- Apr 5, 2007
- 144,404
- 27,056
- 56
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Reformed
- Marital Status
- Married
Upvote
0
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.
What is your understanding of the plan?Perhaps it is, but there is nothing about Biden's plan that seeks to ensure that you (or anyone else) live up to that standard (or any other).
What evidence do have to support such claims?I hope everyone enjoys the "free" lunch because those who can afford it the least will be paying the bill for years to come. Taxing the rich and corporations is a joke, those costs are just passed along to consumers and employees, expect higher prices, higher interest rates, higher taxes, and higher unemployment especially in the lower income jobs, those in the lower income or fixed income situations will become more and more poor as the prices and costs of living increase.
I'm not speaking for @TLK Valentine but my takeaway from his post is that when real justice is not enforced enough by the government it results in people being hurt. That can be, as in his example, a rise in people turning to crime which hurts both the criminals and their victims directly and the rest of society indirectly.So the government should help because people might turn to lives of crime?
But we see constant attacks on the food stamp programs and limitations out the wazoo.
The other day I was in the grocery store and felt so bad for the young mother using SNAP type benefits the other day. It was like the store had to make her fill out something for every purchase. WHich meant everyone of us in line were made IMMEDIATELY aware that this poor woman was on food stamps. It seemed overly degrading.
We put restrictions and social opprobrium on poverty as if it is an STI.
We as a nation can do better. But we hold onto this Puritanical idea that poverty is the direct result of bad life decisions only. (And even if it is due to some bad decisions, who among us makes perfect decisions all the time?)
This (from the article in the OP):What is your understanding of the plan?
There should be more. Generational and systemic poverty are maintained by these programs under their current directives.
I would feel shame not being able to provide for my family apart from taking from others, especially if I knew that the money funding my benefits was taken by force from my neighbors and not "cheerfully given" (as the Bible puts it).
This would be the same with using private charity.
I would want to be off these programs as quickly as possible
It's not the attitude of all though.
You speak as if you wish for the poor to remain that way.
So again, what’s your understanding of the plan? What’s he going to do?This (from the article in the OP):
"President Biden’s multitrillion-dollar suite of economic proposals is aiming to both reinforce and rebuild an American middle class that feels it has been standing on shifting ground. And it comes with an explicit message that the private sector alone cannot deliver on that dream and that the government has a central part to play.
“When you look at periods of shared growth,” said Brian Deese, director of Mr. Biden’s National Economic Council, “what you see is that public investment has played an absolutely critical role, not to the exclusion of private investment and innovation, but in laying the foundation.”"
So the government should help because people might turn to lives of crime?
Robbing the local convenience store isn’t a federal crime.It is the duty of the government to "provide for the common defense," is it not?
That would necessarily include defending us form one another, would it not?
Why do you look down on poor people and think that they will turn to crime?As a fiscal conservative, don't you think it's a sound financial investment to spend, say, $10,000 now to get poor people back on their feet, rather than the millions later to investigate, arrest, prosecute, sentence, and incarcerate them? (remembering also that while they're cooling their heels in a cell, they're contributing nothing to the economy)
What makes you think I don’t support the poor in my community and elsewhere?And we're not even getting into the moral duty of helping those in need. Now, you might say that the government shouldn't be *forcing* you to do this, but as a Christian, you should be doing it already... but you can't do it all by yourself; it's a big task.
No doubt you can. That is until they come for your money.And maybe I'm just a wacky liberal who believes “The legitimate object of government, is to do for a community of people, whatever they need to have done, but can not do, at all, or can not, so well do, for themselves—in their separate, and individual capacities.”
...but I can live with that.
No doubt you can. That is until they come for your money.
Perhaps this feels like virtue? Personally I don't want to live in the richest nation in the history of the planet and still see people struggling for food.
Yet there are many REQUIREMENTS in the Bible to give to the poor (Ex 23:11 for example).
Charity is great, don't get me wrong. But coordinated programs across the entirety of the nation would be much more efficient. Studies find that charities seldom are able to meet the overall larger needs that a coordinated society-wide effort can.
Thankfully most aid programs are used "short term" (SOURCE)
Not even the majority, so that's good.
As it says in Galatians 2:10 remember the poor.
Unless you feel that charity also wishes for the poor to remain so?
If you are happy to pay more, then do it now. You are better at handling money than the government.I'm more than happy for them to "come for my money". It's how I've lived most of my adult life. I don't have kids but my wife and I both happily pay taxes that go to support public schools because there's a value to an educated society. I'd gladly pay even more in taxes if it helped the poor in the community moreso. I'd pay more to see the homeless housed here as well.
A good society is worth its weight in gold to me.
If you are happy to pay more, then do it now. You are better at handling money than the government.
There's no way you could know that.
In short, he's going to invest in the infrastructure of the nation thereby creating jobs and enhancing/enabling existing jobs and he'll shift the tax burden from the middle class to the wealthiest classes. All of which is long overdue. He's doing an extremely miniature version of FDR's New Deal; it's not nearly enough but it's certainly in the right direction from both moral and governmental perspectives.So again, what’s your understanding of the plan? What’s he going to do?
You said that you’d be okay paying more in taxes. Why not just figure out what that number would be and pay that now to some poor person?As I said I already pay more than some. I pay taxes that go to support things I will never have anything directly to do with (no kids, so my property taxes that go to pay for schools pay for things I do not have a direct investment in).
I want a well-educated, stable society. I'm willing to pay for it. I don't expect a free lunch.
You said that you’d be okay paying more in taxes. Why not just figure out what that number would be and pay that now to some poor person?
Do you honestly think that the government would do a better job at this than you?Because it would be more efficient if we as a society worked in a group to help the homeless. Me doing one donation wouldn't have as much impact as all of us doing it. (Don't get me wrong, I donate to charities and gave away all my COVID stimulus money to charities, but it's not enough. If we all do it as a society we could make big changes!)
Will there be pork in this?In short, he's going to invest in the infrastructure of the nation thereby creating jobs and enhancing/enabling existing jobs and he'll shift the tax burden from the middle class to the wealthiest classes. All of which is long overdue. He's doing an extremely miniature version of FDR's New Deal; it's not nearly enough but it's certainly in the right direction from both moral and governmental perspectives.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?