Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (57080)	7/30/2004 10:54:15 AM
From: Andrew N. Cothran	Respond to of 793698

I've been sitting here for the past 30 minutes listening to the speech that Kerry wanted to deliver last night but couldn't find the words or the strength or the wisdom. That speech is being delivered by George Bush. It is on the Fox Cable Network, live from Springfield, Mo. Bush is proving once again that he will be our President for the next four years. Hope you all had a chance to watch it. It serves as a great antidote to all of the crap that we listened to last night.

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (57080)	7/30/2004 11:16:27 AM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793698

I admire the Muslim solution to those in need, Zakat, giving one fifth of your income to charity. I think it's more admirable than the Christian solution of tithing, giving ten percent to the church. I find it far less admirable to advocate setting up government agencies to administer charity using other people's money. I am handling a Chapter 13 bankruptcy for an elderly woman who lives on her small federal pension and a tiny Social Security check. The amount of money she pays in income taxes every month is approximately equal to her Social Security check. That's insane. And she's far better off that the people I represent who live in homeless shelters. Yes, I make use of all the government charity for my clients, homeless shelters, Section 8 housing, Medicare, Medicaid, SSI, SSD, if it's available, I get it for them, but I can't help wishing I wasn't dealing with the government. In fairness, the government is far better run than the private charities I've dealt with. You can accomplish a lot when your source of funding is guaranteed at the point of a gun.

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (57080)	7/30/2004 11:17:01 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793698

The real debate is how much are we obligated to do as a community - it is not to do nothing. I disagree strongly with the way you've framed the question. It is not a question of whether we as a community let people starve or not. We'd be a pretty sick society if we let people starve. The question is instead about the nature of the obligation--whether it is a moral obligation or a legal one--and likewise whether the largess is offered as charity or entitlement. The distinction is critical because the choice implies two different systems. We have to look at which system produces the best sustainable results all things considered. It is pretty easy to look down on people who can't find a decent job. Nobody owes them a living. They would have to depend on the largess of charitable people. This kind of thinking back in the sixties is what got us to where we are now. It didn't work. We should learn from that, not try to recapture it.

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (57080)	7/30/2004 12:14:47 PM
From: Ilaine	Respond to of 793698

I used to be rather liberal, but became a conservative after hearing William F. Buckley Jr. talk about subsidiarity. The principle of subsidiarity is an essential part of the Catholic faith. It means that problems should be solved at the lowest level of complexity necessary to solve them. As a practical matter, for example, why should tax money go to Washington, where it passes through the IRS, the Treasury, OPM, and the various social agencies before it's sent to the states, and their own versions of tax bureaucracy, finance bureaucracy, bureaucracy bureaucracy (that the agency that takes care of bureaucrats), state social bureaucracy, then repeated at the county level, before it's finally given to the needy? How many tax dollars are necessary to give one dollar to the poor indirectly? I don't know the precise number but the ratio is not a good one. We don't send our charitable contributions to the Pope, we send them to the local Catholic charity, which distributes directly to the poor. That's subsidiarity.