Why do we hand out welfare and health care?

Question

Do we do it because some of us are just bleeding heart socialist liberals?

No. It is not that simple.

I would argue that there are two very good practical reason that we hand out welfare and health care that even the hardest of hardcore cons would agree with if they just stopped and thought about it.

1) We give people just enough money in welfare and health care to keep them from rioting in the streets and overturning society. Remember the mobs of the French and Russian revolutions? The Romans called it "bread and circuses." The knew what they were doing. They kept the mob in check that way, too.

2) It is the moral and right thing to do. It has nothing to do with socialism and everything to do with Christianity. The Bible tells us we are our brother's keeper, whether we like it our not.

Agree or disagree?

Answer 1

Look at it from a different angle:

Why does the government confiscate the labor of the productive, and give it to the unproductive?

Your point #1 is valid, but you might add that bread & circuses corrupted and destroyed that civilization.

Point #2 should be amended to state that stolen money is not the same as charitable giving; that governments don't care if the money confiscated is properly spent, since it's only used as a bribe to maintain its political power; and that individuals would have more money for church tithes, the creation of jobs and businesses, and a better ability to take care of their family members if they weren't ripped off by their government.
The United States was built this way; with minimal federal taxes and very strong faith-based, locally-controlled churches and organizations providing services to the needy. Efficiently, with vested oversight.

Think of us honest, working, productive people, as being forced to pay protection (through taxes) to a war-lord and his gang of loyal hoodlums or they'll burn our shops and businesses to the ground.

Answer 2

Aside from the Christian virtues, I believe welfare and medical care are two of the best ways to instill loyalty. From a leadership view, one of the best things a leader can do is be there for a person when they happen to have a bit of bad luck. There are limits, and the way it is done is critical. I do not approve of the way we have been doing it. I have seen for myself many problems similar to the ones listed. Let me suggest some improvements to try to correct the situation. First, if you collect welfare or medicare in any given year without paying it back, that year you may not vote. Second, nobody should ever be refused emergency room services because of an apparent lack of ability to pay. This does not cover long term continuing care or extreme surgeries, specifically, cancer treatment and transplants. Third, since the idea is that nobody should ever freeze or starve, I suggest we reopen some of our military bases as dormitories and kitchens. The food should be as bland as possible, without exception. While there, you give up you rights against search and are under constant surveillance. You are subject to military rules, discipline and courts. MPs, not cops enforce them. Fourth, A: you get one free kid in the ER. The second time you show up, your tubes are tied (in such a way that, when you can afford to pay for it yourself, it can be undone.) B: genetic testing is done. If the father is identified, he has used up his one. One more and he gets cut.

Answer 3

I agree if all you want is the social aspects of it, but realistically speaking, social programs are what jump-started the economy during The Great Depression, and continue to stabalize it today.
Social Programs generate cash flow and revenue for retailers, food producers, and commodity traders on wallstreet.
If we were to slash them it would slash volume sold, which would also reduce profits of food retailers, food producers, landlords who rent to lower income individuals, and send poverty back to the pre 1960's level of over 20%. Which is currently around 10%. CUT IN HALF since the inception of the War on Poverty.
While you can argue that they haven't reduced poverty much in the past decade, it still does not dismiss the facts that they generate income, by creating a cash flow snowball effect in the economy as Reagan believed in.
You also can't argue with the fact that they allow the government a "safety net" to prevent depression.
Anyone who uses this argument as the only argument against social program is ignoring the fact that as in all situations, the closer you come to eliminating the problem, the harder the last bit of it becomes to fix, and ignore the fact that they are responsible for the nice standard of living that most of us enjoy, even if we don't directly benefit from the social programs themselves.

As far as health care, if we reduce the 47 million as of 2005(probably 50 million by now) Americans who have no access to preventative health care, we also reduce our own rate of exposure to infection. We reduce the losses to health care providers incurred by people who cannot pay, and reduce the costs that they pass onto us, to make up the losses incurred by people who cannot pay. This increases the amount of disposable income we all have which does the same thing they keep crying that reducing taxes would do...increase cash flow even more.

Answer 4

I agree with you, and don't understand how Scipro got a thumbs down for agreeing, and quoting the Con's Jesus Ronald Reagan along with it, to support his view. Sure proves some people will disagree with everyone if it doesn't match their right-wing radio derived views of the world.

Answer 5

In a nice way, I disagree with you.

1. Most people on welfare do very well. The more kids they have, the more food stamps and money they get.

It was a way of helping those in need many years ago and right now, we have three and four generations who know nothing but living on welfare. This short term measure failed and needs to be seriously revamped.

2. Morally, yes, we need to help those in need, but, short term. I have always thought if someone collects welfare, they need to earn it. If a 27 year old man is getting welfare, then to collect it, make him pick up trash 40 hours a week for the county or city. They will find they can make more money working a job than picking up trash for a welfare check.


Welfare is a socialistic tool and gets people dependent on big Brother. The ultra liberals want big Brother to handle all aspects of the peoples lives. I think most people are smart enough that they don't need someone telling them what to do and when.

Answer 6

Agree with the 2nd point. 1st point is way off, most people receiving government health care and welfare are way too lazy to take to the streets and riot, and the majority of citizens wouldn't stand for riots and street mob violence. The Americans are not the French.

Answer 7

You make a point but welfare was designed to give people a hand back to their feet. Today welfare has become nothing more than a hand out. I don't mind helping someone with a disability and is unable to work. Unfortunately many of welfare recipients don't have disabilities they are just lazy and would rather have other working tax paying citizens take care of them. We need time limits on welfare recipients and lifetime limitations because I am sick and tired off working 6 to 7 days a week for a large portion of my check to go to a lazy crackhead.

Answer 8

Liberals steal other people's money to buy votes, and then try to fool the gullible into thinking that liberals care about them. If liberals really cared about the workers of America they would stop stealing my money to give it to lazy bums.

Answer 9

I disagree.

It's true that the bible tells us that we are our brother's keeper, however, really that job is being FORCED on us in a situation with Universal Health Care.

Right, everyone has a right to healthcare. But everyone also has a RESPONSIBILITY to work for what they have. Most jobs have health care as a benefit.

I really don't think that I can afford to give away 55% of our measly paycheck for everyone else's healthcare. We can barely afford to pay for our own kid's healthcare.

Answer 10

well personally i think if there is going to be any sort of welfare program at all it should be merely a safety net. SHORT TERM assistance for when things are falling apart. Any more than this creates incentive for laziness. People should understand that this world they are living in is not easy and you have to work your butt off to get by. Expecting hand outs is not what made this country great. Every single individual should be doing everything they can to get by and making smart decisions. paying people who choose not to is not the answer.