Faith Focused Dating. Create your Free Profile and meet your Match! Sign Up for Free
A place to learn, mingle, and share

This room is for the discussion of current events,cultural issues and politics especially in relation to Catholic values.

Saint Thomas More was martyred during the Protestant Reformation for standing firm in the Faith and not recognizing the King of England as the Supreme Head of the Church.
Learn More:Saint Thomas More

I don't hate the successful!

Dec 18th 2012 new

I'm taking a little break soon from CM, and I wanted to start this thread before I left.

We know envy is one of the deadly sins that people these days suffer greatly from. We know that wanting free stuff from others who work for it is prevalent in this society. What we don't know is what we can do to teach people that people have a right to their belongings whether rich or poor and part of that is that they have a right to decide where their money should go. I do not think I have the right to steal it from them as does govt., which is condoned by some people on here. I believe everyone should be taxed the same flat fee for our defense on a federal level and the same flat fee for everything else necessary to help people on the state level.

I am not rich. HOwever, I don't want my money to go to abortions, expensive trips for Michelle Obama, expensive parties for govt., foreign aide to terrorist, etc... I, for one, want govt. to quit spending or at least to quit spending our moeny. I want to decide which charities I will contribute to also because I believe that I can decide in accordance with my faith of course rather than have govt. decide that killing babies is a charity now that we have to pay for.


Truly, I have heard the liberals say they don't hate the successful and aren't envious, but I don't believe them. They want what they have...if that isn't envy what is?

Dec 18th 2012 new

It wouldn't be fair to label everyone who sticks their hands out for "Uncle Sam's" milk and cookies as being liberal. Many aren't. The issue is conditioning. The first part of the conditioning comes from the fact that most who draw benefits from the government believe that they're entitled to them. By and large they would be right. Anyone who has ever worked a job has seen their pay stub and the amount of money that is forcibly taken from them. Then the end of the month comes, another bill is due, they don't have enough money to pay that bill, and think of all the money that they worked for that was taken from them. They feel as though they're owed something for what they're being forced to contribute. There's a great deal of legitimacy in those feelings.


Then there's the other part of the conditioning: dependency. People first come into a circumstance where they need assistance. In years past the responsibility for helping those in need fell on their families. After years of government co-opting the role of the family provider (welfare, etc.) people have become dependant on that assistance and shreik of fear at the very mention of the possibility that they could lose a single dollar of that assistance. This conditioning isn't circumstancial, it's systematic, perpetrated by those who have sought to acquire and seek to expand authoritative power. And they dangle the carrot of assistance as means to maintain their power.


Of course, there are those who believe that the term free country actually means free. I know quite a few people with that mentality, but they are, by far, the minority.


theheart

Dec 19th 2012 new

(Quote) Victor-544727 said: It wouldn't be fair to label everyone who sticks their hands out for "Uncle Sam's&q...
(Quote) Victor-544727 said:

It wouldn't be fair to label everyone who sticks their hands out for "Uncle Sam's" milk and cookies as being liberal. Many aren't. The issue is conditioning. The first part of the conditioning comes from the fact that most who draw benefits from the government believe that they're entitled to them. By and large they would be right. Anyone who has ever worked a job has seen their pay stub and the amount of money that is forcibly taken from them. Then the end of the month comes, another bill is due, they don't have enough money to pay that bill, and think of all the money that they worked for that was taken from them. They feel as though they're owed something for what they're being forced to contribute. There's a great deal of legitimacy in those feelings.


Then there's the other part of the conditioning: dependency. People first come into a circumstance where they need assistance. In years past the responsibility for helping those in need fell on their families. After years of government co-opting the role of the family provider (welfare, etc.) people have become dependant on that assistance and shreik of fear at the very mention of the possibility that they could lose a single dollar of that assistance. This conditioning isn't circumstancial, it's systematic, perpetrated by those who have sought to acquire and seek to expand authoritative power. And they dangle the carrot of assistance as means to maintain their power.


Of course, there are those who believe that the term free country actually means free. I know quite a few people with that mentality, but they are, by far, the minority.

--hide--


Your conditioning theories might be a little superficial. Many people, those who even just got off a boat or a plane, can receive
benefits that all of us have supported by working; e.g., police protection, church services, medical treatment, even education
up until high school. You just have to be in America and you get those services. Not everyone contributes to them.

Then there are the services we have paid into that we expect to recuperate at a later time, like social security and medicare.

The second conditioning you are referring to is not just dependency, but putting yourself into a position to be taken care of by
our government, like having children without a family. The more children one has, the more money they can get from Uncle
Sam. Yet, if the safety net was not there, there would be no one to milk. And as you are saying, authoritative power is also
there and enabling those takers of Government money to create dependency. So there are the users and the enablers.

