Posts Tagged ‘welfare’
Tax rebate to stimulate foreign economies
Written by Chad Phillips
Friday, 02 May 2008 02:30
No Comments

A longtime reader sent us this chain email today. We don't know who the author is or we would attribute it. In any case, despite the simplistic economic outflows listed, the humor as well as the message is quite poignant when you consider how "duh gubmint" has sold us out to foreign countries. ENJOY!

As you may have heard, the Bush Administration said each of us would get a rebate check to stimulate the economy.

If we spend that money at Wal-Mart, all the money will go to China.

If we spend it on gasoline it will go to the Arabs.

If we purchase a computer it will go to India.

If we purchase fruit and vegetables it will go to Mexico, Honduras, and Guatemala.

If we purchase a good car it will go to Japan.

If we purchase useless crap it will go to Taiwan and none of it will help the American economy.

We need to keep that money here in America. The only way to keep that money here at home is to spend it at yard sales, since those are the only businesses still in the U.S.

 

 
Welfare falls short of Christian charity
Written by Thomas Lasher
Tuesday, 26 February 2008 05:58
14 Comments

The favorite example of Democratic righteousness is the party’s support of the welfare system. They claim that if conservatives really cared about Christian values and helping fellow Americans in need, then the Republican Party would favor policies that tax the rich and redistribute wealth to the poor. Liberal Democrats point to government assistance and the welfare state as a model of Christian charity in action. In reality government welfare is at best a pale reflection of true Christian giving.

Admittedly, the welfare system was designed for a noble purpose – to assist the less fortunate either financially or through other means including food, housing, and work programs. Certainly this type of assistance benefits many people. And those who work for or support government sponsored welfare programs generally have the best intentions at heart. They genuinely want to make a positive difference in the lives of those who receive these services. I do not doubt the honesty of their convictions, nor should we discredit the good they do accomplish. But in the end government bureaucracy does not fulfill the demands of Christian love of neighbor.

Liberals correctly point out that Jesus commanded his followers to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, and care for the sick. The Sermon on the Mount and the command to love our neighbor form the basis for the liberal argument in favor of the “Christian” welfare state. Liberals argue that Christian Conservatives neglect this key element of their faith when applying Christian principles to their own version of public policy. Supposedly conservatives have no heart when it comes to the down-trodden and do not heed the words of Jesus about those in need. In truth, conservatives are not heartless or dismissive of human suffering or ignorant of basic Christian ethics. Conservatives know that the poor suffer and need our help. But they also know that making charitable work an integral function of the government actually diminishes the goodness of charity and reduces its spiritual impact.

Charitable acts, when they are truly “Christian,” not only alleviate the suffering of those in need, which is a great good in itself, but goodness is also found in the giver who makes a willing sacrifice. Jesus tells Christians to help the poor because in doing so we not only help our neighbor, but we too benefit spiritually by strengthening our own faith and by building communal bonds with others. Government welfare on the other hand creates a barrier between the giver (the taxpayer) and the receiver (those in need) that filters out any spiritual context. The poor receive benefits from a faceless and faithless bureaucracy; and taxpayers pay taxes, not out of charitable goodwill or faith in God, but because the force of law compels them to do so under strict penalties. That is not Christian charity; it is simply doing your duty to Uncle Sam.

This is not to say that the government should never play a role in assisting the poor. The government has an obligation to regulate certain variables within the economy to prevent or correct social injustices including poverty. But the primary responsibility for ensuring basic human rights and assisting economically oppressed rests with individuals and private organizations such as churches and civic groups which meet the spiritual and emotional as well as the physical needs of those they serve. A partnership with government that allows faith-based organizations to do the job that government is not equipped to do would be in the best interest of all involved.

Making “charity” a function of the secular bureaucracy, rather than a genuine outpouring of love between individuals, contradicts the true spirit of the Christian message. Authentic Christian charity is given out of compassion and love for humanity, and as an act of obedience to God. From a Christian perspective, our charitable good works belong to God. If we make government the primary facilitator of charity, in effect forfeiting our Christian duty to love our neighbor, is this not in effect giving to Caesar what is rightfully God’s? That is a concept no “party of Christian values” should ever proclaim.

 
Class Warfare or Welfare?
Written by Chad Phillips
Friday, 25 January 2008 21:51
6 Comments

Editor's Note: This commentary written by guest contributor, Lisa Greer. Greer is the founder and Editor-In-Chief for SensibleLife.com.


How big government is wasting your money

The tax rebate issue before congress this week is typical of the type of socialistic behavior emanating from a Democrat dominated Congress toward those who have risen above the “average” income level. With just over a year in under this party’s control, the economy has slid faster than a California mudslide.

Directly proportional to the economy, the tax issue is continually perceived to be an eternal battle between the haves and the have-nots, but the reality is that there is no battle. Rather, it’s more a series of mandatory concessions imposed upon those in a higher income bracket in an attempt to appease those in the lower. The desire to eliminate the highs and lows of a free market economy in favor of an entitlement society has long been the battle cry of the majority currently in power.

While it makes sense that the more money you make, the more taxes you pay, what’s interesting is that the higher your income, the higher your rate of taxation. This makes perfect “sense,” right? Punish those who work effectively and invest in our economy by making them pay even more. The entitlement mentality, or Robin Hood Syndrome, is out of control.

One has to wonder how congress can make decisions on a tax rebate based on empty demographics. For example, families with an income level of $174,000 and above get no tax rebate. How does this make sense? Without tracking the individual situations, how can one assume that anyone, at or above this income level, wouldn’t need or use such a rebate. What if that above average income family had been hit with an enormous amount of medical expenses in 2007, such as cancer surgery and/or treatment? What if the wage earner(s) has a large family with multiple children in college?

Then, of course, there are those with such low incomes that they are tax exempt. Yet, they will desperately need this rebate. For those in this group working hard to make an honest living in an effort to help themselves, I’m excited. This rebate will mean a lot. Sure, they’ll put that money right back into commerce. But again, congress is making the decision on awarding them a tax rebate based on meaningless demographics and assumptions.

Finally, there are those who are intentionally living off public assistance and off the income of others. This is just one more method by which they will receive a benefit they didn’t even attempt to earn. Prime example: I know someone in the military who married a girl right out of basic training. He was to ship out to Korea for a year, and she demanded they get married, or she would not wait for him. (When a soldier comes out of basic training, they have been so cut off from family and friends that they are pretty vulnerable to such an ultimatum.) Unfortunately, the couple had not been dating long enough for the soldier to realize he was being scammed. After three years of her making promises to join him in Korea, (he signed up for an extra year based on her promise to join him there) and after a year of being back in the states with her throwing a tantrum every time he mentioned divorce, he finally filed. She is now disputing the divorce, demanding maintenance (similar to alimony). She did mention she “desperately” needs the money because the boyfriend she’s living with now isn’t working. She essentially wants the soldier to support her for the rest of her life, even though she spent just one night of married life with him 3 years ago. Had the soldier bothered to check into her family history prior to tying the knot, he would have found that this is a family who lives off public assistance and suing both people and businesses for personal injury, worker’s compensation, sexual harassment, etc. Of course, they do not pay taxes, but clearly they “need” this tax rebate. After all, who knows when their next settlement might be?

I could go on, but I think this is sufficient to illustrate a singular reality: The government could easily find enough money to give back to everyone, if they would stop wasting it. To find out more about how your tax dollars are being abused and wasted, check out Citizens Against Government Waste. This site is not for the faint of heart, so view with caution.