Budget Cuts Must Protect Poor and Vulnerable, Say U.S. Bishops
- Status
A
aball1035
Guest
I wish that Religious had more of a voice in our society today… It’s sad how they don’t to a very large extent
D
Della
Guest
Tossing money at government programs isn’t always the best way to protect the poor and vulnerable, though. I wish our bishops would not try to wade in on political issues regarding spending. There are many other ways to meet people’s needs other than pushing it all on the shoulders of government bureaucrats who couldn’t give a rat’s patootie about the poor and vulnerable.
If people were encouraged more by our bishops to get their own hands dirty to help their own communities there’d be no need for any governmental inference in such matters. We’ve got programs up the wha-zoo now and we still have thousands of poor and vulnerable who aren’t getting the help they need. More taxes for such programs only means more bureaucrats getting jobs while those who are in real need of work get nothing but grudging hand-outs by them. No thank you. Charity begins at home. That’s the lesson we ought to learn here not how to spend more money on taxes for programs that don’t do enough and cost us way too much.
If people were encouraged more by our bishops to get their own hands dirty to help their own communities there’d be no need for any governmental inference in such matters. We’ve got programs up the wha-zoo now and we still have thousands of poor and vulnerable who aren’t getting the help they need. More taxes for such programs only means more bureaucrats getting jobs while those who are in real need of work get nothing but grudging hand-outs by them. No thank you. Charity begins at home. That’s the lesson we ought to learn here not how to spend more money on taxes for programs that don’t do enough and cost us way too much.
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
It would be nice if either party cared about the REAL poor and vulnerable.
People on here are probably sick of seeing me say it, but I am appalled at a situation in which middle class welfare is the topic of the day, and IMAGINED to be helping the poor and the vulnerable, while the worst off of all, the disabled poor, have to totally impoverish themselves in order to get a miserable $600.00/month on SSI. Who has heard Obama or Boehner or (sorry guys) the USCCB talk about that? I sure haven’t.
And what about the people you see on the street all filthy and mumbling to themselves who might actually have decent lives if there were places where they could live (yes, including institutions) and a judicial system that would actually allow someone to take charge of their lives and make them take their meds? Nobody talks about them. Oh, yes, there is sometimes talk about the “homeless” as if most of them weren’t insane and it’s just a matter of making FNMA buy worthless mortgages.
Whenever this society takes care of the above two situations, then I’ll listen to talk about education funding and “just wages” and middle class “safety nets” and all that stuff. But not until. I have a feeling I’m in for a long wait.
People on here are probably sick of seeing me say it, but I am appalled at a situation in which middle class welfare is the topic of the day, and IMAGINED to be helping the poor and the vulnerable, while the worst off of all, the disabled poor, have to totally impoverish themselves in order to get a miserable $600.00/month on SSI. Who has heard Obama or Boehner or (sorry guys) the USCCB talk about that? I sure haven’t.
And what about the people you see on the street all filthy and mumbling to themselves who might actually have decent lives if there were places where they could live (yes, including institutions) and a judicial system that would actually allow someone to take charge of their lives and make them take their meds? Nobody talks about them. Oh, yes, there is sometimes talk about the “homeless” as if most of them weren’t insane and it’s just a matter of making FNMA buy worthless mortgages.
Whenever this society takes care of the above two situations, then I’ll listen to talk about education funding and “just wages” and middle class “safety nets” and all that stuff. But not until. I have a feeling I’m in for a long wait.
C
catholictiger
Guest
i def agree with this but I also think there needs to be some serious cutting in the spending becuase if we don’t get our budget together and we just spend spend spend we could see our economy go into some bad times worse then what we are in now. So making lots of cuts even if it is to some social welfare programs are necessary. We do need to make sure the poor and vulnerable are cared for but also making sure we don’t set our country up for another serious recession or depression is something that needs to be dealt with as well. I hold the opinion along with other economist I know that overspending could really hit this country somewhere in the future, and they could be really really serious problems. Like collapsing of currencies, along with other things
the first couple minuets of this video explain this.
youtube.com/watch?v=sjsd4hbFArM
E
Ender
Guest
Oh, this is helpful. Perhaps if people understood what the outcome of their proposals would be this would be useful advice, but since every suggestion is simply a best guess all comments like this will do is encourage one side to disparage the other as being heartless. Not that they would need encouragement, but it really is disappointing to see the bishops supplying gas for the fire.
