| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| World of Class Warfare - The Poor's Free Ride Is Over | ||||
| ||||
I've been working on a post for the last few days, and since there's a chunk of it that goes perfectly with this video, I'm going to include it here.
As I've said before, I'm not a Democrat. I'm independent right now, just generally liberal, and frankly I don't think it's likely that I'll ever find a party I can fully agree with. But I don't mind not having a party to sign up with, because what's actually the most important to me is just being not Republican.
In the current battle about the deficit, Republicans are fighting to preserve tax cuts for the wealthy; Democrats fight to preserve programs that give aid to the poor and the elderly. Completely regardless of any arguments about fairness or effectiveness (since those are absolute nonsense anyway), my belief comes down to this: I simply don't want to be aligned with the party that chooses to fight for the wealthy instead of the poor.
Even assuming that all wealthy Americans got their wealth through honest means and hard work (which is a grand assumption indeed, but one that lots of Fox pundits like to make), the simple fact is that Jesus Christ taught his followers to care for the poor--not defend the rich man's right to be rich. There is nothing wrong with being rich (at least as far as politics in our country go; we'll ignore Christ's warnings on that subject for now). But Republicans have chosen defending the wealthy as their standpoint, and there is simply no way around it--that is one hundred percent the opposite of what Christ's followers are told to do. "Plead the cause of the poor and needy."
Did you watch that video I posted? Neal Boortz believes that "it is all-out war on the productive class in our society for the benefit of the moocher class," and called welfare recipients parasites for depending on the government. John Stossel thinks our society is made up of "makers" and "takers," and that we shouldn't be rewarding the takers. Ann Coulter, that horrible, horrible woman, says that welfare is going to create "generations of utterly irresponsible animals." Nebraska Attorney General Jon Bruning--an elected official--called welfare recipients raccoons because "they’re going to do the easy way if we make it easy for them." This attitude is wrong, and these statements are as un-Christian as you can get.
1. Jesus Christ commanded us to care for the poor and needy.
2. It is flatly impossible for any agency besides government to provide the support the poor and elderly need.
3. Billionaires pay less taxes than anyone else.
4. Jesus Christ commanded us to care for the poor and needy.
5. "Expanding the tax base" is a disgusting euphemism for "making poor people pay even more because we like rich people better." Oh hello, Sherriff of Nottingham, nice to see you today. Please give Prince John our regards. http://lds.org/scriptures/ot/prov/14.31?lang=eng#30
6. Oh, by the way. Jesus Christ commanded us to care for the poor and needy.
7. Did I mention that Jesus commanded us to care for the poor and needy?
8. Guess what else:
http://lds.org/scriptures/ot/prov/21.13?lang=eng#12
http://lds.org/scriptures/ot/prov/19.17?lang=eng#16
http://lds.org/scriptures/ot/prov/31.20?lang=eng#19
http://lds.org/scriptures/ot/prov/14.21?lang=eng#20
I'm just saying. It is not about the "reach of government" or the effect on the economy or any of that. If you are a Christian, you believe in helping the poor. If you believe in helping the poor, then you should support helping the poor. Republicans don't.
Proverbs 29:7
The righteous considereth the cause of the poor: but the wicked regardeth not to know it.
Oh my gosh. That video ticked me off as well. I wonder how many of those households actually OWNED the refrigerator, because I have a feeling that the refrigerators in RENTALS probably belong to the landlord. Ugh.
ReplyDeleteOh that's funny Larissa, I'm sure you're right. That never even occurred to me. All I thought was, "You even begrudge them a REFRIGERATOR??"
ReplyDeleteThe refrigerator thing was pretty bad. I had to laugh at that one.
ReplyDeleteThe Ann Coulter comment is what really got to me. I was on welfare for four years of my life while my husband was in medical school. All the medical school families were. We all in a few years and some already will be in the upper class of America. Shouldn't we have to then pay our dues for the help we received to get where we are? And I guess she doesn't get that some of the utterly irresponsible animals actually become the ones that will pay in those upper tax brackets. And when that time comes that we are making over 500,000 dollars I will be happy to help the poor and will still be a liberal and still believe that tax breaks for the rich are not in the best interest of our country.
