Democratic Party Convention General Thread

[TMC]

The problem is that more individuals are not just going to step up and pay for the housing, the food, the medical care, etc. from their own pocket that many poor and disabled people require. Even if some of those people are where they are because of bad choices in their life, it’s not humane for us as a society to let them die or end up living on the street because of it if no private charity is there to provide for them.

I used to volunteer for a private charity that provided free meals to homeless and poor people and many of them had serious untreated health problem like diabetes, high blood pressure, mental illness, hepatitis, etc, and no health care whatsoever. Before Obamacare, many of these people could not have gotten individual health insurance even if they suddenly had money to pay for it because insurance companies would not have covered them because of pre-existing conditions. Going to the emergency room is not a substitute for regular healthcare and in the end costs all of us a lot more money.

True, leaving the care of the poor to individual acts of charity is not sufficient as a practical matter. It is also insufficient as a moral matter. We have an obligation both as individuals and as a society to care for the poor and that obligation must be reflected in the way we order our society, including through government action.

 

[Sy_Noe]

The problem is that more individuals are not just going to step up and pay for the housing, the food, the medical care, etc. from their own pocket that many poor and disabled people require. Even if some of those people are where they are because of bad choices in their life, it’s not humane for us as a society to let them die or end up living on the street because of it if no private charity is there to provide for them.

I used to volunteer for a private charity that provided free meals to homeless and poor people and many of them had serious untreated health problem like diabetes, high blood pressure, mental illness, hepatitis, etc, and no health care whatsoever. Before Obamacare, many of these people could not have gotten individual health insurance even if they suddenly had money to pay for it because insurance companies would not have covered them because of pre-existing conditions. Going to the emergency room is not a substitute for regular healthcare and in the end costs all of us a lot more money.

Well said. And individuals alone can’t possibly cover all the costs involved for all of God’s children in need. This is the 21st century.

 

[JimG]

“If you are in the middle class and receiving food stamps, Medicaid or cash welfare, don’t get married. Not if you want to keep your benefits, that is.”

Want to Help Reduce Poverty? Stop Penalizing Marriage, New Report Says

 

[YADA]

Well said. And individuals alone can’t possibly cover all the costs involved for all of God’s children in need. This is the 21st century.

Way to let yourself off the hook all the while castigating those who don’t agree with your “pet” answer to the issue and attacking their motives and compassion.

Republicans, conservatives, libertarians and whatever other groups you can name do not hate the poor, children post birth, women, or minorities, or whatever flavor of victim you want to trot out.

We want strong communities, clean water, parks, police and fire protection and employment opportunities.

We want public funds to be used wisely - we don’t see throwing more and ever more funds [especially from the federal level] as effective in fighting hunger, poverty, and other social ills. Clearly, if you want to feed people effectively, efficiently and economically it is not cost effective to send money to Washington DC, run it though multiple bureaucracies and send it back to the local community.

Personally I am tired of people telling me how I feel and act when they have no idea what I think, feel or do … and I know there are far more people out ‘doing’ positive things ever day. Who share my views and are out there working in the trenches - making a difference in peoples lives in ways these government programs failed.

When people look primarily to the government and taxation to solve these issues - they so not feel they need to do - and they think taxes are good - because they think someone else is paying them … People always like the taxes that are paid by the ‘rich’ and they do not like the taxes they pay

 

[Thorolfr]

We want public funds to be used wisely - we don’t see throwing more and ever more funds [especially from the federal level] as effective in fighting hunger, poverty, and other social ills. Clearly, if you want to feed people effectively, efficiently and economically it is not cost effective to send money to Washington DC, run it though multiple bureaucracies and send it back to the local community.

It’s funny how many red states receive far more money back from the Federal government than what they pay in, and that money is often coming from taxes paid by the residents of blue states:

So who are some of these red states:

In Mississippi, citizens receive $2.34 in return for every dollar paid in federal income tax, which ranks fourth highest in America. A whopping 43.68% of Mississippi’s state revenue is comprised of federal funding, the highest such rate in the country.

In Kentucky, residents see $2.18 in return for every dollar paid in federal income tax, the sixth highest rate in the country. 35.26% of Kentucky’s state revenue is contributed by federal funds, ranking 14th highest in the nation.

In Alabama, residents see $2.46 in return for every dollar paid in federal income tax, which ranks third highest in the US. 36.64% of Alabama’s state revenue is comprised of federal funds, which is 11th highest in the country.

In Montana, residents see $1.24 in return for every dollar they pay in federal income tax, the 18th highest rate in the country.

Interestingly enough, red states, which tend to advocate for a lesser influence by the federal government, are much more dependent on the federal government than blue states. Blue states combined to form an average ranking of 18.3 (with 1 being most dependent and 50 being least dependent), while red states combined to rank 33.2 overall.

businessinsider.com/the-states-the-most-and-least-dependent-on-the-federal-government-2015-7

So maybe states like Mississippi, Montana, Kentucky, Alabama, etc. should support themselves.

