Your Family is $510,678 Deeper in Debt Than You Thought

90% of medicare money is spent in the last two years of a person's life. If the payments were cut off at age 75 . . . .

 

Once again, Comrade Mitchell sees a communist in every corner!!

 

All of these comments about not feeding the poor through government programs is I am sure coming from those that have never experienced poverty, and if I could see them, would probably take a backhoe to get to their rib cage. If the government stopped feeding the poor, my guess is that the churches today would not fill the gap. We are to take care of the poor. How it is done is beyond our control. Sounds to me like a pattern. Those who speak of poverty that have never missed a meal are the same ones who talk of the noble cause in Iraq and Americans dying and never saw a day of combat.

 

If I put a gun to another person's head and take money from him, that's theft and before a court I can't use a defense that I gave the money to saturnneptune. It's no more moral when the government takes money by force from one person to give to another person - even in a democratic form of government.

Remember, when the goverment robs Peter to pay Paul, the government can always count on Paul's support.

 

I grew up in the southern Appalachians. The county I grew up in had the highest unemployment in NC most years. You had two kinds for the most part: The poor who worked and the poor who lived off guvmint.

My maternal grandparents were poorer than most people can imagine today in real terms. My mother was the youngest and the only one who grew up with in door plumbing. They refused to sign up for "welfare" since that was supposed to be for people who couldn't do for themselves. When they grew older, the family helped them out. When my grandfather died, my grandmother lived with us for the most part.... free of charge. It was what families were supposed to do.

In addition to that, I grew up only a few miles from an Indian Reservation. Most people there were on government programs of one sort or another. Very few if any lived completely independent of government.

So once again, maybe you ought to be more careful about what you are so "sure" about. These programs don't "help" the poor nearly as much as they destroy their soul. It kills ambition and responsibility. Yes. I have seen it over and over.

Who got to Katrina in force first? How many billions of dollars were raised in less than a month to relieve the truly needy? How many people opened up their homes, businesses, and properties to victims of Katrina.

The only reason that private institutions wouldn't do it is that liberals have so effectively indoctrinated people that only the gov't can do it correctly and that it is the "job" of the gov't. Both are lies.

How many scriptures do you want me to cite declaring it to be an individual and church responsibility to provide for the poor? God commands it.

Your first sentence is correct... especially the "we" part. But the "how it is done" is well within our control. We are to obey God.

[deleted at the request of the writer]

[ May 27, 2006, 12:03 AM: Message edited by: Phillip ]

 

If I put a gun to another person's head and take money from him, that's theft and before a court I can't use a defense that I gave the money to saturnneptune. It's no more moral when the government takes money by force from one person to give to another person - even in a democratic form of government.

Remember, when the goverment robs Peter to pay Paul, the government can always count on Paul's support. </font>[/QUOTE]Amen Ken... not to mention making an effective slave out of both Peter and Paul due to the mere fact that they accept government's ownership of all property to include the labors of an individual.

 

First of all, why is it that both you Scott and Ken disagree with me, yet Ken's response is not arrogant, is factual, to the point and concise, whereas yours is page after page of nonsense, mean tone, arrogant, and has no point to it.

Ken, your point is well taken. I guess I have a gut feeling that in this country, if all aid from the government stopped, we as a nation have become so self absorbed, that some would go hungary. I know we should be doing this through the churches, and I wish we cared more about each other. In a country so richly blessed by God, no one should go hungary. Your views are out of a good heart and are appreciated.

As for the other individual, my Dad lost a house in Katrina last year, so you do not know what you are talking about, not a clue. Again, talking without experiencing. Poverty, Iraq, and this. I dont know what your mindset on life is, but you live in some kind of fantasy world that is reflected by the latest article you read. &lt;edited - LE&gt;

[ May 26, 2006, 10:05 PM: Message edited by: LadyEagle ]

 

Oh, is that where they would go?

Question: In the judgement Jesus tells about in Matthew, if one happend to live in a country that did provide public [government-extorted] food, clothing and shelter, is that going to put that person on His right? That's all he said afterall-- "...you fed me... you clothed me... you took me in...."

 

Maybe because you haven't made a point to antagonize Ken. I don't know. Maybe its because you take my writing style wrong. Again, I don't know.

