in the 80s, dipped a bit in the 90s, and is rising again now: currently somewhere around 12 or 15 percent.
How do we define poverty today? A family of 4 living on less than $21,200 per year. (I can’t imagine how people do that.) By HUD’s estimation, 1 in 8 Americans are in poverty. Many millions more, while not “officially impoverished”, face serious challenges putting food on the table. This is a massive problem requiring major effort on a scale few institutions are equipped to handle.
It might surprise you to know that in 1964, the poverty rate for 18 to 64 year olds was roughly the same as it is today: 10.4 percent. The people who have benefited most from the War on Poverty are seniors, for whom the poverty rate was 28.5 percent in 1962 (today, it’s around 10 percent). For children, the rate has fallen from 23 percent to around 16 percent over the past 40 years. Children are still hardest hit.
(“Welfare” was massively overhauled in 1996-97 (during a presidency I’m sure you’d characterize as “liberal”). AFDC was replaced by Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF). Under the new rules (now a decade old), recipients must find work as soon as they are able, and within 2 years. Failure to work results in a loss of benefits, and there is a lifetime maximum of 60 months of support. There has been no “Welfare State” to complain about for more than 10 years.)
So, how do we fight poverty? Family, of course. And religious institutions for sure. I’ll add private charities to your list — my family supports our local food bank. Government aid and private charity are not mutually exclusive, though. Right now we have both, and despite their combined efforts, poverty is still a serious challenge (albeit nowhere near historic proportions). What happens if we pull the plug on government assistance? Life instantly gets much harder for a lot of vulnerable people.
So you want to get rid of government assistance programs, do you? It seems to me there’s one good way to make that happen. Churches and private charities could scale up their efforts, and create self-sustaining programs to fully meet the needs of vulnerable people in their communities. If you’re not content with a public-private partnership, expand the private side until the public side becomes unnecessary.
Trust me: I’ll celebrate with both of you when the government no longer has to support housing, nutrition, child care, education or health care. I’ll dance in the streets when aid programs are no longer necessary. I’m just not willing to let our children pick through dumpsters or our elderly eat dog food to get us there.
There are 35.9 million people in poverty in the United States, and 12.9 million of them are children. We have a moral duty to alleviate their suffering and help them achieve self-sufficiency. At this moment, that means government must be in the business of helping people. Are private institutions equipped to handle poverty? Not so far as we have seen. Prove me wrong.
The dole (welfare) was one of the reasons that the Roman Empire disintegrated. And countries with this system or considering this system will certainly decline.
You might like reading this old post titled Welfare.
@Tom … I just read the post you linked. Nicely written. Two thoughts:
(1) Welfare was reformed in 1996, and the results have been dramatic. It’s nothing like it used to be. It’s no longer possible to be “on the dole” from cradle to grave. Please poke around the web for a few minutes and study the outcomes of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996.
(2) Food Stamps — Fraud is detestable, of course. We should do what we can to stop it, and prosecute people who abuse the system. Aid should be accessible only to those who require it.
I can think of only one example where I recognized someone was receiving food assistance. (These days, it’s all electronic, so recipients no longer stand out.) A little girl was shopping with her grandfather, who seemed to be her caregiver. He was toting around a portable oxygen tank. They were buying food for a modest birthday celebration for the child.
They included a small box of candles with their purchase, but the item was rejected as ineligible for the food assistance program. Grandpa told to the girl that the candles had to go back. She was disappointed, but did not make a scene.
I wanted to help so badly. I remember standing in line behind them with my hand in my pocket, clutching a fistful of bills, trying desperately to summon a way to offer to pay for the candles without embarrassing or insulting them. It never came to me.
It was heartbreaking. I’ll never forget it.
…
Regarding the general spirit of your post, and who should and shot not be on welfare, we are in agreement. I’m glad the reforms of the 90s have been so successful. I’d like to see more work towards restricting aid to those who need it, and eliminating fraud.
(That should be “… should and should not be on welfare …”)
Mike you are so right. It is the moral responsibility of the people to help the truly needy among us, not government. The trouble is there has been too many who have come to power on the backs of the needy, and their culture of dependency has kept them there. If government would keep the money in the pockets of the tax payer we would have more to help those among us in need. I think the local level is better to handle these needs than in a large government program.
Who has come to power on the backs of the needy? In my lifetime, we have had 20 years of conservative Republicans in the White House, and just 8 years with a liberal Democrat. It was the Democrat who transformed welfare, and removed millions of people from public assistance. (Also, how is advocating for the poor a bad thing?)
There’s no denying that the American people are generous, but were we any less so in 1962? Or 1928? Or 1890? What can private charities do today that they weren’t able to do historically?