 

[Ridgerunner]

It’s funny how many red states receive far more money back from the Federal government than what they pay in, and that money is often coming from taxes paid by the residents of blue states:

So who are some of these red states:

businessinsider.com/the-states-the-most-and-least-dependent-on-the-federal-government-2015-7

So maybe states like Mississippi, Montana, Kentucky, Alabama, etc. should support themselves.

So what? States like Mississippi and Alabama have always been poor. They were poor when they were Democrat states and they’re poor now. Kentucky’s coal industry collapsed. I would say Montana likely pays more in if you count taxes on the resource companies. That’s also why college tuition in Montana’s public universities is free to residents. What is it in New York? Well, at State University of New York it’s about $23,000 per year for everything. Of that, about $12,000 is for room and board. So if you add it together and deduct the latter, it’s about $11,000 for tuition and fees. That’s for residents.

 

[Ridgerunner]

True, leaving the care of the poor to individual acts of charity is not sufficient as a practical matter. It is also insufficient as a moral matter. We have an obligation both as individuals and as a society to care for the poor and that obligation must be reflected in the way we order our society, including through government action.

That’s a point of view, but it’s not a Catholic point of view. Catholicism teaches subsidiarity. There is no particular reason to believe only the federal government can take care of the poor. Before the Great Society programs, it didn’t, and the poverty rate is no lower now than it was before those programs.

 

[YADA]

It’s funny how many red states receive far more money back from the Federal government than what they pay in, and that money is often coming from taxes paid by the residents of blue states:

So who are some of these red states:

businessinsider.com/the-states-the-most-and-least-dependent-on-the-federal-government-2015-7

So maybe states like Mississippi, Montana, Kentucky, Alabama, etc. should support themselves.

Well … it does not matter to me what color the state is - it is not cost efficient nor effective to send money to Washington … but as long as you want to bring up the Red States dependency on federal tax dollars - the vast majority of that corporate welfare liberals always decry but lobby at every level of government mightily for - goes to Blue States …

 

[estesbob]

So what? States like Mississippi and Alabama have always been poor. They were poor when they were Democrat states and they’re poor now. Kentucky’s coal industry collapsed. I would say Montana likely pays more in if you count taxes on the resource companies. That’s also why college tuition in Montana’s public universities is free to residents. What is it in New York? Well, at State University of New York it’s about $23,000 per year for everything. Of that, about $12,000 is for room and board. So if you add it together and deduct the latter, it’s about $11,000 for tuition and fees. That’s for residents.

In addition the figures are misleading because include Social Security payments and money spent on the military bases in the region. Both retirees and military bases tend to locate in states with warmer climates

 

[john_ennis]

Yes, Paul Ryan is either stupid (as you said) or really thinks that people on foodstamps are overfed and can do with less for a couple of years (if the taxcut does not help the economy then a few years longer is OK too).

No other possibility? You think he REALLY thinks that?
Is it possible that Ryan sincerely thinks that the particular bills you are talking about will not help the people as intended?
Not everyone who sees these programs differently from you has to be stupid.
Ryan sees these things from the inside and is more knowledgeable than either of us. Of course that doesn’t make him right, but you ought to be open to the possibility that he’s seen enough to come to a different conclusion than you.
And if you’ve listened to him speaking at length on these things over the past couple years, surely you can’t really think he’s an idiot.
Even less can you conclude that he’s a bad guy.
I guess I’m merely saying that you seem to ignore the obvious: that someone can be sincere and reasonable, and still believe different from you (even if you happen to be right).

 

[Sy_Noe]

Way to let yourself off the hook all the while castigating those who don’t agree with your “pet” answer to the issue and attacking their motives and compassion.

Republicans, conservatives, libertarians and whatever other groups you can name do not hate the poor, children post birth, women, or minorities, or whatever flavor of victim you want to trot out.

We want strong communities, clean water, parks, police and fire protection and employment opportunities.

We want public funds to be used wisely - we don’t see throwing more and ever more funds [especially from the federal level] as effective in fighting hunger, poverty, and other social ills. Clearly, if you want to feed people effectively, efficiently and economically it is not cost effective to send money to Washington DC, run it though multiple bureaucracies and send it back to the local community.

Personally I am tired of people telling me how I feel and act when they have no idea what I think, feel or do … and I know there are far more people out ‘doing’ positive things ever day. Who share my views and are out there working in the trenches - making a difference in peoples lives in ways these government programs failed.

When people look primarily to the government and taxation to solve these issues - they so not feel they need to do - and they think taxes are good - because they think someone else is paying them … People always like the taxes that are paid by the ‘rich’ and they do not like the taxes they pay

While I’m not certain I understand your “way to let yourself off the hook” comment, I shall overlook it and turn the other cheek.

