Nelson Mandela Found a Way to Completely Lose My Respect

[volinbham]

Originally Posted by TennNC

What about invading a country with plenty of oil resources? Is that within the scope?

Invading to take oil resources? No.

Taking military action based on threats of both human and economic harm (on a global scale)? Perhaps.

[BigPapaVol]

Originally Posted by TennNC

How do you know this?

I don't know this. I'm guessing.

My definition of lazy also includes those unwilling to find another way, alter their path, step outside their box, etc. I use the term lazy, but I generally mean those without the intrinsic motivation to be self-sufficient.

[KB5252]

Originally Posted by TennNC

How do you know this?

I believe that people that would fall into the category of poor are either A) satisfied in their economic position. B) Too afraid to take a risk and look for better employment. C) Have found that it is much easier to rely on the gov. to give you just enough to get by. D) Just plain lazy. E) Unable to work because of mental or physical impairments.

[VolDad]

Originally Posted by TennNC

My father would absolutely tell me that a key tenet of Christianity, of Jesus' teachings, is to give to those in need as a general principle, whether that be a family member, a good friend, or a complete stranger.

Luke 3:11. And [John the Baptist] would answer and say to them, "Let the man with two tunics share with him who has none, and let him who has food do likewise."

How do you interpret that?

Mark 10:21 And Jesus looking upon him loved him, and said to him, "You lack one thing; go, sell what you have, and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me."

So I guess you will be leaving us after you sell your possessions (i.e., computer) and give to the poor. Or is it “do as I say and not as I do”.

Just kidding TennNC. We would miss you.

[TennNC]

Originally Posted by KB5252

I believe that people that would fall into the category of poor are either A) satisfied in their economic position. B) Too afraid to take a risk and look for better employment. C) Have found that it is much easier to rely on the gov. to give you just enough to get by. D) Just plain lazy. E) Unable to work because of mental or physical impairments.

In BPV's world, C and D make up the overwhelming majority of the poor. And in that world, why pay the poor any attention?

[volinbham]

I think we would all acknowledge that there is a continuum running from people that truly cannot help themselves to those that intentionally play the system for personal gain.

Our approach has favored allowing the latter to try to help the former. It has also favored the federal government directly touching these individuals as opposed to more macro approaches to provide opportunities to those that can help themselves.

Worse, we continually grow the % of govt. spending that goes towards entitlements. Do a Google search on entitlement spending and you'll see the rapid growth and frightening projections for future spending. Phil Graham was partially right. We have become a nation of whiners that looks to someone else to solve our problems.

[volinbham]

Originally Posted by TennNC

In BPV's world, C and D make up the overwhelming majority of the poor. And in that world, why pay the poor any attention?

The BIG question is does financial assistance to the poor alleviate the problem, exacerbate the problem or have no effect on the problem.

Could it be that welfare style programs actually create more of C and D?

[BigPapaVol]

Originally Posted by TennNC

In BPV's world, C and D make up the overwhelming majority of the poor. And in that world, why pay the poor any attention?

that is not true. I said the majority, not the overwhelming variety.

Are you saying that you believe the majority of the poor can't do anything to help their own situation? How is that the vast majority of the US was poor in the 30s and 40s, yet we made it without exhorting the wealthy to pay for the poor? How is it that my family made it?

[BigPapaVol]

Originally Posted by volinbham

The BIG question is does financial assistance to the poor alleviate the problem, exacerbate the problem or have no effect on the problem.

Could it be that welfare style programs actually create more of C and D?

There is absolutely no doubt.

[TennNC]

Originally Posted by VolDad

Mark 10:21 And Jesus looking upon him loved him, and said to him, "You lack one thing; go, sell what you have, and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me."

So I guess you will be leaving us after you sell your possessions (i.e., computer) and give to the poor. Or is it “do as I say and not as I do”.

Just kidding TennNC. We would miss you.

Thanks. Someone else would take my place though, I'm sure, and y'all would have fresh meat to feed on.

[TennNC]

Originally Posted by BigPapaVol

I think they said let him who has means share with those without. Where this falls short is the definition of need? 1) They don't define it, you didn't define it and we all have a different viewpoint.

Him who has none is a different guy to you and I. 2) I'm all for helping those who justifiably have none. Otherwise, I'm all for those who have none but have the wherewithal to fill the gap, figuring it out.

3) I guess you're all for the blanket statement that it's a moral responsibility to give to everyone who deserves it and that we should all have relatively equal financial outcomes.

1) I agree.

2) From the sound of your other posts, I'm surprised you'd say this. Why are you for this? Why not let them fend for themselves and figure it out on their own? Unless you're speaking only about those who were born with a physical or mental deformity or become deformed through no fault of their own. Everyone else, you're on your own, right?

3) your guess is hyperbolic and incorrect.

[BigPapaVol]

Originally Posted by TennNC

1) I agree.

2) From the sound of your other posts, I'm surprised you'd say this. Why are you for this? Why not let them fend for themselves and figure it out on their own? Unless you're speaking only about those who were born with a physical or mental deformity or become deformed through no fault of their own. Everyone else, you're on your own, right?

3) your guess is hyperbolic and incorrect.

pretty much correct.

as to my hyperbole, it's no different than your use of the same tactic from the opposite slant.

[TennNC]

Originally Posted by BigPapaVol

pretty much correct.

as to my hyperbole, it's no different than your use of the same tactic from the opposite slant.

So, in your work with your church, do you only help those who are disabled through no fault of their own? I'd assume you'd make sure your talents (time and resources) would only go toward those recipients.

[BigPapaVol]

Originally Posted by TennNC

So, in your work with your church, do you only help those who are disabled through no fault of their own? I'd assume you'd make sure your talents (time and resources) would only go toward those recipients.

our church quickly weeds out the vagrants, if that's what you're getting at.

we help everyone at first, thereafter it's different.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

[VolByBirth]

Originally Posted by BigPapaVol

My parents shoved education down my throat and told me to get a scholarship or lump it.

Everyone can't do the same. Everyone doesn't need to do the same. Everyone can make the effort it takes to provide for themselves. Those incapable due to physical or mental infirmity, again, I'm all for helping.

This is actually one of the better threads I've read of late. Very interesting and some pretty good points on both sides. Just a few questions though: With your highlighted statement above doesn't greed create a problem with this? Said another way, if there is a finite amount of money in the world and certain people are "achieving" more (accumulating more wealth) then it has to be at the expense of someone elses ability to do so. The more wealth that certain persons accumulate, the less opportunity there is for those lower off. It's the same reason we have anti-trust laws -- it limits free market movement.

I'm not saying everyone strives to be a billionnaire but I'm certain that most people want and look for ways to make more money.