If we don’t come together as a society (by way of our government), we must all step up as individuals. When a tank of gas costs $50 and a bushel of wheat costs $8.55, there’s not much room in the budget for generosity. That means the few who can afford it will be required to give more. A lot more.
So we face a decision: We can turn off federal assistance, hoping we are as generous as we aspire to be, and that things won’t return to how they once were. Or we can acknowledge that while imperfect, our current system has gone a long way toward improving the lives of the least fortunate among us. (Or, I suppose we can just remove federal assistance, and say “to hell with the poor”. That doesn’t sit right with me, though.)
Or there’s another option: You and I can give [substantially] more to private charities, which will reduce the need for public aid. The public programs can then be scaled back, reducing the tax burden, and giving us more money to donate privately. A Pollyanna feedback loop, if you will.
Mike, surely you jest if you think by voluntarily giving to community needs will reduce the tax burden…you are either very young or very naive or both. That will never happen….who knows maybe I’m just getting cynical….I hope not.
My thought is that capitalism works most effectively when it is free and the burden of the need is administered by those who love their fellow man and are guided by the principals of the Divine Creator. Government cannot and will not ever be as effective as God working in the hearts of loving people. There is a measure of discernment that must be used to know who giving aid to is a help or enabling unhealthy behavior.
Who has enjoyed power on the back of oppressed people? Where do I begin? Let’s start with a couple of contemporary and corrupt mayors in Detroit and in New Orleans.
Mike, you are so right in not just cutting off federal aid…that would be so tragic. I’m absolutely in harmony with you in the whole social justice concept. We may just differ as to which is the most effective way to make that happen.
My answer would be a gradual return to faith based organizations taking the lead in what, morally, is their responsiblity. Businesses should be actively involved in this process too. BUT, in must follow the heart….not the legislation.
One of my favorite sayings is this:
America is great because America is good. When Amercia cease to be good, America will cease to be great.
This country and the form of government established by our forefathers will only stand, in this form, when guided by the hand of God and His word.
In the State of Michigan, Medicaid reimburses hospitals and physicians for the medical care of 289,700 disabled persons, at a cost of around $3 billion (with a “B”) per year. You propose to dissolve this program and transfer the duty of supporting these individuals to local religious institutions, with no government aid.
What might we expect to happen if we destroy a $3 billion program and shift the burden to local organizations? I’ll make a few predictions: (1) Poor communities with no philanthropic base will be catastrophically under-served, and even wealthy communities will struggle with fundraising; (2) Administration will be substantially more expensive, with hundreds of organizations now replacing one; (3) Program expenses will be substantially higher, with no “strength in numbers” or regulatory authority.
Suppose every man, woman and child was willing and able to pitch in an equal share for medical care of the disabled in their communities (an impossible proposition). The cost would be around $300 per person per year. Some people can’t pay. Some people won’t pay. For you and me, the burden would be substantially larger.
I’m assuming you consider medical care of the disabled a worthy cause, so you’ll dutifully hand over $1,500 each year to support your church’s efforts in this area.
… and now on to medical aid for the elderly: $1.5 billion, supporting 133,200 Michiganders. Michigan’s total Medicaid budget is $8.2 billion. That’s just medical reimbursements. We haven’t even started to talk about housing, nutrition, energy or education.
Medical care for the disabled seems like an insurmountable problem, but we have come together as a nation and solved it. Can we split ourselves up into many thousands of smaller groups, and achieve the same goal with the same efficacy at the same cost? I don’t see how.
Explain it to me.
Mike, Medicaid is an excellent insurance program. I’m not in favor of disbanding this federally funded and state run program. Nor do I think the Patriot is advocating this either. Medicaid has excellent guidelines and in some cases requires people to pay a share of their benefit.
In this post I’m refering to the able bodied person who chooses to live off others instead of work. Low income workers are eligible for Medicaid. They contribute. That is so much different than those who choose not to work at all. In some states, single mothers are “rewarded” by getting more welfare benefits by having more children…how crazy is that?
A passage in the bible states that, “if a man will not work he shall not eat.” This passage refers to the able bodied person, not the blind, lame, elderly, infirmed, etc.
Passing the minimum wage rates would also fit into this stream of thought. It helps no one, but politicians. Oh, I know there are some who think it’s helping them, but in reality it is not.
I agree with you completely in that the church should not be in the insurance business. Rather, the church should be in the business of dealing with the local per diam needs of the needy among them. Look at the need per capita in a giving City, town, village and you will find ample resources to care for their own. These locals will also weed out the truly needy from the culture of takers. Irresponsible behavior should never be rewarded. Hunger is a great motivator!
Medicaid is not insurance. It’s needs-based social welfare — an entitlement program. Limited income is a primary eligibility requirement. (Medicare, by contrast, is a social insurance program.)
