Quote Originally Posted by Ramulux
I am not trying to imply that the funding of socialist programs be considered charity.
not every government program leads us down the road to socialism or hides its true agenda behind the mask of compassion, though most fall into one category or the other. as members of this society, we agree to fund certain programs for the good of the society as a whole. the question is not whether these programs are needed, but to what degree we should allow government to intrude into our lives. government has shown us time and again that it is a wasteful monster, incapable of running even the simplest enterprise without drowning in waste. the examples you cited of education and the postal system are perfect specimens of governmental ineptitude, showing that the private sector will almost always be more efficient than the red tape laden bureaucracy of even the most streamlined government.

the enforced charity i was speaking of is the outrageous concept that it is perfectly fine to legislate usurious taxes on the most successful and productive members of society so that we can raise the standard of living for those incapable of supporting themselves. the growing welfare state seems to not just want to give a hand up to those who are down on their luck, but to support a large portion of the population in a style that many around the world would consider luxurious. instead of giving incentives for people to support themselves, we have created an industry that coddles the unproductive and supports a massive bureaucracy that is dependent on enlarging that pool.

But then again I guess its cool to just have a large percentage of our population be homeless and malnourished.
of course i'm not cool with such poverty. that is one of the reasons i'm so willing to donate a large share of my time and income to programs that actually do something about such problems. i am not, however, cool with supporting the bureaucracy that rewards idleness as a means of enlarging the fiefdoms of thousands of petty bureaucrats nor do i believe it is ethical for anyone else to be forced to do so under penalty of law.

.....there used to be this concept called the 40 hour work week and America's goal used to be to make it so that everyone in this country could work 40 hours a week and make minimum wage and survive.
it is quite possible to survive on the earnings of that 40 hour week. if you don't wish to enjoy the luxuries of family and your own home, you can do quite nicely even on minimum wage. we have to start realizing that we are not necessarily entitled to such things, but that they come with a price. demanding that others pay for your lack of foresight in starting a family is no more ethical than hording your riches while others starve. much of what we consider basic expenses are really luxuries that we are entitled to only through extra effort.

You should also be grateful that you had a job at which you were able to work 80 hours a week because a lot of people's financial woes stem not only from a minuscule wage but from an overall lack of available working time.
who said i had a job that allowed me to work such overtime? i struck out on my own and did without such things as free time so that i could achieve what others seem to believe is their natural right. i failed many times before i found a path that allowed me to earn such luxuries for myself.

I realize that you do not care about that and you seem to believe that our government should not provide any sort of assistance to people who have experienced great financial loss regardless of their particular situation.
this is less a matter of my empathy than of who is best suited to aid those in need. with little or no oversight, government creates programs that do nothing more than sustain the status quo and expand its own power. hidden behind the lie of the ballot box and a mask of false compassion, these political animals are allowed to do what they please with the fruits of our labors in the name of the public welfare. there is little or no accounting for the billions we pour into such services and there is no stated goal but the nebulous concept of fairness.

Also, while I hate Obama just as much as the next guy, if you think he is the reason for our current economic climate you have no idea what you are talking about. All hes done so far is continue down the same pro-business and militaristic path laid down for him by every president of the last 60 years.
i don't actually blame brak, but the entire political system that has created the welfare state and the mindset of a population that is steeped in a cult of entitlement. while government may lead its citizens in one direction or another, it is the almost total lack of ethical grounding that has pushed us so far down this path toward our own destruction.

Could you also please explain to me how using tax dollars to fund programs which allow American citizens to be sheltered and fed is destroying this country?
i wouldn't say it is actually destroying the country, rather ridding us of that pesky concept of the rights of the individual in favor of servitude to the state. while supporting citizens in times of emergency might be a rational extension of the duties of government, creating an entire class that is dependent on governmental assistance is the path toward an orwellian nightmare. the wealthy can only support such a top heavy bureaucracy for so long before the entire house of cards comes crashing down and leaves us with a population cowed into a state of comfortable poverty by the power of a totalitarian regime.