Obama didnt cheat on his wife with a porn star then lie about it and pay her hush money. That’s a start. He also doesn’t call people childish names via tweet.
Is it the governments responsibility to put out a house fire if its burning? Why is it the governments responsibility to establish a military? Or, are there some things that society deems important enough to protect? Why should a young child’s health be beholden to their parents choices, if the child has no means of providing for itself? Children are not commodities.
Obama is light years ahead of Trump in terms of moral and human decency. Not being able to admit this just proves your partisan lense is what is at stake here - not your righteousness or sense of morality.
How was it working before govt involvement? Elderly poverty was at a very high percent until SSI was created. Nothing stopped the people from solving that problem before govt stepped in. It just wasn’t solved but now it is.
I dont understand why we need the government to protect us. Why cant our communities just form our own private militias
I am more about reducing government involvement. The government attaches strings to federal funding. Start with someone who wants to alleviate a specific pain and suffering in one specific location, for a specific group. He gets the community involved, they come up with some resources, but it is not enough. He submits a request to the federal government for the rest of what is needed and he receives it without the usual government strings attached. The people who work on this project are paid through the local organization and are not government employees. The local group should ask for an organize volunteer help–tell the community what is needed and how they can help.
Since corporations are growing in number, instead of taxes going straight to the government, each business (if it wants to instead) could sponsor a certain cause, where instead of a local organization even having to approach the government, goes to the corporation.
People do step up. Go Fund Me pages are now in vogue. Go Fund Me/Come Help Us pages, working with community clubs, churches, etc. are also ways to find help–and many are happy to find ways to be of help for a cause they either believe in or have empathy with.
These are broad ideas, but the general idea is to get people working for themselves, for an organization, for a cause, for each other, instead of becoming government employees.
Let’s keep an eye on business funded charter schools and watch how they work out. Let’s see if we can do better than government. This cannot happen overnight. Baby steps, done slowly, but done right. The reason individuals helping individuals doesn’t always work out is because sometimes it takes a group or a community–individuals working together. We can do this without the Federal government telling us how, attaching strings, etc.
Are you seriously asking if there are things like a child’s life, important enough to merit government intervention and programs while simultaneously advocating the murder of children in or even just out of the womb?
You say children are not commodities, yet a woman’s " choice" makes them exactly that…
Sadly, I believe you are serious…
I’ve never advocated for abortion “outside” of the womb. What are you talking about? I am ok with abortion before 3 months, before a fetus has developed any brain function capable of consciousness or self awareness. Now, back to the subject that you are trying to avoid - if a mother does not take care of her BORN child (food, clothing, shelter) do you think the government should step in?
FDR never intended for Social Security to become what it is. It was intended to be a temporary program, but like all government programs, they never end. BTW, do you know how much money is actually in the SS trust fund? ZERO!! Know why? Because our wonderful, decent, moral, benevolent big brother has stolen it and replaced the money with IOUs. Do you also know it’s funded by essentially a Ponzi scheme? Don’t know how old you are, but don’t hold your breath hoping SS will be there for you when you retire. But of course our government would NEVER lie to you…
While you give thoughts and prayers, the rest of us will through the republic actually do something to help all impoverished children in this country. Tell me, op, if a mother doesnt take care of her child (food, clothing, shelter) do you think the government should step in?
If you’re talking about abuse or neglect, of course the law should step in. LBJ started the war on poverty over 50 years ago and it still exists… Government can not cure poverty… You are not helping All impoverished children, not even close.
So if a mother cannot afford to feed her child or provide adequate shelter or health care, then you agree the government should step in? Or, if a mother cannot afford that, “small” government should just take her child away? Tell me op, how much do you think it costs per month to raise a child? You see it’s easy to talk the talk - but when the church and society wont walk it, the government needs to help the helpless.
What I’m talking about is what’s being advocated in NY and VA… Not that any abortion isn’t murder. I asked a question early on and no one has even attempted an answer: how does abortion benefit a secular society?
Let me guess “she shouldnt have had a baby”
You willing to double school budgets and increase housing costs for that extra 30 million children? What if the mothers cant afford it? Adoption for all 30 million? What if they cant all find foster parents? Are we going to punish the lives of children and lower their standards of living because females have sex? Thoughts and prayers…gets nothing accomplished.
Here’s a thought, how about if we take the money were spending on 20 million illegals and spend it on Americans first? Here’s another thought: if we hadn’t aborted 60 million babies in the last 45 years, we would have millions more contributing to our society. Isn’t that another liberal belief? All people really desire and in fact will give their all for their fellow man if given the opportunity?
I repeat a premise in many posts, namely that people are not inherently good and just want to help their fellow man. We are inherently selfish, fallen sinners in need of a savior. Left to ourselves, we turn to evil and our evil brings a price, both on this Earth, and in our eternity.
You are agreeing with me ( at least about our nature) without even realizing you are doing so. You point out the truth; man, as individuals, does not step up enough to help his fellow man, which necessitates the need for government to do so. Right so far? If government is of, by and for the people, then they are comprised of us- the same selfish, fallen sinners in need of a savior. They are not inherently smarter, wiser, more honest or decent than we are and they ( of both parties) demonstrate this over and over… Government has a function, spelled out and limited by our constitution for a reason.
I am reminded that on another thread I offered a plan to address abortion. The plan was tested in Colorado and reduced teen abortion rates by over 60% ! But the plan involved birth control so conservatives on the thread started their attacks…
“Birth control promotes sex”
Rates for teen sexual activity declined
“The IUD used in the study is dangerous”
Unlike first generation IUDs, this one had very little issues and was very safe
“The cost was too high”
Colorado saved money versus what they had paid previously for teen pregnancies
“It’s not an ideal solution because it doesn’t eliminate abortion 100%”
And eventually it came down to not wanting a govt solution.
They would rather have more abortions than have govt involved in a solution.
Today’s pro-life conservative. (Not all, obviously)
Your ignorance of SSI is on full display. Govt has been very upfront on the status of SSI. It may drop down to a 70% payout to help cover the demographic issue. It would be impossible for it to not provide any funds like you imply.
Regardless, the poverty rate among the elderly dropped significantly when SSI was instituted. You have not addressed that. The free market didn’t fix the problem. Neither did charities. Neither did churches.
And millions more tha would need jobs and likely social benefits since mothers arent financially capable of supporting them. Do you have anything realistic to say beyond wishful thinking?
This is rambling, incoherent nonsense. If a mother cannot afford to raise her child, do you think the government should take her child, help financially support it, or do nothing and let the child suffer until the mother gets a better job or financial means? Let’s deal with REALITY. Simply wishing people wouldnt enter this country illegally doesnt help stopping illegal immigration. Simply wishing women wouldnt get pregnant doesn’t help us protect the children who are born into poverty, not having access to health care and basic needs.