It is much more complex than you are suggesting or that you have outlined as being conditioning because you left out
one important group.

No matter who wants to give to the needy, and who wants to take from the Government, there are still the ones
who have to pay the taxes for the above to happen. And that tax money comes from what people have earned by
working, and working hard.

So when you work, you are different from those that want your money, and different from those that want to give away
your money.

The power really is in the hands of those that make the money. They are the ones who should decide where their
money goes--not some career politician who works about 3 months out of twelve and gives away your money either
by conditioning shameless takers or dependent takers. It is time the workers wake up and take charge of what
happens in this country.


Dec 19th 2012 new

(Quote) Cheryl-409772 said: I'm taking a little break soon from CM, and I wanted to start this thread before I left.
(Quote) Cheryl-409772 said:

I'm taking a little break soon from CM, and I wanted to start this thread before I left.

We know envy is one of the deadly sins that people these days suffer greatly from. We know that wanting free stuff from others who work for it is prevalent in this society. What we don't know is what we can do to teach people that people have a right to their belongings whether rich or poor and part of that is that they have a right to decide where their money should go. I do not think I have the right to steal it from them as does govt., which is condoned by some people on here. I believe everyone should be taxed the same flat fee for our defense on a federal level and the same flat fee for everything else necessary to help people on the state level.

I am not rich. HOwever, I don't want my money to go to abortions, expensive trips for Michelle Obama, expensive parties for govt., foreign aide to terrorist, etc... I, for one, want govt. to quit spending or at least to quit spending our moeny. I want to decide which charities I will contribute to also because I believe that I can decide in accordance with my faith of course rather than have govt. decide that killing babies is a charity now that we have to pay for.


Truly, I have heard the liberals say they don't hate the successful and aren't envious, but I don't believe them. They want what they have...if that isn't envy what is?

--hide--


Bye, Cheryl. You will be back.

Dec 19th 2012 new

(Quote) Marianne-100218 said: Bye, Cheryl. You will be back.
(Quote) Marianne-100218 said:



Bye, Cheryl. You will be back.

--hide--
Yep...sure will...plan on seeing me back on this summer when school is out!

Dec 19th 2012 new

(Quote) Victor-544727 said: It wouldn't be fair to label everyone who sticks their hands out for "Uncle Sam's&q...
(Quote) Victor-544727 said:

It wouldn't be fair to label everyone who sticks their hands out for "Uncle Sam's" milk and cookies as being liberal. Many aren't. The issue is conditioning. The first part of the conditioning comes from the fact that most who draw benefits from the government believe that they're entitled to them. By and large they would be right. Anyone who has ever worked a job has seen their pay stub and the amount of money that is forcibly taken from them. Then the end of the month comes, another bill is due, they don't have enough money to pay that bill, and think of all the money that they worked for that was taken from them. They feel as though they're owed something for what they're being forced to contribute. There's a great deal of legitimacy in those feelings.


Then there's the other part of the conditioning: dependency. People first come into a circumstance where they need assistance. In years past the responsibility for helping those in need fell on their families. After years of government co-opting the role of the family provider (welfare, etc.) people have become dependant on that assistance and shreik of fear at the very mention of the possibility that they could lose a single dollar of that assistance. This conditioning isn't circumstancial, it's systematic, perpetrated by those who have sought to acquire and seek to expand authoritative power. And they dangle the carrot of assistance as means to maintain their power.


Of course, there are those who believe that the term free country actually means free. I know quite a few people with that mentality, but they are, by far, the minority.

--hide--
Well, that is an interesting theory. It doesn't explain though how Obama's attack on the rich campaign worked so welll. People really buy into the hate the successful theme.

Dec 19th 2012 new

www.youtube.com

Feb 19th 2013 new

(Quote) Victor-544727 said: It wouldn't be fair to label everyone who sticks their hands out for "Uncle Sam's&q...
(Quote) Victor-544727 said:

It wouldn't be fair to label everyone who sticks their hands out for "Uncle Sam's" milk and cookies as being liberal. Many aren't. The issue is conditioning. The first part of the conditioning comes from the fact that most who draw benefits from the government believe that they're entitled to them. By and large they would be right. Anyone who has ever worked a job has seen their pay stub and the amount of money that is forcibly taken from them. Then the end of the month comes, another bill is due, they don't have enough money to pay that bill, and think of all the money that they worked for that was taken from them. They feel as though they're owed something for what they're being forced to contribute. There's a great deal of legitimacy in those feelings.