 

[openmind77]

No other possibility? You think he REALLY thinks that?
Is it possible that Ryan sincerely thinks that the particular bills you are talking about will not help the people as intended?
Not everyone who sees these programs differently from you has to be stupid.
Ryan sees these things from the inside and is more knowledgeable than either of us. Of course that doesn’t make him right, but you ought to be open to the possibility that he’s seen enough to come to a different conclusion than you.
And if you’ve listened to him speaking at length on these things over the past couple years, surely you can’t really think he’s an idiot.
Even less can you conclude that he’s a bad guy.
I guess I’m merely saying that you seem to ignore the obvious: that someone can be sincere and reasonable, and still believe different from you (even if you happen to be right).

Of course he is sincere in his intentions - what I am saying is that he is willing to let people who need food (from the foodstamp program) do with less and maybe suffer for a couple of years, until his taxcuts kick in to magically save them. I have read Ayn Rand too - the ‘magic’ Paul Ryan believes in.

I think we should stop talking about Paul Ryan and listen to what Jesus is saying in Matthew 25 35-40. He does not say let a hungry person remain hungry for a couple years while you make sure some rich man makes more money.

The Christ will be returning soon, maybe even before this election in over, then you won’t have to keep rationalizing that denying poor people food and healthcare and giving the savings to the rich, is the best solution to our problems

 

[YADA]

Of course he is sincere in his intentions - what I am saying is that he is willing to let people who need food (from the foodstamp program) do with less and maybe suffer for a couple of years, until his taxcuts kick in to magically save them. I have read Ayn Rand too - the ‘magic’ Paul Ryan believes in.

I think we should stop talking about Paul Ryan and listen to what Jesus is saying in Matthew 25 35-40. He does not say let a hungry person remain hungry for a couple years while you make sure some rich man makes more money.

The Christ will be returning soon, maybe even before this election in over, then you won’t have to keep rationalizing that denying poor people food and healthcare and giving the savings to the rich, is the best solution to our problems

If Christ is coming back that soon [before the election] then why advocate for any of this - all of these programs would take years to put in place and dispense and it won’t matter which is elected - so why advocate for one candidate over another - it wont make any difference - vote for whomever you want.

Lets just open the doors of every store and every bank and let the people have whatever they want … lets open your house, my house and every motel - let every hospital, rehab center and clinic operate free and be available to one and all - no charge - no money necessary poof …

There you have it … - that is the end of hunger, the end of a lack of medical care and everyone has a roof over their head … That ends the issue of those who have not vs those that have all … no more 2% vs 98% …we can est drink and be merry until Jesus returns …

Hint - they tried that in the early Church … it did not work , which is why St Paul had to admonish the people to work and tell communities that those who did not work - did not eat … was he advocating for not being helpful to those in need … no … but it was the realization that there are those who take advantage of “free” stuff instead of taking care of themselves … and its not possible to care for those who truly need help when people who can help themselves fail to do so.

Our creator gives us gifts which we are to use to make the world a better place - we are stewards of those God given gifts … they should not be wasted, used foolishly but dispensed with great thought and care to [quoting G. Pinchot] “do the greatest good for the greatest number for the long run”.

The last 50 years have shown that our “Safety Net” programs do great harm - fail to address the underlying issues, have destroyed families - even creating generational dependency. Our programs punish marriage and reward promiscuity. Both of which make our society less stable and prosperous

Growing government is not the answer … throwing ever increasing funds - borrowed from the future - is not the answer.

 

[openmind77]

If Christ is coming back that soon [before the election] then why advocate for any of this - all of these programs would take years to put in place and dispense and it won’t matter which is elected - so why advocate for one candidate over another - it wont make any difference - vote for whomever you want.

The Return of the Christ does not mean the end of the world or end of governments. It just means we will have a divine arbitrator in our midst and people will no longer be able to get away with strange claims like the best way to help the poor is to give more money to the rich. And of course there will be a separation of people into goats and sheep (which is already happening). In the meantime, we should all try not be one of goats - these are people who don’t care about the hungry, the sick, strangers (immigrants) and those in prison.

 

[YADA]

The Return of the Christ does not mean the end of the world or end of governments. It just means we will have a divine arbitrator in our midst and people will no longer be able to get away with strange claims like the best way to help the poor is to give more money to the rich. And of course there will be a separation of people into goats and sheep (which is already happening). In the meantime, we should all try not be one of goats - these are people who don’t care about the hungry, the sick, strangers (immigrants) and those in prison.

And who is it that does not care for the hungry, the sick, strangers (immigrants) and those in prison? This is just talking points meant to divide and stop conversation.