What I do know is that at the point where you made it your mission to play judge over me I had no intent of offending you or anyone else. These debates get pointed at times and I doubt that Ken would even deny that he has jabbed pretty hard at times. If you don't like my writing style or whatever, maybe you should make suggestions or ask me to clarify or even offer constructive criticism.

"hungary"... now that's funny .

I actually fear at this point you are right. That's why I held out some hope for the ideals GWB promoted for awhile. He presented a concept of an ownership or responsibility society. The notion was that the object of relief programs should be to work themselves out of business... not to self-perpetuate. This is one of the major things I hold against Bush. He abandoned this ideal.

Now. Why haven't you been that nice to me? I have previously said basically the same thing but you found reason for offense without even pausing to think that you might have taken me wrong or that I meant no offense. Why?

&lt;edited - LE&gt;I have been here now for several years and at time have barked back and forth with some pretty decent people. You are the first to make it your business to follow me around and find offense in what I post. I can honestly say that no one has reacted to me the way you have and several people have contacted me to compliment me on being patient and reserved when dealing with others who were neither.
&lt;edited - LE&gt;

[ May 26, 2006, 10:04 PM: Message edited by: LadyEagle ]

 

Here's your opportunity. Show me where I have done this... not having been incited by you.

 

Well, I will compliment you on one point. At one time, George Bush did have ideals I voted for him twice, never again if he could run. It is hard to say what happened. Maybe the media, or the liberal element of Congress drug him down. And another point we agree on is that the churches should be helping the poor. My only point was that I do not think they would because lots of people dont go to church, and second, as noted before, we are all self absorbed. So to say we do not agree on anything just is not so.

 

I agree .

I truly wish you wouldn't take me wrong and then react as you do. If you'll pm me and point out how you think I might have written it differently it will be taken to heart.

I just want to state my opinion and am very sorry that for whatever reason it irks you so. I have posted some things since getting aggravated with you that I shouldn't have. I am sorry for that. Please feel free to report any that you think should be deleted... or on second thought, perhaps I should go back through this thread and report them myself.

 

But do you think this is cause or effect? Are people apathetic so gov't takes over or are more people apathetic because it is easy to assume that gov't will take over?

 

I dont believe that is necessary. There is nothing you can do to write different. One person pointed out that we cannot see eyes, body language, and expressions here, and that is a problem in this forum. To get back to the subject of Bush, I guess the two things that are the most offensive to conservatives, is an out of control border, and a massive federal deficit.

Your idea of going back to the 1940's and stopping social security would probably have been a good idea, but those people had just gone through a depression. Today, it has become a burden for our generation. I do not know what the answer to that problem is. They talk about private investment, then people see the market plunge as it has for the past two weeks. What are your ideas to reform social security?

 

people are so apathetic that government takes over, or maybe the word is, as the Bible says about the last days, "hearts have grown cold." The tragedy is that the government, some departments especially, are horrible at any similance of being able to handle money in an efficient manner.

 

Eliminate abortion? We're going to need more people. If estimates are correct and the current program is maintained, there will be only 2.5 workers paying in when I am old enough to draw.

It is a really tough problem and I am not sure there is a good way out. Future leaders more than likely won't be able to avoid means testing which will be patently unfair. While the market over time offers greater benefits, plans to escape the current system to a market based system will have casualties... and maybe alot of casualties.

One thing that could be done is to simply level with people 20+ years from retirement and tell them that they'd better get into an IRA because SS may not be available... even after they've paid in. Maybe greater incentives should be given to both businesses and individuals to promote retirement investments. Maybe allow people to start digging into their half of the SSI contribution after they're investing 10% of their income already. Somehow people have to get prepared to not depend on gov't. SS could drive us into default.

I think streamlining the taxation is the first place to start with all of our Federal problems. The "Fair Tax" form of sales tax looks the best from what I've seen. We waste far too much money raising money through all of the different routes.

 

Oh, anything that gov't can do to promote real property ownership would also help.

 

One thing that has kind of been on my heart lately is that maybe we should start displacing the gov't the way they displaced us. Shouldn't I be obeying God's command anyway? Didn't Paul praise the Macedonians (I think) for giving even more than they could?

Please pray that God will continue to fester this sore spot on my spirit until I know specifically what to do about it.

 

And one more thing... geez maybe its better for you to bark at me than to ask my opinion?

We might need to revise our immigration laws and progressively let more working people in. I know you have a major concern about illegals but wouldn't allowing more legals help offset the lack of people to support the system?