I don't side with either political party either. I don't think either are taking the right approach to basically any of the problems we have. But I disagree with you on your fundamental philosophy.
ReplyDeleteIt isn't so much about fighting for rights of the wealthy vs. the poor. It's about allowing people who work hard to keep what they have earned. Your statement about the wealthy paying the least tax is completely incorrect. The poor in our country not only do not pay ANY income taxes, but they actually get government refunds. If anyone is getting a free ride, its the recipient of welfare programs, not the wealthy.
We are commanded to take care of the poor and needy, but that commandment is given to individuals, not governments. Government social programs HAVE NEVER WORKED! They don't help people to get out from their situations and help themselves... they are handouts that only delay problems rather than solving them. Education and job opportunities are the key to solving tough financial situations, not handouts. Those only come from investment of time by people who care. Government programs are run incredibly inefficiently by people who generally do not care about those in need... to them, what they're doing is a paycheck. Real reform comes when community helps themselves, not someone sitting behind a desk making decisions for people they do not know. Taking money from people and filtering it into programs where only a small percentage goes to actually help is just wrong. We have charities in this country for a reason... most of those are run by people who are genuinely interested in helping out. I don't think we can say that about government social programs.
Yeah. I sure as heck don't own the refrigerator in my kitchen. Also, we don't have A/C, cable, or a dishwasher. But I guess I'm a slime ball because we have internet, which is necessary for applying for work, my husband's art, connecting with relatives, etc.
ReplyDeleteYou're right, Doug, we do not agree fundamentally. It absolutely IS about helping the poor, and NOT about "allowing people who work hard to keep what they've earned." For one thing, Jesus never at any time said that we should help the poor only after we've made sure that everyone gets to keep everything they earn. Besides, that absurd philosophy implies that the wealthy are the only ones who work hard, and that is just an insult to everyone in this entire country, besides being completely and utterly false.
ReplyDeleteDoug. I am sorry, but what the heck. The people who don't pay taxes don't pay taxes because they make a tiny microscopic fraction of what the wealthy make. Can you really honestly call that "getting a free ride"?? Maybe you don't know what it's like to be poor, but it is anything but a free ride. And sure, maybe there are people who've figured out a way to get more out of the system than they should, but those people are not the point, and they are not the majority. It would be incredibly cruel to deprive the needy of their only form of assistance because we are bitter about the people who've chosen to exploit the system.
And yes, billionaires DO pay more than regular people--that article obviously does not refer to the people who don't pay any, but they pay significantly less than everyone else who does pay.
Why don't you try telling welfare recipients that the government program isn't working? You're looking at its "effectiveness" from the wrong standpoint. If you're someone who can't afford your housing or groceries, then I'm pretty sure you think welfare "works." There are things that should be fixed, certainly. But the point of the program is to help people who have been screwed over by our stupid, heartless system. As long as those people are being helped, the program is working--maybe just not as well as it needs to.
Yes, it's true that Jesus's commandments were given to individuals, but I would like you to tell me what would happen to welfare recipients if they had to rely on the charity of individuals. As I said before, government is THE only agency that is capable of providing the kind of support the poor need. I am fully behind the idea of smaller government, but it needs to get smaller in other areas (like, I don't know, not telling grown-up adults they can and can't get married because the Christians don't like it)--not areas where there isn't anything else to take its place. All that talk about the commandments being for individuals is only an excuse to justify what is at heart a selfish and un-Christian political policy.
As INDIVIDUALS, it is our responsibility to put in place some kind of method for helping people who need it. Government isn't some strange wild animal, after all--it is made up of PEOPLE, individuals who represent the individuals who live in their states. If those individuals are Christians who care about helping the poor, then they should think of a way to help them. Since the government is an organization that we are all connected to, it just makes sense.
ReplyDeleteHey, Larissa, why don't you tell Doug about how your education and job opportunities are helping your family to eat right now? Do you go to the grocery store and show them your degree from BYU instead of giving them money?