Ender
H
Holly3278
Guest
I heard the other day on TV that someone is planning to cut food stamps and HUD out of the budget. Well, I can assure you that if they do that, I will likely be without both food and a home. My family can’t afford to take me in. I hope and pray that they do not cut these things out of the budget.
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
I don’t think many people would want to do that to you, Holly. But it has to be admitted that USDA, from where the food stamps come, also subsidizes millionaire farmers and agribusiness. Should it?
And HUD is also in the business of insuring, with taxpayer money, mortgages that are no good the day they’re written. Should it?
C
catholictiger
Guest
prayers for you
now cutting the saftey net for the poor which I think food stamps would go under is something that I think should be avoid cutting, for people in your situation, while I think churches and charity organizations can help people like you out without the government the government still needs to look out for the needs of the poor and vulnerable.
the government still needs to cuts things IMO but cut programs that are unnecessary for us to have don’t help the poor and vulnerable and lose tuns and tuns of money
bring the troops home that would save alot of money
along with other things I’m sure I could come up with hundreds of things we can cut.
this government needs to get their house in order with their budget, stop over spending
E
Ender
Guest
This is the kind of rumor that is typically started to create fear and deter people who might otherwise support a particular candidate or party from following through on that inclination. I remember back during the run-up to the Bush-Kerry elections the rumor was being spread that, if Bush was elected, he would re-instate the draft. There was of course no truth to the rumor but it did in fact cause at least one person I knew to vote for Kerry for fear her son would be drafted. Rumors can be very effective and I think your comments bear that out.
Ender
B
bjryman
Guest
Remember everyone…that all this “helping the poor” current rehtoric while reasonable in concept, is missing the “600 lb gorilla in the living room”.prayers for you
now cutting the saftey net for the poor which I think food stamps would go under is something that I think should be avoid cutting, for people in your situation, while I think churches and charity organizations can help people like you out without the government the government still needs to look out for the needs of the poor and vulnerable.
the government still needs to cuts things IMO but cut programs that are unnecessary for us to have don’t help the poor and vulnerable and lose tuns and tuns of money
bring the troops home that would save alot of money
along with other things I’m sure I could come up with hundreds of things we can cut.
this government needs to get their house in order with their budget, stop over spending
Entitlements represent well over 60% of the USA Federal Budget. Medicaid is specifically a program for those poorest of all…and it’s cost is skyrocketing. Medicare, with 10,000 baby boomers retiring every day, is on an unsustainable course.
Those are the facts and for this dialog I will not refer to Social Security.
Even if 100% of non-Entitlement spending were cut, the US is on an unsustainable track. And even if 100% of all the income from those “millionaires and billionaires” were taxed to fund entitlements, the result would not change. Of course, they would not also be able to hire the rest of us, but that’s another argument altogether
So, we need to stop continuously saying what “must be taken care of” and start voting with our pocket books and at the voting both about the “how” of it all. Perhaps the solution is “local”.
Let me ask posters here a question: Do each of you actually tithe…that is give 10% of your take home pay first to the Church? National statistics state that we Catholics give far, far less than that amount. If Charity begins at home, and your local Parish, or Parishes led by the Bishop are responsible for their flocks, then we all have SIGNIFICANT opportunity to help locally, every day through our churchs.
Food banks, homeless shelters, elderly home care, outreach to folks on the street…etc. How many of us actually reserve a strong percentage of our Time, Talent, and Treasure devoted directly to the poorest and most needy of us all? What if each suburban church adopted an inner city church, like we do for churches in other countries? Can you imagine if each family tithed and gave 4 to 6 hours a week of service to this group of citizens?
The reason I ask, is that until we do that …the way our faith teaches to do…we will be forced to have the government (i.e. Ceasar) involved …and perhaps in ways our faith does not wish to see happen. Rules, regulations, allocation of funds and resources, will not necessarily be in the direction we Catholics would prefer.
It is beyond me why our Christian population would want to delegate that very basic call from Christ to take care of the least of his to Ceasar, until and unless we have first all contributed via our faith based ministries. Worse in my mind, is that instead of our clergy actually “demanding” such participation from the flock…all of us, not just the 20% that currently do 80% of the heavy lifting…how can we ask more of the government?
