• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

"You didn't build that ... "

Obscure

Non-denominational protestant
Jul 11, 2012
92
3
England
✟22,740.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Contrary to popular belief, the best indicator of "economic growth" is not statistics of employment or spending but rather the standard of living.

According to the United Nations, the people of the United States have a generally higher standard of living than the people of Sweden.
 
Upvote 0
Nov 16, 2009
3,039
134
Kentucky
✟27,610.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
You didn't find Scripture directing the government to help the poor. Sorry, that's not in the Bible.

Read the Book of Romans. God is not telling us to worship the emperor, but to do our best for the govt soas they know we are good ppl.
Im certain if you look deep enough inside your heart you will find, that as a citizen of the US, you are the govt, and as a citizen of the Kingdom of Heaven you must help those in need.
And, thinking on those terms, as a citizen, being the govt, we, the ppl, the govt, must help the poor.

Just do the math. Or dont. Someone has to fall in front of our Beloved and say, " But Lord, Lord did we not......in your name." And He will repay them with...."Depart from me, you workers of iniquity, I didnt even know you".:sorry:
 
Upvote 0

IisJustMe

He rescued me because He delighted in me (Ps18:19)
Jun 23, 2006
14,270
1,888
Blue Springs, Missouri
✟23,494.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
Read the Book of Romans. God is not telling us to worship the emperor, but to do our best for the govt soas they know we are good ppl.
Read the rest of the Bible where it tells us, as believers to care for the needy ourselves. Never does God put that responsibility on government, and no government every took it upon itself until the 20th century when government all began building toward that time when there would be only one worldwide. The way to build consensus among the populous worldwide that this is acceptable is both by force (there are enough weapons in the world to accomplish the level required0 and dependence (through social welfare). None of these are God's ideas. He will allow them however in order to bring His order back to the world, in judgment.
Im certain if you look deep enough inside your heart you will find, that as a citizen of the US, you are the govt, and as a citizen of the Kingdom of Heaven you must help those in need.
I can do that without routing my tax money through the government, where it is wasted, lost and comes out the other end of the system at only 30% of the amount that went in. The government is eating that other 70% to feed itself. We could use that money in the church to take care of the poor without the bureaucratic avarice involved.

Perhaps you've heard Ronald Reagan's opinion of the greatest lie in the world? "I'm from the government, and I'm here to help."
 
Upvote 0
Nov 16, 2009
3,039
134
Kentucky
✟27,610.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Read the rest of the Bible where it tells us, as believers to care for the needy ourselves. Never does God put that responsibility on government, and no government every took it upon itself until the 20th century when government all began building toward that time when there would be only one worldwide. The way to build consensus among the populous worldwide that this is acceptable is both by force (there are enough weapons in the world to accomplish the level required0 and dependence (through social welfare). None of these are God's ideas. He will allow them however in order to bring His order back to the world, in judgment.I can do that without routing my tax money through the government, where it is wasted, lost and comes out the other end of the system at only 30% of the amount that went in. The government is eating that other 70% to feed itself. We could use that money in the church to take care of the poor without the bureaucratic avarice involved.

Perhaps you've heard Ronald Reagan's opinion of the greatest lie in the world? "I'm from the government, and I'm here to help."
I agree we have far too many pork barrel projects. And I agree the govt wastes more money that it utilizes well. But the food stamp program is almost 95% efficient. The medicaid program saves thousands of lives/yr. HUD, while often abused, actually has about an 80-85% effeciency rate. Not bad for a govt program when only 15% of the users are using it without proper eligibility.

So long as we fund those FIRST....I would have no problem cutting every ounce of pork out of the budget. Problem is, that if we want to pass a democrats budget, the Republicans fill it with their pork. If the Republicans want to pass their defend budget, the Dems fill it with their pork.

I dont think we should be studying bear poop in Minnesota, but Rep Congresswoman Michelle Bach thought the need was so great that she sponsored a pork project for 2.2 mil/yr and pigbacked it to something the dems needed her consent to pass. Utterly ridiculous. And that, my friend is the small pork. The big stuff....well.....I dont think you need me to explain.:doh::doh::doh::doh::doh:
 
Upvote 0

IisJustMe

He rescued me because He delighted in me (Ps18:19)
Jun 23, 2006
14,270
1,888
Blue Springs, Missouri
✟23,494.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
I agree we have far too many pork barrel projects. And I agree the govt wastes more money that it utilizes well. But the food stamp program is almost 95% efficient.
It's never been that efficient and never will be. The government has claimed that of the total costs of the program were only 13.4% of benefits distributed, but that number failed to factor in the cost of field investigations of fraud, which totaled nearly $50 billion in 2011. Here's how Food Stamps (now known as SNAP) have expanded:

  • When food stamps were first expanded nationally in the 1970s, just 1 in 50 Americans participated; today the figure is almost 1 in 7. The program has doubled in size since 2008 and quadrupled since 2001.
  • Food stamps are one of nearly 80 means-tested federal welfare programs, including 17 for nutritional support. Collectively, these programs cost $700 billion annually, plus $200 billion in state contributions.
  • From 2001 to 2006 the food stamp budget doubled, even as unemployment remained around five percent.
  • Food stamps make up 80 percent of the current farm bill, costing $770 billion over the next 10 years.
  • Food stamp spending is projected to remain permanently and significantly above pre-recession levels.
  • Were food stamp spending returned to pre-recession (2007) levels, and increased at the rate of inflation, it would produce 10-year savings of $340 billion. The current farm bill calls for only $4 billion in savings. http://budget.senate.gov/republican...round?ID=4ebe218a-dbbd-4a16-8d4e-8dcff1aeff7b
The medicaid program saves thousands of lives/yr. HUD, while often abused, actually has about an 80-85% effeciency rate. Not bad for a govt program when only 15% of the users are using it without proper eligibility.
No offense, but that's not even close. For one thing, it only covers 45% of the people who are technically eligible, which more than double the on-paper administrative costs, which are figured based on eligible clients, not actually enrollees. Also, Medicaid is rejected by more than 50% of the doctors and hospitals that technically should be accepting it because the approved payment levels on all but the most basic procedures fall woefully short of the actual cost of providing those procedures.
So long as we fund those FIRST....I would have no problem cutting every ounce of pork out of the budget. Problem is, that if we want to pass a democrats budget, the Republicans fill it with their pork. If the Republicans want to pass their defend budget, the Dems fill it with their pork.
You misunderstood my initial point. Overall, the entitlement programs consume 70% of their budget in administrative costs, with only 30% actually reaching the "consumer." Medicaid and food stamps may be better overall than the other programs, but their administrative costs are completely unreliable, fabricated as they are to reflect a "best-case scenario" rather than actually reflecting total costs.
I dont think we should be studying bear poop in Minnesota, but Rep Congresswoman Michelle Bach thought the need was so great that she sponsored a pork project for 2.2 mil/yr and pigbacked it to something the dems needed her consent to pass.
Two-point-2 million may sound huge, but compared to the waste, fraud and utter disregard for fiscal responsibility in the federal government, it was nothing. Literally. We spend $2.2 million every 19 seconds of every day, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year.
 
Upvote 0
L

Lovely Lane

Guest
It's never been that efficient and never will be. The government has claimed that of the total costs of the program were only 13.4% of benefits distributed, but that number failed to factor in the cost of field investigations of fraud, which totaled nearly $50 billion in 2011. Here's how Food Stamps (now known as SNAP) have expanded:

  • When food stamps were first expanded nationally in the 1970s, just 1 in 50 Americans participated; today the figure is almost 1 in 7. The program has doubled in size since 2008 and quadrupled since 2001.
  • Food stamps are one of nearly 80 means-tested federal welfare programs, including 17 for nutritional support. Collectively, these programs cost $700 billion annually, plus $200 billion in state contributions.
  • From 2001 to 2006 the food stamp budget doubled, even as unemployment remained around five percent.
  • Food stamps make up 80 percent of the current farm bill, costing $770 billion over the next 10 years.
  • Food stamp spending is projected to remain permanently and significantly above pre-recession levels.
  • Were food stamp spending returned to pre-recession (2007) levels, and increased at the rate of inflation, it would produce 10-year savings of $340 billion. The current farm bill calls for only $4 billion in savings. Food Stamp Reforms Will Help Both The Recipient And The Treasury - Budget Background - Research - U.S. Senate Budget Committee
No offense, but that's not even close. For one thing, it only covers 45% of the people who are technically eligible, which more than double the on-paper administrative costs, which are figured based on eligible clients, not actually enrollees. Also, Medicaid is rejected by more than 50% of the doctors and hospitals that technically should be accepting it because the approved payment levels on all but the most basic procedures fall woefully short of the actual cost of providing those procedures. You misunderstood my initial point. Overall, the entitlement programs consume 70% of their budget in administrative costs, with only 30% actually reaching the "consumer." Medicaid and food stamps may be better overall than the other programs, but their administrative costs are completely unreliable, fabricated as they are to reflect a "best-case scenario" rather than actually reflecting total costs.Two-point-2 million may sound huge, but compared to the waste, fraud and utter disregard for fiscal responsibility in the federal government, it was nothing. Literally. We spend $2.2 million every 19 seconds of every day, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year.
oh well, the republican house didn't pass last years farm bill so not only food stamps are effected but also farmers facing drought and wildfires.
 
