posted on June 11, 2001 12:26:53 PM new
Dear Conservatives/Republicans:
I know that I rant a lot of the time, make emotional pleas, and sound the horn a lot. Your response so far has largely been that I'm Crying Wolf and that I haven't a clue as to why your solution on social ills far surpasses our existing system of tax-based federally administered social programs.
OK, I'm also reasonable. With the hard facts/data and/or the overwhelming logic of your position, please educate me. My mind is always open to the truth of things, even if yours may not be.
What I want to know is this: if all Federal social programs were shut down today, what should magically spring up to replace it? Now, I am not looking for the Perfect System, because I don't believe that one will ever exist. However, please tell me how your agenda will take on the burden and do at least as good a job as what we currently are doing.
The reason that I ask is that every time I use one of your suggestions to replace a current social program, 10 new problems - old problems, seem to resurface. If you think about it, in a short time it gets way too complicated a solution to try to solve at least as much as our involuntary taxed-funded social programs do today.
For instance: we hear a lot about Faith-based Charities doing a lot of good for the communities. And they do, no doubt about that. But every one of them is a short-term fix, one day, one meal, two-weeks on a cot with a roof overhead - that sort of thing. Over one-third of our national budget goes to social programs, not counting Social Security (can we leave Social Security out? Even many Republicans and Conservatives do not want to see this program go away so quickly). Umm, wasn't our recent budget last Fall around 6.5 Trillion dollars or nearly that? Will all the churches in the USA band together and have 2.5 trillion to 3 trillion dollars a year to fund charities? That doesn't seem reasonable. That Tax-Dollars-for-Religious-Charities will never happen, simply because all government giveaways of that size will have strings attached and the churches object to that. In addition, to give it without strings attached would be in direct, undeniable violation of the First Amendment. So where is this money to come from? Donations? Who will administer the program without prejudice? Volunteers? Volunteers are only a short-term resource, you can't base long-term benefits from them. Do you see why I'm at a loss for just this one, single instance of Conservative/Republican "fix"?
URLs likely won't help too much: I've got two businesses to run simultaneously and that's time consuming. Maybe just the gist of what's on a URL? Or, you cold always explain it concisely here in this thread. I will not come back and rant - but I will ask questions as I have them come up. Are you willing to do this for me?
posted on June 11, 2001 08:12:58 PM new
You've already planted an insult in your first post, why would anyone want to talk to you? Even I don't want to talk to you, and I'm not a Conservative or a Republican.
posted on June 11, 2001 08:23:04 PM new
lol donny, I agree and I am a Conservative also. He is baiting, don't any of you fall for it. He has made it abundantly clear that he believes all Conservatives are mindless morons who are not aware of the truth.
posted on June 11, 2001 08:39:40 PM new
I have nowhere near the knowledge of politics that a lot of you do here, and Borillar, I used to like reading what you had to say, I'm open to hear both sides. But when you call Republicans "stupid morons" and then say that they all oughta be thrown in with McVeigh (or something on that order), I pretty well lost my respect for your posts. Not that you'll probably care anyway, but that's how I personally feel.
skipped a word
[ edited by bobbi355 on Jun 11, 2001 08:41 PM ]
posted on June 11, 2001 08:44:31 PM new
I would have posted that whether donny had posted or not. This is the first time I saw this thread today. Sorry, unlike some people, I don't spend all day every day ranting on the boards.
posted on June 11, 2001 08:52:04 PM new
Speaking of ranting on these boards day in and day out - I've gotta get back in gear and start working so I don't have to go on welfare. And speaking of welfare ...... food stamps ...... There was a woman in front of me at the grocery store buying 3 bottles of Evian water and 5 Tombstone frozen pizzas with food stamps. Wonder if she has ever thought of buying the necessary staples and actually cooking a meal and making those stamps stretch a lot further. I'm all for people getting help if they genuinely need it, but I swear, looking in their carts at the grocery store, those people eat better than I do!!
posted on June 11, 2001 08:52:29 PM new
Borillar has stated exactly what many of us are thinking. The unfortunate fact is not in the wording of Borillar's question but rather in the fact that there is no conservative Republican able to answer the question.
posted on June 11, 2001 08:55:10 PM new
What conservative republican would want to answer his questions? You know as well as I do that there are more liberals on here than conservatives - they'd be belittled, made to look like a fool, called a liar and you know that. I'm sure there are other boards who would eat this alive!
posted on June 11, 2001 09:02:52 PM new
First, let's examine: if all Federal social programs were shut down today, what should magically spring up to replace it? Now, I am not looking for the Perfect System, because I don't believe that one will ever exist.