ReplyDeleteWelfare is not meant to be a permanent solution, Doug. It is a solution for people who have the very immediate need to eat and have somewhere to live while they don't make enough money to pay for it themselves. Education and job opportunities are the long-term solution, but they cannot replace welfare.
Yikes--sorry for all the sarcasm, guys. I'm honestly trying to restrain myself, but I keep just getting really upset about this issue!
ReplyDeleteI think the point that Doug is trying to make is that government social programs don't work because, for way too many people, they have become a permanent way of life. I can't tell you how many people I've encountered who rely on help from the government, but don't do anything to better their situation. I'm perfectly fine paying taxes to help people who are in a genuinely tough situation, but I am NOT fine supporting welfare recipients who use the money to buy big screen TVs and pay for dish network (and yes, I have seen this myself. I'm not just pulling that example out of thin air.)
ReplyDelete"If...individuals are Christians who care about helping the poor, then they should think of a way to help them."
For most conservatives, that way is NOT through government social programs, but through churches, charities, and other PRIVATE organizations.
As a conservative (who doesn't always vote for Republicans, mind you), I personally favor a flat tax rate. If the rich can pay 15% of their income (or whatever the number is), so can the poor. It is absolutely ludicrous how many people pay ZERO income tax.
Anyway, I'm not trying to change your mind about this issue, as you obviously feel very strongly about it. Just keep in mind that the real, fundamental difference of opinion lies in what people think the government should and should not be doing. Just because a person supports efforts to make sure everyone pays taxes doesn't mean they're not Christian. :)
Yeah. We are struggling right now. We have a three year old little girl. My husband works three jobs. His full time job pays so little and benefits cost so much that he nets HALF of his gross. So he works 12 hour days five days of the week, and at least 8 hours on the weekend. So he averages around a 70 hour workweek, but we are still categorized working poor. I think our health care system is jacked. We have a crappy HMO that we fork over a ton of money for, but I can't afford what they won't cover for my sleep apnea. So what happens? I don't get treatment.
ReplyDeleteAnd after all our hard work and our struggles, we're still called "animals" by the wealthy. If there's a class warefare going on, count me in. I want these suckers out of power.
And some rethuglicans want to get rid of minimum wage. What a joke. By the way, I have a masters degree and my husband has a bachelors, but that doesn't mean anything nowadays.
Again, because of the way our financial system relies on the federal reserve banking system, we are screwed because it is a system of fixing prices which leads to bubbles and recessions, leaving the fat cats on wall street and in the banking system to make crazy money off of low income people, and when their "fake" system of making money appear out of thin air fails, as it inevitably does, the taxpayers bail them out. These people aren't even making anything REAL but buying and trading debts and scalping money off of those accounts.
ReplyDeleteOUR SOCIETY IS MAJORLY SCREWED BECAUSE WE CAPITALIZE OUR GAINS AND SOCIALIZE OUR LOSSES.
Jamie- It is ludicrous that some people pay ZERO income tax. But the wealthy and the people who are running the financial system ought to be the ones paying up FIRST because they're the ones who put us in this financial mess to begin with. Leaving my husband struggling to find a decent paying job in this recession. So why all this whining and crying over the fact that the poor don't pay income tax, when the rich could make a much bigger dent in the deficit than the nickles and dimes you are going to get out of the working poor?!
ReplyDeleteIf you are still stuck in the "Republican VS. Democrat" dichotomy, you have been fooled. Read this: http://usawatchdog.com/democrats-vs-republicans-its-you-vs-corporations/
ReplyDeleteBy the way, speaking of relying on charities and church's for charity. That's a joke too. I told my local LDS church about our struggles and our financial and family crisis a couple of months ago and no one bothered to help us. Not one person. Saying that everyone who needs help needs to rely on private charities, is naive.
ReplyDeleteI'm sorry. I write really long sentences when I'm angry. lol
ReplyDeleteI understand Doug's (and your) point, Janie--I just disagree with it. Like I said, I believe that helping the poor IS something the government should do. Individual charity is small-scale and individualized; poverty is a wide-spread and national issue. It's just pretty basic logic to see that something national is required to address it.