Upvote 0

ameriswede

Member
Jul 20, 2012
73
4
Umeå
✟22,709.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Contrary to popular belief, the best indicator of "economic growth" is not statistics of employment or spending but rather the standard of living.

According to the United Nations, the people of the United States have a generally higher standard of living than the people of Sweden.
2010 list:
1. Norway
2.Australia
3.Sweden
4. Netherlands
5. Germany
6. Switzerland
8. Canada
9. USA

Since 2010 the way of ranking has changed. 2012 ranking has USA placed higher and Sweden placed much lower. Since 2010 Sweden has had the strongest economy and best development in Europe. So I am not sure what has led to the fall in ranking. Possibly, the cut in entitlements that the right wing has made?

But actually, the fact of the matter is that European countries called "socialistic" in a negative sense, by the right wing in USA...Norway, Germany, Netherlands, Sweden...are right there at the very, very top of countries having the highest standard of living in the WORLD. So, even though USA has surpassed Sweden in the most current report...my point has been that the standard of living is quite high in Sweden, nothing more. Further, one might take into consideration, that the fact that a small percentage in USA have the absolute best that money can buy you anywhere in the world...raises USA a notch in the rankings, despite that there are some at the bottom that have it below standard. It is probably fair to say that the "middle class" in USA has a bit higher standard of living than the "middle class" in Sweden. But Sweden, in contrast, has a much higher percentage of its people, in its middle class. They have a little lower standard, so as to raise the standard for those at the very bottom. I would much rather be "poor" in Sweden than "poor" in USA. Take my word for it, there is a world of difference there.
 
Upvote 0
L

Lovely Lane

Guest
Even if you did build it, the republicans will help to destroy it. Will the House con's pass a Farm bill this year?

The Senate has already passed a major overhaul of the nation’s farm programs, but a parallel effort in the House has been stymied, in large part by conservatives who have pressed for deep cuts to the expanded food stamp program. Without movement, a bipartisan drought relief package has had no vehicle to get out of Congress on.
Republican Leaders in Tricky Spot on Farm Bill and Drought Aid - NYTimes.com
Republicans will let the rich have tax cuts and the poor go hungry. Anti-Christ policies is my opinion about the GOP House.

p.s. it's all about politics with the GOP House, who cares if people are in need today.

After a late-night drafting session that ended early Thursday, the House Agriculture Committee easily approved a farm bill but House Republican leaders, fearing a divisive and messy intraparty floor fight, may want to hold off a floor vote until after the November elections to avoid being portrayed by conservatives as big government spenders who approved $969 billion in outlays over 10 years, and by liberals as the party that wants to virtually gut school lunch and food stamp programs. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/13/us/politics/house-agriculture-committee-agrees-on-farm-bill.html/
 
Upvote 0

IisJustMe

He rescued me because He delighted in me (Ps18:19)
Jun 23, 2006
14,270
1,888
Blue Springs, Missouri
✟23,494.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
Websites lie. Here is one that claims to be based on the UN's Human Development Index: Top Ten Countries with Highest Quality of Life

It lists the countries in order: Norway, Australia, Sweden, The Netherlands, Germany, Switzerland, Ireland, Canada, US and South Korea.

However, it clearly doesn't agree with the UN's own ranking of the HDI for fiscal 2011 as list shown on Wikipedia (which I'm always suspicious of regardless): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Human_Development_Index


1
11px-Steady2.svg.png
22px-Flag_of_Norway.svg.png
Norway
2
11px-Steady2.svg.png
22px-Flag_of_Australia.svg.png
Australia
3
11px-Steady2.svg.png
22px-Flag_of_the_Netherlands.svg.png
Netherlands
4
11px-Steady2.svg.png
22px-Flag_of_the_United_States.svg.png
United States
5
11px-Steady2.svg.png
22px-Flag_of_New_Zealand.svg.png
New Zealand
6
11px-Steady2.svg.png
22px-Flag_of_Canada.svg.png
Canada
7
11px-Steady2.svg.png
22px-Flag_of_Ireland.svg.png
Ireland
8
11px-Steady2.svg.png
22px-Flag_of_Liechtenstein.svg.png
Liechtenstein
9
11px-Steady2.svg.png
22px-Flag_of_Germany.svg.png
Germany
10
11px-Steady2.svg.png
22px-Flag_of_Sweden.svg.png
Sweden
 