Your opinion of Welfare (i.e. cash assistance to indigent families) is clearly shaped by obsolete information. We are in agreement that able-bodied people should be required to work. Fortunately, this is exactly what the law now demands. (See 1996 Welfare Reform)
Let’s look at a program that addresses ordinary “per diem” needs: Food Stamps (eligibility requirements here — briefly: “poor people”).
In 2007, this program helped 26.4 million people at a cost of $33.1 billion. I can’t find county-level statistics, but based on statewide participation (1.2 million) and census data, there might be around 12,000 food stamp recipients in Lenawee County, receiving $1.14 million per month ($13.68 million per year) in food assistance. If every man, woman and child in the county paid an even share (impossible, of course), it would be $133.87 annually. Some can’t, and some won’t. The generous will pay substantially more.
Can churches replace the Food Stamp program with the same efficiency and efficacy? Suppose they cut loose half of all recipients. Could they administer a $16.5 billion program serving 13.2 million people? Again, I don’t see how.
Don’t get me wrong. I’m not doubting the generosity or commitment of religious communities. What I’m saying is that there are some problems that are well beyond the capacity of individuals and their local faith-based organizations. We have decided we should alleviate hunger among the poor. In Lenawee County, it would be impossible to raise $1.14 million each month, or even half that, for this purpose. And even if it was possible, there are many other needs to be addressed.
It might not conform to certain political ideals, but some of the biggest strides we have made have been by way of our largest communities: the states and our nation. No, it’s not perfect. But consider the alternative.
Mike, normally I am impressed with your accuracy in your comments. In regards to Medicaid, funded by the Fed and administered by the state, is insurance. You are simply wrong in this regard.
And, yes, I do think faith based organizations could handle the volume in Lenawee County. I do think those numbers could come down if properly administered. Again, I share your concern for the poor and needy. We just differ in it’s administration.
Mike, Let me give you an example of what is possible. Our small congregation did something very radical this Christmas. We decided to forego some presents and take up a special contribution to drill a water well in Kenya, Africa for an orphanage. We needed to raise $5,000….at Christmas….during Michigan’s historical economic downturn….all the while maintaining our support for ongoing ministry needs. This small group of people in one congregation raised over $10,000!! This small church is going to drill the well themselves. 100% of the proceeds will go to the expense of drilling the well. Those who will make the trip will raise their own travel funds. Due to the generosity of these giving people, we will now be drilling two water wells! More than 1,000 people will now have the opportunity to drink fresh, safe, clean water! All the while we are supporting local ministry needs! Imagine what could happen in the hundreds of churches in Lenawee County….especially if they had that tax money left in their pockets!
Mike,
Here is a link to support the definition of Medicaid:
http://www.socialsecurity.gov/disabilityresearch/wi/medicaid.htm
Technically, Medicaid and Medicare are both “insurance” in that they operate on the principle of shared risk. Most working Americans contribute to these programs, and we all benefit from the safety net they provide. In this way, all entitlement and welfare programs are both “social protection” and a form of “insurance”.
Medicare generally requires that recipients work for a covered employer for at least 10 years. Most people don’t pay for Hospital Insurance (part A) because they paid Medicare taxes while they were working. There is a monthly premium for Medical Insurance (Part B), about $1,200 per year. The entire program is federally subsidized.
By contrast, Medicaid’s function is not to act as health insurance per se, but rather to reimburse providers for expenses incurred by people who cannot afford insurance. It’s geared towards certain low-income families, the disabled, pregnant women and the elderly. Coverage is assured, regardless of employment history or the ability to pay premiums. In this way, it is a welfare program — free insurance for the poor.
(By the way, the cost of Medicaid is split between the states and the federal government. Federal contributions are based on state poverty levels. Medicare is administered at the federal level.)
I read Russell’s post on the well in Kenya a few months back. What an outstanding achievement! I’d love to follow your progress as the project proceeds. When do you start? Can you post photos and comments?
I don’t want to belittle your congregation’s good work, but to put things in perspective, $10,000 is just 0.87% of Lenawee County’s estimated monthly Food Stamp bill. In order to meet the needs of your community, you (and other local churches) would need to duplicate the Kenya Well fundraising effort 115 times over, and you’d need to do it each and every month, regardless of economic circumstances.
Can Lenawee County’s churches raise $13.68 million per year for local food aid? That would be amazing. But then what about housing assistance? And energy? Child care? Education and job training? And to add another dimension to our discussion, can our nation’s poorest communities achieve the same feat? After all, there are places where poverty is substantially higher, and median income is substantially lower.
Churches can do fantastic things, like dig wells to provide clean water for a thousand orphans in Africa. We need to acknowledge, though, that some challenges are simply beyond the reach of small clusters of even the most committed, well-intentioned people. To conquer these challenges requires unity.