Not exactly an easy question for anyone to answer, or explain. Who said Republicans wanted to do away with each and every Federal Special Program? Then I have to show how I'd replace each one!?! I'm not even aware of all of them!!!
However, please tell me how your agenda will take on the burden and do at least as good a job as what we currently are doing.
I don't know if any person, Dem, Rep, or Ind could replace them and do as good a job as we currently do; they've been altered and changed time after time from the left and the right, evolving into what they are today.
Perhaps Borillar, you can set the example, and show us Republican fools how it is done. You erase the board, and start from scratch. I'm sure my conservative mind could learn a lot how you would cure our social ills.
posted on June 11, 2001 09:26:07 PM new
I guess I just don't get it. I see an inference made by the author.
What I did enjoy reading was: During the past eight years, the Republican majority in both houses of Congress has had no interest in probing the social costs of spending cuts. Minority Democrats couldn't convene hearings and had little desire to expose neglect taking place on a Democratic president's watch.
Such an important issue that they had little desire to expose neglect takng place on a Democratic President's watch. And a certain poster, over and over, chides Conservatives for their morals?!? Shame on those Democrats!
posted on June 11, 2001 09:57:57 PM newBorillarMy mind is always open to the truth of things, even if yours may not be.
What a trooper.
I wonder how many government workers are donating their time compared to the workers for these faith-based charities. I wonder if our federal food stamp program operates as efficiently as the faith-based charities.
I have my suspicions.
I too have seen some outrageous items purchased with food stamps. I think that it is a slap in the face to those that really need them and those that put the bill.
Maybe some of these long term fixes have been abused to the point that we are subsidizing failure.
I'm all for student loans and low interest loans to give people the tools to build with, but subsidizing failure isn't the same thing. Biloxi/Gulfport had a large influx of Vietnamese refugees in the 70s. They took advantage of the tools that were offered and went after the American dream with a vengeance and became assets to the system instead of burdens. Give people a hand up, but don't carry them on your back, it harms you and them.
posted on June 11, 2001 09:57:58 PM new
Ralph Nader wrote a telling piece on the subject of the unseen costs of this administration's program of budget cutting but it's not immediately available to me right now. I'm sure that rather than pointing fingers at democrats who had little sway in determining the agenda in either the senate or the house over the course of the Clinton administration you could find it. Oh, but wait, fingerpointing is a way of life for republicans isn't it? Nevermind then. I'd be too much work and not as much fun anyway.
On the matter of sway of agenda, don't you think that that is important? It is, after all, what has brought about the mass flapping of wings amongst the current administration after the defection of Senator Jeffords.
posted on June 11, 2001 10:05:37 PM new
Some of you might look into the food stamp program a little bit before you claim to be footing the bill.
As to what you see in the supermarket; certainly there are abuses, but isn't it true that if you see a mother in line ahead of you with a cartful of staples and some goodies for the kids. using foodstamps along with real money to pay, that you automatically see only the goodies and only the food stamps?
Would you also possibly admit that even while denying yourself, as all parents do to some measure, it's darned hard to deny your children day in and day out? Wouldn't you agree that every parent, rich or poor, would have to give from whatever source some small measure of happiness to his or her child?
posted on June 11, 2001 10:08:00 PM new
I fail to see why it's anyone's business what kind of food a person poor enough to qualify for food stamps buys.
posted on June 11, 2001 10:15:52 PM newI fail to see why it's anyone's business what kind of food a person poor enough to qualify for food stamps buys.
In a nutshell, this is the difference between liberal and conservative views on charity.
Conservatives really enjoy funding success, and despise funding continued failure.