Then there's the other part of the conditioning: dependency. People first come into a circumstance where they need assistance. In years past the responsibility for helping those in need fell on their families. After years of government co-opting the role of the family provider (welfare, etc.) people have become dependant on that assistance and shreik of fear at the very mention of the possibility that they could lose a single dollar of that assistance. This conditioning isn't circumstancial, it's systematic, perpetrated by those who have sought to acquire and seek to expand authoritative power. And they dangle the carrot of assistance as means to maintain their power.


Of course, there are those who believe that the term free country actually means free. I know quite a few people with that mentality, but they are, by far, the minority.

--hide--
I do think it would be hard to rely on family now days when families are so fallen apart or gone even and some also barely make it. It isn't like the days of extended families on the farms. However, that doesn't mean that so many should be needing govt. and I do think dependency grows from it. I wish there was a way to provide jobs to the people who receive the help.

Feb 19th 2013 new

(Quote) Marianne-100218 said: Your conditioning theories might be a little superficial. Many people, those who even ...
(Quote) Marianne-100218 said:



Your conditioning theories might be a little superficial. Many people, those who even just got off a boat or a plane, can receive
benefits that all of us have supported by working; e.g., police protection, church services, medical treatment, even education
up until high school. You just have to be in America and you get those services. Not everyone contributes to them.

Then there are the services we have paid into that we expect to recuperate at a later time, like social security and medicare.

The second conditioning you are referring to is not just dependency, but putting yourself into a position to be taken care of by
our government, like having children without a family. The more children one has, the more money they can get from Uncle
Sam. Yet, if the safety net was not there, there would be no one to milk. And as you are saying, authoritative power is also
there and enabling those takers of Government money to create dependency. So there are the users and the enablers.

It is much more complex than you are suggesting or that you have outlined as being conditioning because you left out
one important group.

No matter who wants to give to the needy, and who wants to take from the Government, there are still the ones
who have to pay the taxes for the above to happen. And that tax money comes from what people have earned by
working, and working hard.

So when you work, you are different from those that want your money, and different from those that want to give away
your money.

The power really is in the hands of those that make the money. They are the ones who should decide where their
money goes--not some career politician who works about 3 months out of twelve and gives away your money either
by conditioning shameless takers or dependent takers. It is time the workers wake up and take charge of what
happens in this country.


--hide--
Now that I got that emote and came back early, I decided to revive this thread. Even non Amercians can receive those benefits, but I think the burden is more from Americans. The solution has to come from determining who really needs it and who doesn't and I'm not sure how we do that. Also, "entitlements" is NOT the only govt. waste. There are SO many....Michelle's million dollar trips for instance, the govt. parties, top heavy jobs, etc....

I heard something so funny about the recent pay raise those politicians put in for...so, so sick of tihs...we need to cut their salaries and especially their pensions not give them yet another pay raise for those 3 months of "work". Anyway, the funny story was that they work so hard that they sleep in their offices.....can you believe it??? What happened to the days when this volunteer job was a service and they then went back to their own paying job?

Feb 19th 2013 new

Then there is another type of recipient who might take gov't handouts: someone like Cheryl. She is not rich, but does not want handouts, and is not liberal. But someone like her could make the rational calculation that if she doesn't take the handouts, then someone else will, probably someone else who is a "liberal taker" and thus is less ethical and is less deserving of the handout.

Those who are ethical are also rational, and that category includes everyone to some extent. No one in their right mind seeks to work harder for less money. Whether we realize it or not, we all try to maximize our income and minimize our work in a free market. Getting by on gov't handouts is just the extreme case of this principle, in which case our work is minimized/reduced to simply applying for the handouts. So, it is not just liberal but rational to a limited extent to seek hand-outs (I say limited because the reasoning is short-sighted). Indeed, one can feel foolish for refusing free money when everybody else it taking it and getting ahead. In this way, gov't handouts can ruin the work ethic of people who would otherwise develop a decent work ethic. As a result, dependency and a sense of entitlement grows.

I think something analogous happens when gov't prints too much money. The rich, who end up with most of the extra money, decide to binge on speculative investments. Even the wise ones know that this just creates economic bubbles, but some of them bet on profiting from speculation in the short run. After all, it's better that the wise profit instead of the stupid.

Cheryl, there is waste all throughout government. We should get rid of entire departments: education, energy, HUD, labor, and parts of the dept. of agriculture and of commerce. Even in the defense dept. and NASA and other agencies that supposedly perform legitimate gov't functions, there is colossal waste. Instead of increasing gov't budgets every year because of inflation, Congress should just decrease the budget every year somewhat and force government agencies to adjust accordingly. Reduction in the salaries of gov't workers would then happen automatically.

Also, let's get rid of all subsidies to private industries.

Posts 1 - 10 of 15