Nelson Mandela Found a Way to Completely Lose My Respect

[MG1968]

Originally Posted by TennNC

Will you point me to those verses?

If I understand you, I think it's comical that you're indignant that someone would call on those with means to help those without means.

My point, and I think BPV's point was that the rich already help a lot and there's only so much money you can throw at a problem and throwing money at poverty accomplishes very little since nothing is being done to actually lift the people out of poverty.

[TennNC]

Originally Posted by MG1968

My point, and I think BPV's point was that the rich already help a lot and there's only so much money you can throw at a problem and throwing money at poverty accomplishes very little since nothing is being done to actually lift the people out of poverty.

What do you think of the dozens of biblical verses that call for those with means to help those without means? Do they make you cringe?

"Throwing money" is a loaded term. I loathe inefficiency in any form. I loathe "handouts." I loathe "throwing money" at problems without actually getting your hands dirty - I'd be glad to talk more about that if you'd like. But I don't see every effort to help people get out of poverty as "throwing money" at the problem. Even more, I loathe the mindset of those who think they're doing those people a favor by ignoring them.

As I stated before, most of the aid to Africa is in fact geared toward economic development. We should lambaste corruption and waste, but not the efforts of those who want to lift them out of poverty. There should be standards for those running the programs we contribute to, but just b/c some greedy souls manipulate the system doesn't mean we should give up on trying to help those in need.

[MG1968]

Originally Posted by TennNC

What do you think of the dozens of biblical verses that call for those with means to help those without means? Do they make you cringe?

"Throwing money" is a loaded term. I loathe inefficiency in any form. I loathe "handouts." I loathe "throwing money" at problems without actually getting your hands dirty - I'd be glad to talk more about that if you'd like. But I don't see every effort to help people get out of poverty as "throwing money" at the problem. Even more, I loathe the mindset of those who think they're doing those people a favor by ignoring them.

As I stated before, most of the aid to Africa is in fact geared toward economic development. We should lambaste corruption and waste, but not the efforts of those who want to lift them out of poverty. There should be standards for those running the programs we contribute to, but just b/c some greedy souls manipulate the system doesn't mean we should give up on trying to help those in need.

I agree.

Please don't misunderstand me, I'm not saying we should just stop trying to help Africa altogether, but there has to be a better way than what is being done now. Between ruthless despots like Mugabe and self-serving NGO's who'd rather serve a political agenda, much of the aid isn't going where it's intended.

[VolDad]

Originally Posted by TennNC

...If I understand you, I think it's comical that you're indignant that someone would call on those with means to help those without means.

Out of curiosity….If one of your family members were a person "without means”, would you take care of them or perhaps seek help from churches and/or charities; OR would you expect the government to take money that we have earned away from us and give to them?

[tim]

Originally Posted by VolDad

Out of curiosity….If one of your family members were a person "without means”, would you take care of them or perhaps seek help from churches and/or charities; OR would you expect the government to take money that we have earned away from us and give to them?

Not so easy. If they were shiftless drug addicts I would allow them to care for themselves. Unlike the government who does'nt care if you use drugs with the taxpayer's money.

[TennNC]

Originally Posted by VolDad

Out of curiosity….If one of your family members were a person "without means”, would you take care of them or perhaps seek help from churches and/or charities; OR would you expect the government to take money that we have earned away from us and give to them?

I'll answer the question, but I don't know what it adds. Of course I'd help a family member if I had means and they didn't. I don't think most of the people who need help have family members or churches readily available to help them - otherwise they'd just get that help.

If I'm hungry, and I haven't eaten in a couple of days, I don't care where the meal comes from as long as I can eat. If I have rotting teeth, I don't care where the dental work comes from as long as I get it. If I'm stuck in a hole, I don't care who helps me out, as long as I get out.

Now, I have 2 questions for you. What % of your taxes do you think goes toward helping those without means? And what's the actual number?

[VolDad]

A quick look at the budget and I would say about 60% goes towards some sort of entitlement program.

What do you think?

totaloutlaysfy2008.gif

[BigPapaVol]

Originally Posted by TennNC

Will you point me to those verses?

If I understand you, I think it's comical that you're indignant that someone would call on those with means to help those without means.

I don't care that you think it's comical. It's not the moral truism that Mandela points to it being. Additionally, the whole language regarding the poor has been softened by using terms like means and less fortunate, but he didn't except those too lazy or whose past is littered with poor decisions. The language also leaves out any mention of many of the wealthy having earned their means.

If we approached it the way of the Bible verses, the vagrants would have little.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

[volsforever27]

Wasn't Winnie Mandela on trial for kidnapping, murder etc?

[Rasputin_Vol]

Originally Posted by volsforever27

Wasn't Winnie Mandela on trial for kidnapping, murder etc?

yes

[TennNC]

Originally Posted by VolDad

A quick look at the budget and I would say about 60% goes towards some sort of entitlement program.

What do you think?

Attachment 12621

I think, "how in the world did you come up with 60%?"

[TennNC]

Originally Posted by BigPapaVol

I don't care that you think it's comical. It's not the moral truism that Mandela points to it being. Additionally, the whole language regarding the poor has been softened by using terms like means and less fortunate, but he didn't except those too lazy or whose past is littered with poor decisions. The language also leaves out any mention of many of the wealthy having earned their means.

If we approached it the way of the Bible verses, the vagrants would have little.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

In regards to the bold, so that's what Jesus meant when he said, "Blessed are the poor, for they shall inherit the earth"?

And let me get this straight - b/c you feel Mandela hasn't properly acknowledged that the wealthy "earned" their means, you're going to completely disregard the notion that you should help out those who are starving. Because some poor people are "lazy" or have made "poor decisions," we should disregard the needs of them all?

Sounds like a pretty easy way to clear one's conscience of doing nothing.

[VolDad]

Originally Posted by TennNC

I think, "how in the world did you come up with 60%?"

Correct me if I am wrong but pretty much everything on the left side of the chart is a program that takes away from 1 person to give to another; and is outside the Framers intent which was that government exists to protect the life, rights, and property of its citizens.

[TennNC]

Originally Posted by VolDad

Correct me if I am wrong but pretty much everything on the left side of the chart is a program that takes away from 1 person to give to another; and is outside the Framers intent which was that government exists to protect the life, rights, and property of its citizens.

And you think only those without means are using Social Security, Medicare, and income security? I'm pretty sure those programs don't discriminate based on means.

I'm looking for a number that we spend annually on "lazy" people who make "poor choices" who end up poor and therefore just survive on government paychecks - you know, "welfare queens" and such. What's that total?

[615 Vol]

I would just like to add that not all poor people are lazy and a lot of wealthy people obtain their wealth off the poor.