Liberals don't think it's anyone's business whether the funding is resulting in success or not.
posted on June 11, 2001 10:19:47 PM new
Who's talking about success? I'm not "A liberal" or a conservtive for that matter. I just think it's completely condescending and downright nosey for someone to be at all concerned with what food a poor person buys with their stamps.
If you're entitled to a stipend, it's no one's business which food you buy, so long as you don't trade it for drugs -- perhaps. Maybe only healthy veggies and milk should be allowed to be purchased with food stamps?
It's ironic, since Republicans imagine that they aren't interested in people's business.
posted on June 11, 2001 10:24:43 PM newI too have seen some outrageous items purchased with food stamps.
What's so outrageous about frozen pizzas and bottled water? Maybe she doesn't cook. And there's NO WAY I will drink the tap water where I live. Besides tasting bad, I'm convinced it's unhealthy.
posted on June 11, 2001 10:25:00 PM new
I'm not sure today if one can draw hard generalizeations about "Republicans" or "conservatives" in the same sense one can regarding "liberals" (and not all Democrats are liberals).
But to the extent that we can generalize about "conservatives" and "minding their own business", the distinction arrives when one is asked for funding. When another person is going about his business, a conservative has little interest. But when that person asks for money, the conservative takes interest in the likely result of giving the money. Because the conservative believes that giving money to some people is very noble, while giving money to other people is the source of those people's problem.
posted on June 11, 2001 10:30:13 PM new
uaru points up as an example the 'success' of Vietnamese immigrants but perhaps doesn't see that they brought with them their squalorous living and many of them now in 'success' continue to live in conditions that he would find unendurable for crowding and meager diet. A mark of success may be a large new house in a decent neighborhood until it is realized that many times 30 or 40 people are living there.
Aside that, there were several programs offered at very advantageous rates in small business, home loan, and subsidies for living which no naturalized citizen in this country could qualify to receive. Several of those continue to this day. Many of those 'successful groups are receiving heavy stipends for living right now.
posted on June 11, 2001 10:41:24 PM newI fail to see why it's anyone's business what kind of food a person poor enough to qualify for food stamps buys.
James,
It shouldn't matter, but sometimes I can't help but notice things. If I'm putting the generic ketchup, and generic cereal on the checkout counter and someone else is paying for name brands on the same items with food stamps I can't help but think, "I wish they were as careful with my money as I am with my money."
I'm not saying all or even most using food do this, I'm just saying I do notice, there is a reflex thought process that happens.
posted on June 11, 2001 10:43:34 PM new
I guess I've been taught the wrong way - that is that you WORK to make a living and pay your bills - the handouts are for the very unfortunate people who absolutely cannot work - because of physical disability or whatever. I live from paycheck to paycheck, and if there's a week that I'm running low on funds, I don't consider frozen pizza an economical item to buy. I'll usually buy a roast or make a casserole so that I can have it the next day also. I saw a person with a heaping cartful of groceries, then gets ticked off at the checker when she was told she couldn't purchase prepared foods with food stamps. Yeah, maybe I am bitter about this - but there are weeks when I'm barely getting by and then I stand behind someone who's buying "luxuries" that I can't afford when I WORK for a living.
"Give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day..... teach a man to fish and he'll eat for a lifetime".
posted on June 11, 2001 10:52:48 PM new
It's not your money. The National Food and Nutrition agency has this stated mission:
FNS increases food security and reduces hunger in partnership with cooperating
organizations by providing children and low-income people access to food, a healthful
diet, and nutrition education in a manner that supports American agriculture and
inspires public confidence.
posted on June 11, 2001 10:53:45 PM newkrsuaru points up as an example the 'success' of Vietnamese immigrants but perhaps doesn't see that they brought with them their squalorous living and many of them now in 'success' continue to live in conditions that he would find unendurable for crowding and meager diet. A mark of success may be a large new house in a decent neighborhood until it is realized that many times 30 or 40 people are living there.
Krs perhaps doesn't know that one of these examples lives on the same street as me and my wife was their daughter's teacher. It is possible they have a tunnel system so I haven't noticed the other 30-40 other members of the household.
couldn't resist.