Upvote 0

ameriswede

Member
Jul 20, 2012
73
4
Umeå
✟22,709.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
1. What are all those countries with "socialistic" tendencies doing in the top 10? Thought "socialism" was the sure way to devastation?
2. Norway, Netherlands, Germany and Sweden would certainly qualify for "socialistic" according to your definition. Now, how did they want up all the way up there?
3. "Either we've got to pretend that Jesus was just as selfish as we are, or we've got to acknowledge that He commanded us to love the poor and serve the needy - and then admit that we just don't wanna do it." Steve Colbert
 
Upvote 0
L

Lovely Lane

Guest
1. What are all those countries with "socialistic" tendencies doing in the top 10? Thought "socialism" was the sure way to devastation?
2. Norway, Netherlands, Germany and Sweden would certainly qualify for "socialistic" according to your definition. Now, how did they want up all the way up there?
3. "Either we've got to pretend that Jesus was just as selfish as we are, or we've got to acknowledge that He commanded us to love the poor and serve the needy - and then admit that we just don't wanna do it." Steve Colbert
:thumbsup:^_^:clap:
 
Upvote 0
Nov 16, 2009
3,039
134
Kentucky
✟27,610.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
3. "Either we've got to pretend that Jesus was just as selfish as we are, or we've got to acknowledge that He commanded us to love the poor and serve the needy - and then admit that we just don't wanna do it." Steve Colbert

:thumbsup::thumbsup:
 
Upvote 0

IisJustMe

He rescued me because He delighted in me (Ps18:19)
Jun 23, 2006
14,270
1,888
Blue Springs, Missouri
✟23,494.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
3. "Either we've got to pretend that Jesus was just as selfish as we are, or we've got to acknowledge that He commanded us to love the poor and serve the needy - and then admit that we just don't wanna do it." Steve Colbert
Show me where Mr. Gilbert or, more importantly, Jesus, said to do that through the government?
 
Upvote 0

ameriswede

Member
Jul 20, 2012
73
4
Umeå
✟22,709.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Show me where Mr. Gilbert or, more importantly, Jesus, said to do that through the government?
Show me where Jesus states that it is against God's will to give to the poor, whether it be via an individual, a congregation, or a government??? God never has anything against the giving to the poor, no matter who or what the source is.

I am not sure where your thinking is at. You seem to think you have some money, I have some money and the government has some money.
Isn't all of it God's? Are we not merely stewards? What do you have that you have not received? You entered this world naked and you will leave it naked? Where is your treasure invested?
 
Upvote 0

ameriswede

Member
Jul 20, 2012
73
4
Umeå
✟22,709.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Show me where Jesus states that it is against God's will to give to the poor, whether it be via an individual, a congregation, or a government??? God never has anything against the giving to the poor, no matter who or what the source is.

I am not sure where your thinking is at. You seem to think you have some money, I have some money and the government has some money.
Isn't all of it God's? Are we not merely stewards? What do you have that you have not received? You entered this world naked and you will leave it naked? Where is your treasure invested?
PS
JESUS = the poor.
 
Upvote 0
P

Publius

Guest
Jesus didn't say to. Jesus didn't say not to. Anytime He spoke about helping the poor, it was always in the context of a command to His followers.

That having been said, there are a couple of problems with the "Jesus didn't say not to argument".

The first is that Jesus did say that governments are to act justly, which precludes taking money from one group who has earned it to give to another, which has not earned it. It is also unjust for the government to subsidize poverty and enact inefficient programs that keep the poor in their poverty, as well as policies that punish the poor for trying to get out of povety.

Second, Jesus said that we, including the government, must act within the law. The Government violates Jesus' command to act within the law when it violates the Constitution. The Constitution never gives the government the responsibility or authority to enact entitlement programs to subsidize poverty.

The third is that Jesus, through various places in scripture, tells us that there are two kinds of poor: poverty which is caused by circumstances beyond the control of the poor, and poverty which is caused by sin, laziness, and irresponsibility. While Jesus is very clear that His followers are to help the former, His Word is equally clear that the latter are to be left to face the consequences of their self-imposed poverty.

In other words, in the words of Benjamin Franklin, they should be made so uncomfortable in their poverty that they are motivated to work to get out of poverty.

The government does not make this distinction and, as a result, not only violates Christ's teaching, but enables them to remain poor and enables their sin.

1. It is the responsibility of the Church, the community, and of neighbors to help the poor, not govermnent.

2. "Helping" the poor should always be in the context of not merely subsidizing their poverty, but helping and encouraging them to climb out of poverty. This simply cannot be done without placing the responsibility for their success on them and holding them accountable for their behavior, actions, and decisions, none of which the government does.

3. Not only are we under no obligation to help those who are poor as a result of their own sin, laziness, and irresponsibility, it is a sin against them and a sin against God to do so.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IisJustMe
Upvote 0