ReplyDeleteAs far as your other point, I also understand that. It's frustrating when you see people take advantage of what they've been given. But what's the solution? To take it away from everyone?
"If the rich can pay %15 of their income, so can the poor." Um... Really? If you make $20,000 a year it should be just as easy for you to pay $3000 of it as it is for someone who makes $20,000,000 to pay $3,000,000 of it? I'm sorry, but... No. I understand that the concept seems perfectly logical, it totally does. But in reality it does not work.
It's hard to say this without sounding judgmental, but I need to say it. I think it's wrong to be angry about people not paying income tax. For one thing, they still pay all the other kinds of taxes--state, payroll, etc. For another, they don't pay income tax because they are so incredibly poor! Is it really right for us to begrudge them the one thing they have to help them? I don't think it is, and I think it's just plain absurd to compare people below the poverty level with millionaires and billionaires. Come on now.
It is possible to be Christian and not behave like one, Janie, and although I realize it's incredibly judgmental of me to say that about anyone, I can't help but admit that that's how I feel about it. I don't think people do it intentionally, or out of unkindness. But I do believe that they are making a mistake and endorsing political action that is very unlike what Christ taught.
"Um... Really? If you make $20,000 a year it should be just as easy for you to pay $3000 of it as it is for someone who makes $20,000,000 to pay $3,000,000 of it? I'm sorry, but... No. I understand that the concept seems perfectly logical, it totally does. But in reality it does not work. "
ReplyDeleteEXACTLY. Miri, you make a fabulous point. 15% of our income is a SUBSTANTIAL amount of money for us. It's the difference between getting some decent food in our groceries or not.
Larissa, in reference to this comment:
ReplyDelete"So why all this whining and crying over the fact that the poor don't pay income tax, when the rich could make a much bigger dent in the deficit than the nickles and dimes you are going to get out of the working poor?!"
The answer to your question is exactly what I was referring to in the original post, about thinking that Republicans have chosen the wrong side to fight for. If they were only concerned with getting the deficit closed, they would be turning to the rich, because the poor don't HAVE anything. (See the video for Jon Stewart's lovely illustration of this.) What they're really concerned about is making things "fair"--which is, to me, the most absurd thing I think I have ever heard. How is it fair to hear a man like Warren Buffett tell us that he pays less in taxes than most of us do, then complain about the poorest people in the country not paying income tax? What on earth is fair about that?? It's just mind-boggling to me.
When I say that government social programs don't work, I mean that they don't help people to better their situations. Sure, it helps people to have a place to live and food to eat today, but they don't help people to get out of their situations, just perpetuating the problem. I'm happy to offer assistance here and there, but to provide an ongoing source of income for people that are (1) unwilling to work (accountability is the answer) or (2) unskilled and can't find good work (education is the answer) is just wrong. These are free handouts. These people aren't made accountable in any way for the assistance they receive. Many of the people on government assistance could improve their lives if they would take responsibility for themselves and/or be granted opportunities to be learn basic skills. Just sending out checks every month doesn't do anything toward solving the problem. It actually makes it worse because it causes long-term dependence which passes from generation to generation.
ReplyDeleteThe real answer is education programs and making those that receive assistance demonstrate some sort of effort that they're trying to help themselves. Our current programs don't do either.
And BTW, I do know what it's like to be poor. My business partners and I have been trying to build a business for the last four years. For the first _two years_ of that, I had NO INCOME. And even now I'm only making $9/hr, and killing myself doing so. But even during that time I wasn't making anything, I still didn't ask anyone for help. I figured it out on my own.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteJamie, no I don't have cable. I only have a cell phone but no phone line. Trust me, from what little you know of my situation, I considered EVERYTHING you've mentioned here and MORE. I would love to move somewhere with a lower cost of living, and have been applying for jobs on the mainland, and so has my husband. But the job is here at the moment. By the way, my husband has a bachelors degree, but he has to go back to school again.
ReplyDeleteDon't judge me because of where I live. Because this is where my husband was offered employment after applying to jobs all around the country for over 3 years. Just because some people are working hard, and still classified as working poor, doesn't mean that they aren't trying to cut as many costs as possible without having people try to make them feel bad about where they live. Also I don't have A/C, or a dishwasher.