You paint with a broad brush … You have determined that those who have different ideas on how to solve the problems of society are goats and do not care …

You have determined that everyone who comprise the hungry, the sick, who are strangers (immigrants) and those in prison are somehow in those plights through no fault of their own but due to the ill treatment of those who have deemed the goats … all the while advocating for government solutions …

In your scenario - once Jesus arrives - He - who is God - will be in control - so in your scenario … we may as well open the doors and throw in the towel …

For me … I will continue to help the hungry, the sick, strangers (immigrants) and those in prison with my God given talents in the best way I see … I will work where I can, donate where I see the best use of those funds and advocate for government that does not mortgage my children’s and grandchildren’s future in order to enslave people on Uncle Sam’s Plantation [a very good book by Star Parker - I encourage you to read it]

Star Parker CURE urbancure.org/

Other good books by Star Parker are:
Blind Conceit: Politics, Policy and Racial Polarization: Moving Forward to Save … 2014
White Ghetto 2006
“Pimps, whores and welfare brats” 1997

 

[dmelosi]

Yada, you have done a good job of dispelling the notion those on the left have that conservatives only pay lip service regarding abortion and not caring about the welfare of people. Very nice job!

I have yet to see any of these Catholics that are married to their party, give any ways that they are trying to end abortion within their democratic party. They seem to becoming better and better at fooling themselves that the reasoning that they are personally against abortion is all they need to do.

I am curious who some of the democratic Catholics think will be looked at as “goats” because they did nothing for the most innocent, as their party continued to promote this mass slaughter?

 

[YADA]

Yada, you have done a good job of dispelling the notion those on the left have that conservatives only pay lip service regarding abortion and not caring about the welfare of people. Very nice job!

I have yet to see any of these Catholics that are married to their party, give any ways that they are trying to end abortion within their democratic party. They seem to becoming better and better at fooling themselves that the reasoning that they are personally against abortion is all they need to do.

I am curious who some of the democratic Catholics think will be looked at as “goats” because they did nothing for the most innocent, as their party continued to promote this mass slaughter?

Your words are very kind …

Lately - I think we need to push back when people say we do not care or work to do anything … because we do care … and work hard …

We had a deacon a few years back who had his first real conversation with one of our most active pro-Life parishioners - a retired doctor … I knew this deacon very well … after that meeting he said to me “One of the problems with the pro-Life group is illustrated by Dr. X … he is so one issue - there are many issues that we need to address - like feeding people who are here and working to solve homelessness and end the death penalty” … I was rather dumb founded … I said “Dr X is very serious in fighting for the unborn - as has been since the early 1970s but do you realize he works at a food bank two days each week and works with JOIN - [this organization is well known in our area for successfully helping move homeless individuals and families from the streets into permanent housing]. He also financially supports an inner city parish - he does this every week?” … the deacon said he did not know that … This Doctor lives his pro-Life activism for all lives - born and unborn - every day … he is a roll model for Catholic activism.

Millions of babies are killed every year - in Oregon over 10,000 lives are lost every year …Since 1978 only two executions have been performed in Oregon … I asked the Deacon - Given the two issues Abortion or Death Penalty - which issue seemed most important for a Catholic to address if saving lives was the goal … the issue where 300,000 lives were lost or the issue where there were 2 victims? both are important but one is more serious in a daily life saving need!

FYI - JOIN … [jo(name removed by moderator)dx.org/](http://jo(name removed by moderator)dx.org/)
Father Taaffe Homes for Unwed Mothers ccswv.org/home-page/childrenfamilies/father-taaffe-homes-and-pregnancy-support-services/

 

[dmelosi]

Your words are very kind …

Lately - I think we need to push back when people say we do not care or work to do anything … because we do care … and work hard …

And take it a step further and ask what they do to end their parties mass killing atrocities.

It is certainly fine to disagree, but on such serious life and death matters people need to “put their money where there mouth is”.

 

[TMC]

That’s a point of view, but it’s not a Catholic point of view. Catholicism teaches subsidiarity. There is no particular reason to believe only the federal government can take care of the poor. Before the Great Society programs, it didn’t, and the poverty rate is no lower now than it was before those programs.

It is a Catholic view. The Church teaches that we have a societal obligation toward the poor, not merely a personal one. Read any of the Church’s encyclicals on the topic.

 

[openmind77]

For me … I will continue to help the hungry, the sick, strangers (immigrants) and those in prison with my God given talents in the best way I see … I will work where I can, donate where I see the best use of those funds and advocate for government that does not mortgage my children’s and grandchildren’s future in order to enslave people on Uncle Sam’s Plantation …

That is great that you are working so hard on behalf of the poor. However, if you work very hard to help a hundred poor people and then oppose a program that helps a few million of them, that may not be best way. Of course everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but when the Christ returns he will make his own judgment on who are the goats and who are the sheep based on how they have helped the poor. The litmus test will be how they have treated strangers - BTW strangers are immigrants and refugees.