2006-11-01 12:51:46 · 16 answers · asked by ஃ panen et circenses ஃ 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
I think we should feed and shelter our poor AND have a strong military. Screw sending money to Palestine and Egypt or any other country that hates us - spend that money to take care of our own.
2006-11-01 12:55:17 · answer #1 · answered by Jadis 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
We've been doing that since the Roosevelt administration. The number of poor tend to increase with the amount of money spent on them. Think of it on a personal level. If someone gives you something, food/money etc., on a regular basis you start to expect it and deem yourself deserving. Now if it were a close personal friend who gives to you, you may feel differently. You would be thankful and wanting to help your friend in return. The government is like a stranger handing out money on the corner. Naturally you would want to take it and usually spend it unwisely since you didn't work for it. Suppose the stranger hands out money once a month at that corner, it would be nice to quit your job and live off what is given to you freely. Food and shelter are the basic needs of a person which everyone has the capability of providing for themselves. It may take a little compremise or sacrifice to earn money but there are limitless opportunities to do that.
2006-11-01 21:09:00 · answer #2 · answered by Poncho Rio 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
If your point is we should direct our focus on providing more charity for the poor, then generally I agree. However, if you look at historical impact of chartiy, it doesn't have such a great record. The whole world has been involved in some sort of charity or another, yet there are still poor people in the world, and quite frankly the number has increased.
What is needed is a new approach to help people break out of poverty. The only proven method that I have seen work is the brain child of the guy who recently won the Nobel Peace prize. His name is Muhammad Yunnus. In the 1970's, working as an economics professor in Bangladesh, he became frustrated that none of the policies really worked for the poor.
So he decided to examine the situation himself and learned that giving out tiny loans to very poor people at very low interest rates gave those people financial freedom. I am talking about loans in the amount of $20 to $30. This may seem nothing to us, but in a third world country this is a small fortune.
In any case, over 30 years later, he has successfully loaned out over $5 billion with a 98% loan pay back rate and pulled millions of people out of poverty.
The point is that hand outs don't work, you have to enable people to break out of poverty themselves. It gives them self esteem and generates more confidence in themselves.
This is the kind of program we need in the US.
Here is a link to a story about him:
http://www.pbs.org/opb/thenewheroes/meet/yunus.html
2006-11-01 22:14:50 · answer #3 · answered by redstorm 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
To get the truth, check the US budget for the last 50 years, and find out how many BILLIONS have been given to the "poor"by our taxpayers. Remember how small a percentage of the population they really are, and calculate how many dollars PER PERSON they have been given. In welfare, foodstamps, tax exemptions, earned income credit, adc, etc. Add student loans.
If they don't want to be poor, let them get off their asses and produce something!
2006-11-01 21:04:51 · answer #4 · answered by Thorbjorn 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Many poor people (in America) are poor because they are lazy. I work hard for my money and don't want to pay taxes to support the poor. I am not happy about the money being spent on the war either.
2006-11-01 21:00:31 · answer #5 · answered by Nelson_DeVon 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
10 billion a month could buy a whole bunch of health care. Feed a whole bunch of folks, and shelter many homeless. That is what I look at every day. 655,000 Iraqi, 3000 Americans all dead is a bigger price to pay then all that. I still don't have a good reason why we went there in the first place.
2006-11-01 20:58:21 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
That's because Bruno, most who are poor do so of their own choice! They can get as far or as low as they want in this country and if there low, its a choice they made. There's any number of ways to work out of poverty and they choose not to take any of them.
TedT, try not to give advice on the United States and I'll curb any points to be made about Australia, your from a place that couldn't even save the crocodile hunter! I'm shocked!
2006-11-01 20:56:14 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
We have, in the past 40 years, spent enough money on poverty to be able to give $100,000.00 to every poor person in the USA.
If you could "cure" poverty by giving people money then we would already be done with the poverty problem.
Governments can't do it. It takes a healthy, growing economy, coupled with a desire by the poor person top take responsibility for his/her own success in life.
2006-11-01 21:03:59 · answer #8 · answered by chocolahoma 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Hey man,
Wake up....If you think We have real poor people here in America....You need to go visit a 3rd world country. The money spent on the military here in the U.S. is vital to keep the country free and virtually poor free. 3rd world nations don't have welfare programs...the poor there die........DIE.... they don't have anything like the poor have here.....Please....before you start bashing military spending do a little research...... or go to a third world country....it will open your eyes on how "lucky" poor people here in the U.S. really are.
2006-11-01 20:58:02 · answer #9 · answered by ugadawg30 2 · 6⤊ 0⤋
As an Australian I cannot understand how U.S.A. can spend so much on war but appear unable to sort the mess in New Orleans.It could well be that you have and the news hasn't reached us. Is this the reality?
2006-11-01 21:00:41 · answer #10 · answered by Ted T 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