Why is it getting ridiculous? Because po' folk like me have something to say about all this?
ReplyDeleteBy the way, we only have one car, and I pretty much stay in my apartment all day with my three year old. Is there anything else I need to do to justify my situation to you so that my little family is not judged for being lazy or not working hard enough?!
ReplyDeleteDoubleDeej- That's great you figured it out on your own. But sometimes, you get in situations where you aren't on your own, and you have small children depending on you to get medical care no matter what.
ReplyDeleteBy the way, it seems like me mentioning how much my husband is working has gone over people's heads. Just because we are poor doesn't mean we are lazy.
ReplyDeleteAlso, do you realize how expensive it is to move from Hawaii to the mainland (which we're already planning on doing but have to save up money). And where exactly would we move to if we don't have a job offer? I'm sorry but it's frustrating to have someone judge you when they don't know the first thing about what my family has been through and my struggles, so your whole "food for thought" with telling me to cancel my imaginary gym memberships was extremely offensive and really put me off.
ReplyDeleteI have to be honest, Janie, I'm pretty surprised at your last response, because you are usually one of the most reasonable people who comments on my blog. Do you realize how presumptuous it is of you to be making assumptions about Larissa, someone you've never met and know nothing about? And that's exactly what you're doing with everyone else on welfare, too. Okay, so apparently you know some people who are on welfare and dared to use that money for things beyond just the absolute basics--you have to stop using these people as the basis for your opinions about the program. You're against welfare, so now you're trying to make everyone on welfare out to fit your (highly generalized) beliefs.
ReplyDeleteMike and I are not on welfare. Together--him working 12-14 hour days, me working two (and sometimes three) part-time jobs--we make several thousand more than what's considered poverty. But we don't have cable. We didn't buy our TV--my friend Rob gave me a TV when I lived at Belmont, and that's still what we have. We have cell phones but no home phone. (And anyone who tries to claim that cell phones aren't a necessity is SERIOUSLY living in fantasyland. Mike uses his all day long for work--no, they didn't provide one--and try getting a job without one.) Our phones can access wireless networks; we don't pay for a monthly data plan. We share one car, a beat-up 2002 Sentra which we bought for $1500 from a family friend. We live with my parents because to move out would have required every dollar of our incomes, leaving nothing for things like car repairs. When we lived on our own, we didn't have internet. We each have one iPod that we bought five years ago, when we weren't married, and we have two laptops that we both bought in college when we still had student loans. (We share one now--mine broke in January, and we don't have money to fix it.) And speaking of student loans, we have approximately $70,000 in debt.
So you really need to stop assuming that everyone who's on welfare is just a moocher. Frankly I don't understand how people could make less than us, WITH children, and survive--but they do. And then Republicans gripe about those people not paying enough in taxes, and not needing "free handouts." THAT'S ridiculous, Janie. Caring about the poor is not.
Doug, you're making a lot of assumptions too. I like that you think it's simple enough to pare down into your two categories, but it isn't. How about 3, skilled and/or educated but can't find a job anyway and/or don't get paid enough? For those in category 2, how will they pay for that education, and how will they provide for their families while they're off getting educated? For those in category 1, what will their families do?
ReplyDeleteWhat is this intense aversion to "free handouts," anyway? Another word for that is charity, and no one condemns that. What you're talking about is true, as far as creating accountability, but here again we have the issue of government's role. Who decided that it's government's responsibility to teach us accountability?? Who decided that it's YOUR job to decide whether welfare recipients are accountable or not? It isn't! It's our job to give these people what they need to survive, and what they do after that is not your responsibility or the government's.
Like I said before, education programs are very much needed, but they need to come IN ADDITION to welfare, not instead of it. It's all well and good to say that welfare only solves a short-term problem, but that short-term problem is one that very much needs to be solved IN THE SHORT TERM. You can't REPLACE a short-term program with a long-term one--you need to have both.