The only underlying reason I can come up with for our Church taking the path of not demanding more from each of us within our faith communities, is that they fear an exodus of the majority of registered parishioners who choose not to help.
The Pope is absolutely right on target with his comments regarding the threat from relativism in our secular world.
I pray that the dialog within our Church to meet the needs of the less fortunate evolves to one of how groups of church communities can make a difference by putting community service first, and secular personal improvement second
Cheers!
bruce
E
Ender
Guest
This is the point: we face an economic meltdown unless we reform our spending habits and it just becomes that much more difficult to behave like adults if groups like the bishops are opposing the only medicine that can cure our ills. Doing the right thing is going to be painful and a lot of people will - in the short term - be worse off; that’s unavoidable. The only alternative, however, is to continue on as before and wait for catastrophe to over take us.
Ender
C
Captain_America
Guest
Cut public subsidies to Big Business (which cares less about America) and cut the Pentagon budget waste.
C
catholictiger
Guest
ethanol needs to be done away with as well
B
bjryman
Guest
I agree with doing the right thing. We need to remember however, there is almost an unlimited need in the world, and just a bit less in the US and our local communities. It is impossible to help everyone. We have a mandate to be responsible (like the “Talents Parable”), to “leave to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God that which is God’s”. Jesus called to us his flock to help our own. He also told the apostles to “kick the dust from your sandles” of those that do not listen to the Word.
In other words, the whole painful process needs to be done with discipline, compassion, and within a realistic end result. That is unless, one believes that not only do we give until it hurts, we give until the country is reduced to absolute mediocrity, until nothing is left.
Again, I return to the comments in my last post following the ones you note above…that is that we as Catholics have “miles” to go within our own church faith communities in giving of our Time, Talent and Treasure. BEFORE the Bishops enter into a dialog with Caesar, we need to make a call of responsibility to our own communities…and begin locally one person, one family at a time.
That’s my point…don’t pass the responsibility to the secular collective…except in a very minimal way.
Did I mention that 50% of our weekly collections go to our K-8 school? Yet we also have a dynamic Sunday Morning Religious Ed program… Imagine if the 50% of our collections were targeted at the needy within our community. (poor, elderly, homeless, single mothers, etc) and we used the buildings for that as well? Just imagine
C
catholictiger
Guest
just to bring it up
does anyone hold the view that churches and charity organizations should be the first group to help the poor and what ever they cant do the government should step in and help what they can’t help
or should the government be the first aid to the poor and Churches and Charity just be a back up
or do you hold some other view.
does anyone hold the view that churches and charity organizations should be the first group to help the poor and what ever they cant do the government should step in and help what they can’t help
or should the government be the first aid to the poor and Churches and Charity just be a back up
or do you hold some other view.
R
RobbyS
Guest
The bishops seem not to realize how much of the expeditures for the poor and needy go to the bureaucracies. The big shots will economize at the expense of their clients. But, I guess, really this is boilerplate put out by the chancellories whose staffs are all liberals and probably patrons of Planned Parenthood. /sarc
R
RobbyS
Guest
It is certainly easier to let government do the work. It never occurs to them if the people were taxed less they would have more money to give to the Church.
C
catholictiger
Guest
but I think the church can be more effective IMO
C
CMatt25
Guest
The United States has it backwards.
Be peacemakers. Don’t spend all the money which was spent on wars for a decade now. One of which was an invasion of a country having no WMD nor having been tied to 911. When a budget crisis looms, you can’t police the world.
Cut defense.
Don’t give tax cuts to the wealthiest top percent or 2 when you’re in a budget crisis.
Don’t make cuts affecting the homeless, the sick, the hungry, the thirsty, while granting huge tax breaks to rich corporate contributors.
Any of these words, peacemakers, the homeless, the sick, the hungry, the thirsty, the rich ring a bell from anywhere? From any One?
Be peacemakers. Don’t spend all the money which was spent on wars for a decade now. One of which was an invasion of a country having no WMD nor having been tied to 911. When a budget crisis looms, you can’t police the world.
Cut defense.
Don’t give tax cuts to the wealthiest top percent or 2 when you’re in a budget crisis.
Don’t make cuts affecting the homeless, the sick, the hungry, the thirsty, while granting huge tax breaks to rich corporate contributors.
Any of these words, peacemakers, the homeless, the sick, the hungry, the thirsty, the rich ring a bell from anywhere? From any One?
- Status