[Ask the Gulch] What if any opinions do you have about Welfare? I read somewhere that the number of Americans on food stamps has increased substantially? Can those of individualist mindsets condone welfare, if the person on welfare finds productive work?
Posted by mothyspace 8 years, 3 months ago to Ask the Gulch
Welfare officials on the other hand have a vested interest in growing the program as much as possible as the resource from which they draw is not finite and the more resources the handle...the grater the staffs, salaries and perks.
To begin with, it violates the basic Gulch principle: "I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine." The program takes from some for the unearned, unpaid benefit of others.
Second, the "others" who get the unearned, unpaid benefit include more than "down on their luck" individuals. "Food stamps" always make part of the Farm Bill. That bill turns farmers into Orren Boyles. And may of them don't even care.
Third, it's a trap. An elaborate trap. It traps people into dependency on the government.
Fourth: it makes no effort to address the reason anyone is "down on his luck": the pervasive economic interference that means many couldn't become independent even if they tried--because the government wouldn't let them. When the government makes job creation impossible, they might as well tell job seekers, "You may not get out of our soup line."
I would be more tolerant if there was a 40 hour work requirement, monthly drug testing, and the welfare benefits could ONLY be used to buy real food like vegetables.
Basic, basic need, and you still have to provide value for receipt of it.
You watch 99% drop off if you implemented those policies.
As for medicare being something you actually pay for, that's just totally untrue. There's no way the few dollars that we have stolen from our paychecks could EVER pay for our medical insurance as we get older.
(1) Churches and other private institutions are better at directing help to those who can become self sufficient, and away from those who will just go on mooching until somebody stops them. The Mormons are especially good at this; they can and do put unemployed people into jobs.
(2) A private "safety net" is the kind of spontaneous public good that ought to be encouraged, a set of habits that creates better communities. Having the state make charity a state monopoly destroys those habits and leads to the kind of alienation that has given us movements like BLM.
(3) Under a state monopoly system, some deserving people "fall through the cracks" and don't qualify. I expect this to happen less often under private charity.
I'm aware of Rand's disdain for charity as demeaning to both giver and taker, and I somewhat agree with it, but I don't feel it should stop us from giving at all.
food and sometimes cash to poor residents. In many cases those capable were required to work for the town or county were given jobs for the earn the money and food they received.
In special cases where those needing help were not capable of working: widows, children, the elderly, and the disabled were helped without thought of return. In the philosophy of objectivism Ayn Rand pointed out "Don’t try to be your brother’s keeper or to force him to be yours. Live independently". This to me means we should have the moral duty to decide as individuals (as they did in the past) whether we will help others and in what way.
There is always some work out there. Better to get the proposed welfare recipients that have some skills to go out and look for work somewhere. Free lunches only promote sitting around and not finding work.
No skin in the game, no vote. That, more than any single one thing, will eliminate the current state of our elections as auctions, in which politicians fall all over themselves competing to offer voters more of other people's property.
I have many more ideas on welfare, which are expressed in my Manifesto: http://www.frombearcreek.com/animals-...
I think that sometimes things happen in people's lives. A hand up creates a productive citizen who will put money back into the tax coffers.
Also, on welfare, voting privilege is suspended.
If we are going to be taxed and we're going to be forced to fund welfare I'd rather a constructive hand-up that lessens the welfare rolls than a wasteful hand-out that only expands it. You?
I'm not talking of a philosophical utopian idea, I'm talking about to make reality come to exemplify what it should have been from the beginning - a helping hand, not a hand out or a long term career. You can say all you want about the perfect society but taxes aren't going anywhere. I'd rather see the money used productively and in such a way as to reduce the problem.
On the other hand, he is the kind of person who will spend thousands of dollars to save the life of one of his pets. Maybe I'm just a cold-hearted bastard?
smells like coldness but is just reality at work! -- j
.
The strong arming was what one Sergeant Major explained as stuff rolls down hill. You are at the bottom. If you prefer not to be buried in a bill pile of stuff pony up. That means negarive efficency reports,, No recommendations for promotions, Finding yourself on the duty roster for everything and anything especially on weekends and holidays. In front of the unit were signs on what percent has complied. Not only this stuff but passing Physical Training Tests, weapons qualifications,. you name it. We had people in casts runing six minute miles on their records. Shooting Expert while they were on annual leave, The people up the hill would catch the same stuff if those 100% signs were not out front on time and they were inspected.
But it was still a Protection Racket under RICO statutes.
We had our oaths of office but we als had a dark side that started with some General saying..."if we got everyone in the Army to donate one dollar a month." Then appointing a project or officer.
The Sergeant Major finished his speil with "think of it as purchasing $5.37 worth of non-harrassment or get ready for guard duty. Since you will be the only one on the duty roster you will get the duty every night.." Add in Kitchen Police and stuff like that you'll be busy until aren't a soldier anymore and still be a Private. "
Translate that program into other fudging on the honor codes you end up with careerists instead of leaders..
It was very much a boot camp lite compared to what I went through at Parris Island.
I was taught a lot of BS that did not apply to real prison work but that's another story.
At the end of this training came the final exam. To flunk it meant to get fired. I made a high grade.
But before we took it, word began to buzz that several blacks were going to flunk it on purpose. That was hard to believe the way we were now all looking so sharp marching about with a banner held before us.
Turned out to be true. There they were standing in a group of about a dozen blinking back at us before they were told to go pack and skedaddle to apply for their unemployment checks.
Suppose every class provides room and board to such wait to fail the final exam moochers who are also trained to shoot along with some hand-to-hand combat.
contribute to charities at will, using discretion which
the government cannot use. . productive charities! -- j
.
No more food stamps I know of it's all credit card appearance so they won't lose self esteem or have to face up to the fact they are speniding OPM.
Wizards Rule #2: "The greatest harm can come from the best of intentions."
However, if it must exist, recipients should forgo the right to vote in any election following a period they've received welfare.
Also if it has to exist, I favor a privately managed work program rather than welfare, where group of companies is contracted to employ and train people in some manner not to rather than just hand outs.