I am surprised, Doug, that you don't seem to know how unbelievably blessed you are. You have what is possibly the single most marketable skill in the entire world--of course someone who can write a program for Little Caesars can figure it out on his own! Not to diminish the hard work you do, because I know you do work hard, and I know it's hard to make only $9 an hour (believe me)--but besides your skills, you are also in a very different situation. Everyone could get by on $9 an hour if they only had to provide for themselves, but it makes things a little bit different when you have others to provide for, too. You are hardly the best example of what people on welfare should do--any one of millions of people, me included, would kill to be able to do what you can do. I think maybe you should try using a different standard when you judge people who are poor.
You all are so very interesting...I have to say something...just cause it sounds so fun!
ReplyDeleteThe reason we have politics is proven right here. We each have our own set of standards, ideas, moral compasses and we each think our's in superior to another.
Objectively, I think everything here makes sense, each with your own 'backing' of why you're right and the other is wrong.
I think there are lots of problems with lots of unreasonable and unrealistic solutions/expectations...coming from both sides.
Welfare and the poor are far from the worst problems or money eaters in this country right now...my opinion.
I personally think our problems lie within the entire government over spending...in every department, in every way...responsible and irresponsible spending.
I do have to say that feeling welfare is not always the best solution...being called unchristian is a little harsh. Jesus Christ did admonish me to help the poor and needy, I try to do that. I donate to charities, to my church, I volunteer when I can. I would like to think Jesus wouldn't consider me not caring for the needy because I don't want to pay into a broken system.
But the extent of the help is the question...the actual help. I think the welfare system has potential of being amazing. But when I don't qualify for it...I am too wealthy and someone else does...here's my hang up. With my so-called wealth I can only spend $200 a month to feed 6 people and don't qualify for any help. So I struggle and suffer. My friend who does qualify...gets $600 for her family of 4 for food. That's not helping the poor effectively. It helps. It's needed. The standards and purposes have evolved into something unsustainable at skewed payouts and qualifications...and I think each side just disagrees on how to fix those details. Because somehow they do need to be fixed and the balance between the two lies within conversations like these...
ok, my 2 cents...happy day folks!
Thank you for commenting, Janeen! I'll be honest, I know I'm not being as understanding about this as I should be. Or rather, I'm being too candid about my thoughts, since I actually do feel like I understand where the other side is coming from (although I'm sure they would say I don't).
ReplyDeleteI have a really hard time accepting the conservative point of view in this case because this is an issue where the selfishness of the majority can really ruin people's lives. Talking about taking away the support system for people who are so poor they couldn't survive without government money? Talking about the whole group as though they're deceitful lazy moochers, lumping welfare recipients together as though they're all the same? That is just wrong, and it really, really bothers me.
I believe that my friends and neighbors think they have good reason to feel the way they do, and I know almost none of them say anything out of deliberate unkindness. But I don't believe that makes them right. It's just hard for me to convey the depths of my feeling about it without saying things that I probably shouldn't say. So Doug, Janie, anyone else who's been reading--if I've offended you, I am sorry. I know you are all kind people, and I know you feel justified in your beliefs. I can agree with you that there are definitely concerns about the current program. But as far as the basics of our feelings about this issue, I could not disagree with you more.
The Declaration of Independence says that we believe life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are unalienable rights, and it says "that to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed." It is not up for debate that being able to feed and house your family is essential to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Governments are instituted for the purpose of securing these rights--so, this absolutely is an issue the government should be involved in. "The consent of the governed" is necessary to decide how it should happen, but that doesn't mean that an inadequate solution should be adopted just because the majority wants to act in their own self-interest. These rights are "unalienable" for all people--not just the ones who make enough money.
It looks like I'm a bit behind the curve but I wanted to say thanks for your excellent post! I love the video by Jon Stewart, it is one of his best. It was a major tipping point in my transition from "Liberal leaning moderate" to full blown liberal.
ReplyDeleteYour scripture links on this post are spot on, thanks!
Thanks, Andrew! I loved this video, too, once I got past the overwhelming rage I felt the first time I watched it. :) It made a pretty important point for me.
ReplyDelete