(If you’re just joining this series, feel free to read the previous installments.)
Welfare – Has it Helped the Poor? (Part 4)
Thus far, we’ve looked at how the government’s “War On Poverty,” carried out through a terribly inefficient, ineffective and counter-productive (we won’t even talk about Unconstitutional since, unfortunately, that seems to be a non-issue these days) system of force, has – like most government programs – made things worse for everyone; most notably the truly needy!
Solutions that have proven to work were suggested, as well as ramping it up to something that would most likely work even better; market-based charities.
But, at the conclusion of the last installment I said there was one more point I wanted to save for its own article, and that is the insult toward all Americans by the very nature of the system itself.
I asked, “Who are government politicians and bureaucrats anyway to imply that without their force, we won’t help out our needy brothers and sisters, whether for one-time emergencies, or to provide them with a helping hand until they can get back on their feet?”
Let’s continue that thought with some excerpts from my friend, David Berland’s book, Libertarianism in One Lesson:
Government welfare programs insult and demean all of us. They tell us we have no compassion. That only legislators and bureaucrats have compassion. They tell us we don’t know how to effectively help people. They tell us we are unwilling to provide assistance to the needy unless we are forced to do so. Not one of these premises is true.
Government welfare interferes with our ability to express compassion for our families, neighbors, and needy people everywhere. Because of the heavy taxes Americans pay, we have less money left over to use as we think best to help other people.
. . . We must respect the compassion that others have because it is the same compassion we experience within ourselves. Most people know government welfare programs are terribly inefficient but still continue to support them precisely because people are compassionate. People don’t want to see others in distress. We all want to live in a world where people generously help each other. The fatal mistake is to believe that compassionate and effective charity can result when government force is used in the place of a genuinely charitable spirit.
I agree with everything David says. And, while the insult being highlighted is not nearly as important as actually helping the poor, the fact is . . . Welfare has simply not helped them.
Overall, government Welfare hurts far more people than it helps, and undermines the work of loving, caring individuals and private charities that have a proven record of helping people turn their lives around.
As we conclude our four-part “series within a series” let’s remember that . . .
#1 We do indeed need to help those who cannot help themselves.
#2 Government is not the proper, nor best qualified entity to take on this very important job.
Yes, let’s get the fate of the poor and truly needy out of the hands of government and into the hands of those who are most qualified to help. That way, we’ll actually help the poor…and not just talk about helping the poor.
In Part 8 we’ll begin a new topic; one that is at the heart of much controversy and, not surprisingly, misunderstanding. And that…is Healthcare
Enjoy this post? Receive an update when our next post is published by entering your best email address below and clicking Get Updates.
This may seem strange coming from a centrist Democrat. But if anyone wants to see a case study on how eliminating Welfare in its traditional form HELPS the poor become productive, happy, self-sufficient, financially secure members of society, just take a look at the changes then-governor of Wisconsin Tommy Thompson made to that state’s Welfare system in the mid 1980s and how it resulted in getting people off of welfare and into jobs where they made a livable wage and felt productive. Thompson’s goal was to get everyone but the very neediest among the state’s citizenry off of welfare. Here’s a book that details the plan: http://www.amazon.com/Government-Matters-Welfare-Reform-Wisconsin/dp/0691116466
Now, I’m no fan of Tommy Thompson. Not at all. In fact, I don’t agree with most of his politics. But I admire how he helped a vast majority of people on Welfare to get off of the system, and lead happy, financially secure, and productive lives.
And, to your point Bob, if anyone doubts how people will rise up and support others in crisis, just look back at Katrina, 9/11, Ike, and the myriad other disasters and how the ordinary citizens contributed cash, clothing, food, and shelter to the needy.
We are a caring nation, at our core. America is the land of opportunity. America is the land of compassion. Let’s not confuse compassion with government programs that discourage opportunity and initiative.
Bob,
This is a tough one. I mean we as a society have a responsibility to help others in need. However, where do we draw the line? It just seems that people at time like to take advantage of others generosity.
When it all comes back to one thing. Mindset. Between the woe is me picture that the news media shells out each day and all the negativity that people allow themselves to be surrounded by. Its a world that feeds that negative energy, thus causing us to end up in the state that we are in.
Here is an idea. Why not have everyone who is taking part in ANY assistance programs go through a class on mindset.
Sure this may cost a bit to put together but what do you think the impact that may have on society as a whole?
I feel that overall something like that may have a greater positive ripple in all areas. Just a thought.
http://AshleyBolivar.com
Hi Vickie, actually it doesn’t seem strange at all. You’ve seen the results directly and you’ve “thought the matter through.” The combination of those two things typically leads to the conclusions that government-sponsored (i.e. forced) welfare simply doesn’t work. It hurts everyone; most notably those it is intended to help. I appreciate your insights and sharing.
Ashley, yes, we as a society do indeed have the responsibility to help others in need (in fact, throughout the entire four-part series on this topic that is the basic point I’ve made). The point you brought up in the first paragraph about people taking advantage is “caused/enhanced by” a huge, bloated government system. It’s much less likely to happen when private (either profit or non-profit) charities are in charge because there is much more accountability.
Regarding your idea, which was: “Why not have everyone who is taking part in ANY assistance programs go through a class on mindset. Sure this may cost a bit to put together but what do you think the impact that may have on society as a whole?”
My reply is that, if insisted on and funded by a private (profit or non-profit) charity, that’s fine; that’s their choice to enforce and they have the right to insist that anyone receiving their assistance do so. If done by government, however, that’s simply another forced use of taxpayer money. My foundational premise is that, not only does government not have the legitimate authority to do that, but it never works when they try and do it. It ends up being just another good idea that, like Tim “The Tool Man” Taylor’s inventions on the sitcom, “Home Improvement” blows up in everyone’s faces.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts. We don’t necessarily need to agree on everything. And, of course, just because I say it does’t mean I’m right. These are my opinions, and I’m extremely grateful that you are willing to share yours with us.
Bob
I think the purpose of government intervention is to control people under the guise of helping them. Currently there are few things you can do without the permission of the government. But how did we start as a free market to this socialistic/fascist police state? Does capitalism invariably lead to socialism?
David, while I don’t agree with you that that is the “purpose of government” (by definition, the “purpose” of government is to defend the rights of the individual), I agree that one way politicians both control people and get re-elected is by controlling people under the guise of helping. And, while some politicians truly believe that they are helping, good intent does not necessarily equal good results.
In answer to your question, “does capitalism invariably lead to socialism?” the answer is that, no it doesn’t “lead” to it; t must be protected from it. Our Founders warned us that eternal and ongoing vigilance would always be needed to keep our country from becoming dominated by our politicians. Unfortunately, that advice has not been heeded and so, little by little, we as citizens have given up our rights and responsbilities and handed them over to the politicians (supported by special interests) and bureaucrats, who have gladly accepted them; not because of any conspiracy or anything like that, but simply because that’s what governmen’s do.
The purpose of this entire series is to educate on the blessings of liberty (and Capitalism; and the two go hand-in-hand), to help define it in a way tht its true essence can be understood, and to keep the dialogue going.