Simple. End the war on poverty AKA welfare.
Liberals don’t seem to understand that if you want to eradicate poverty, you have to know how wealth is created. It doesn’t come from government. It doesn’t come from sitting on your hands. It comes from getting a job. The Liberal architects of our welfare system seem never to have asked the question: Would you work if you were paid not to work?
Here’s what the Liberals say:
“We need welfare to give the poor a safety net.”
Wrong. The American welfare system was originally designed to help the deserving poor with the basic necessities of life: food and shelter. This is honorable, but the current system strays far from these ideals. Now it caters to untold numbers who use welfare as a hammock. Such a deal! Why would you work if you got paid not to work? As an unemployed teenager, why should you have to wait to have children until you can afford to care for them when the government will pay you a subsidy right now if you have a child?
It’s pretty simple: if you tax something, you get less of it; if you subsidize something, you’ll get more of it.
Despite decades of research by liberal social workers, psychologists, sociologists and other assorted do-gooder liberals – and despite $8 Trillion in social service spending since 1965 – has anyone really been able to come up with a better and more successful social program than just going out and getting a job?
Look, sometimes bad things do happen to good people. Some welfare is necessary, although it would be better handled by private charities that can better monitor the effects of their own efforts than by the government, which just sends a check.
It should be available in limited circumstances to help formerly productive, responsible members of society get back on their feet. Welfare should not, however, be permitted to replace work, family, or personal responsibility.
That’s because this safety net just doesn’t work. Thanks in large part to the perverse financial incentives created by generous welfare programs, illegitimacy, welfare rolls, and crime rates have exploded. Since the rise of government welfare, the American family has disintegrated. Since the 1960’s, the number of single-parent households and the number of illegitimate children has gone through the roof.
According to the Centers for Disease Control, National Health Statistics, Division of Vital Statistics, when the War on Poverty began, only 7.7 percent of American children were born out of wedlock – in 2002, that figure was 34.5 percent.
Why? Liberal social welfare programs reward illegitimacy, unemployment, and single parenthood. And when you reward such socially undesirable behavior, you get more of it. It’s that simple.
“Conservatives oppose welfare because they’re mean and not compassionate towards the poor.”
Oh really? Well, let me tell you something: Conservatives are more compassionate than Liberals. Liberals love to talk the talk when it comes to compassion, but they don’t walk the walk. Liberals constantly talk about how society should spend more of someone else’s money to help out poor children in inner-city schools, but they continually refuse to try school vouchers, which would give inner-city parents the financial ability to remove their children from failing schools and place them in schools that work.
Liberals talk about how Americans should be compassionate to the criminals who create heinous crimes, but they themselves show little compassion to the victims of crime. Nor do they take any notice of the devastating effects crime has on crime-ridden neighborhoods.
Liberals claim to be compassionate towards the poor, but simultaneously overtax the people who give the poor their best chance at a middle-class lifestyle: businessmen and employers who could provide those poor people with jobs.
Conservatives are far more compassionate – and a whole lot less patronizing – than liberals. Liberals think its “compassionate” to raise taxes on hardworking, productive Americans in order to transfer other people’s money to Democratic constituents: welfare recipients and government bureaucrats.
In stark contrast, conservatives show real compassion by trying to create a world with as many economic opportunities for as many people as possible. Making it possible for poor and low-income workers to become self-reliant is far more compassionate – and far more effective – than creating opportunities to receive government handouts.
Remember: Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day, teach a man to fish and you feed him for life.”
“We have welfare to bring fairness to American economic life.”
I don’t know what causes it. maybe they failed to advance beyond their freshman course in Marxism. But for whatever reason, liberals endlessly natter on about how the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, and that’s not fair that some people can fly first class while others cant afford cars. What liberals don’t acknowledge is the many years of hard work and sacrifice that are usually needed to create a rich person.
Why is it unfair for a rich person to make lots of money? Imagine if a young woman, Noelle, gets rich after working 40 hours a week to pay for college – and studying another 40 hours each week. now imagine if this young lady went to high school with Jack, a guy who decided not to go to college or get a decent job, and who never did anything to develop marketable skills.
Ten years later, Jack is lucky to find work sweeping up at McDonald’s. Noelle has a Park Avenue penthouse. Is that unfair? Not on your life! Noelle’s own work and self-sacrafice made her wealthy.
But how would a liberal view this scenario...? Predictably.
A liberal view would immediately label Noelle a member of the “fortunate few,” and conclude that she should be punished for her high income by being made to pay high taxes for social welfare programs – which go to benefit poor old Jack. At the ballot box, liberals can count on Jack for political support, because, obviously, Jack is happy to get a piece of Noelle’s income.
Conservatives look at this same situation and understand Noelle gets paid more not because she is lucky or because the system doesn’t work, but because it does!
Her skills and personal qualities (determination, perseverance) paid off in the marketplace.
Nothing unfair about that.
Answered By: flaming_liberal415 - 10/24/2007