Mike,
I’m certain we could do it. You must remember 3 things while crunching those numbers. 1.) There are more than 115 congregations in Lenawee county 2.) They are already helping in welfare causes 3.) They could do exponentially more if the money that went to the state was left in their pockets! Anyone can throw the numbers of need in one pot….and see that it is a big pot! It needs to be broken down to the local level and it becomes easily managed. Before Uncle Sugar came along…who took care of the poor and needy? Answer: The people in their local community. And it did them good! The moral responsibility should remain with them. Thanks for listening.
The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is the largest transparently operated charity in the world, with an endowment of $38.7 billion. In 2007, they distributed just over $2 billion in grants. The Food Stamp program is a commitment 16.55 times the size of the Gates Foundation’s current capacity. It’s huge.
The numbers look big in the national pot, but $13.68 million is no small number for a county of only 100,000 people. Gas is on its way to $4. Food is getting more expensive. Our personal savings rate is in negative territory. I just don’t see how a local program based on voluntary contributions can be sustained.
You say it can be done. As far as I know, nothing like it ever has. In 1962, 28.5% of seniors lived in poverty. Local communities were not moved to action, but our nation was. Today, the poverty rate among seniors is in line with that of working-age adults.
We can’t just shut off federal aid programs. The consequences would be unacceptable. We must first have a viable replacement. That’s a problem because no one wants to pay to duplicate our efforts. Why spend $13.68 million on food that is already paid for? It’s a bit of a dilemma.
So why not focus on unmet needs? If churches rush in to fill the voids left behind by government cut-backs, there will be no need to restore spending when there’s more room in the budget. Why haven’t we seen more of that?
Good point…we should!
hi are they still assisting un-wed mothers or out of work mothers with welfare asistance, medical,daycare even how much do they get receive on average it should be told to them and limited to five children its a help up not a hand out with checks on progress they should be required to get a job and they provide daycare
its a free ride in some cases the father still comes around and they also dont get married so that the mother can still receive benefits. cause their stingy with money or have addictions this happens in all races black hispanic and white and asian…..
THIS MAY BE LONG BUT INTERESTING I do not feel recieving help from our goverment is wrong at all I mean I have helped our goverment on many occations even gave my life for it? yet because we make a little to much money we have been turned down for example Christmas of 2002 I was robbed for 1,800 bucks (very Scary) I know I Know I shouldn’t have had that kind of money on me but I took the money out of the bank to buy money orders for my monthly bills? where I banked charged 3 bucks a pop for money orders (I since stopped banking at Wells Fargo Opps did I say that? ) anyway I stopped to purchase gas at a convenient store the ones with gas pumps and I paid inside .. well in Las Vegas if you have a large bill you have to stick that bill in one of there slot machines and verify the large bill via the machine and recieve money at counter and all that going on around Christmas when all the “Vultures” or Insects are scope’n everything out to see who they can rip off and Vegas is really bad well sure enough I was one of those unfortunate people a guy jumped in car at same time I did pointed a gun at me and held me up he only saw the 100 dollar bill but I couldn’t take money from the other money which was wrapped around so neatly (Bummer!) but the real crook was the goverment that told me they couldn’t help me so I could get back on my feet no one! not Welfare, General assistant programs, Church’s, any organizations all because my income was to great? the bill collectors wow they are ruthless the phrase everything else can and most likely will stop but those bills, will sure to keep a come’n and if you don’t pay hey they don’t care… Ya know the Welfare Dept. made wait…. wasted 3 days of my time jumping threw there hoops and I asked (this is no joke) even the security guard about a emergency funds that they had for just our type of situation a family who didn’t qualify for assistance but did not have one spare dime to our name and the answer was always yes… well after waiting in line being embarrassed because the workers basically yelled out your private and personal information no concern at all and when I finally got past 4-5 diffrent workers (seriously they do this to discourage you from apply’n but I stuck to my guns! Hey we adopted our (at that time) 6 year old granddaughter and I wanted to make sure she had some type of Christmas? but here I was the very last worker the entire 3 days they all made it sound like I had a chance to at least get a few bucks (heck I was willing to pay it back even) but this worker said No! definitly not you make to much money??? I completely blew it I yelled out that this was something you might have told me when I told you 100 times these past 3 days about my income and if it was going to be a problem? Then I asked to speak with the dept head and he actually got mad at me for being frustrated? and said his helpers were only following procedure Egads is it proceduyre to waste my time? make me feel like dirt? then decline my application when I had already told you folks my yearly income to even the security? hahaha Welfare is a joke … had I came across the border and had a child …things would have been diffrent they would have rolled out the red carpets! hey Im even a Vet and this is what type Of Goverment I fought for? the Vietnemese are better off where they are … Frustrated yeah you can say that …