Hunger in Amercia

[Swan]

That’s not true at all…sigh…

And please tell me…who employs the “poor”? Through the “rich” owning of corporations and businesses of all kinds many of us have the ability to take care of ourselves by WORKING for them!

I know…working, its a difficult concept for those on the left to grasp…it means being personally responsible and accountable!! It means relying on your own God given talents, skills and abilities, rather than looking for the government to provide you a job, a home, food, security, etc, etc.

I don’t have a lot of time for this right now, but I want to say a couple of things. First of all, all folks don’t start on a level playing field. Some are born poor, sick, etc., while some are born wealthy and healty. In other words, some folks have a lot more to overcome. What about babies? They can’t help themselves, but are often born into horrific poverty. How are they going to get out if no one helps them? If there is no decent housing, nutrition, education, health care? Are these infants suppossed to pull themselves up by their bootstraps before they can even stand? If you start with one generation and keep improving their chances, eventuaylly many will make it out of the cycle of poverty. But you can’t expect the baby born to uneducated drug additcs to have the same chance as the one born to the well off suburban couple. The gov. should serve the people - that’s why it’s there. Otherwise, we end up serving the system. We have all kinds of corporate welfare and tax breaks for the wealthy while those that hurt just keep getting knocked down. Right now there are more services for the poor getting cut than in recent memory. So who will suffer? Children, the elderly, the ill - folks who can do little to help themselves. Jesus told us to help them and he didn’t seem to care a lot about how we went about it. When we raise up the lowest in society, it benefits all of society. Don’t you think we’d do better if these kids grew up to be contributors to society instead of us paying for them to sit in prison? It’s pay now or pay later - and ruin lives while you do it.

 

[neat62]

I don’t have a lot of time for this right now, but I want to say a couple of things. First of all, all folks don’t start on a level playing field. Some are born poor, sick, etc., while some are born wealthy and healty. In other words, some folks have a lot more to overcome. What about babies? They can’t help themselves, but are often born into horrific poverty. How are they going to get out if no one helps them? If there is no decent housing, nutrition, education, health care? Are these infants suppossed to pull themselves up by their bootstraps before they can even stand? If you start with one generation and keep improving their chances, eventuaylly many will make it out of the cycle of poverty. But you can’t expect the baby born to uneducated drug additcs to have the same chance as the one born to the well off suburban couple. The gov. should serve the people - that’s why it’s there. Otherwise, we end up serving the system. We have all kinds of corporate welfare and tax breaks for the wealthy while those that hurt just keep getting knocked down. Right now there are more services for the poor getting cut than in recent memory. So who will suffer? Children, the elderly, the ill - folks who can do little to help themselves. Jesus told us to help them and he didn’t seem to care a lot about how we went about it. When we raise up the lowest in society, it benefits all of society. Don’t you think we’d do better if these kids grew up to be contributors to society instead of us paying for them to sit in prison? It’s pay now or pay later - and ruin lives while you do it.

Sorry, but I am not buying it…first off, Christ told us the “poor” will always be among us…in addition, He told us we INDIVIDUALLY have the obligation to help one another…NOT government. Government’s job is NOT to provide its citizens with a job, a home, money, food, etc…and its NOT because the ONLY way it can do so is to TAKE from other citizens…government DOES NOT have a magic money tree with endless resources to pull from, it gets what it “gives” from you, me and BUSINESS OWNER - tax payers!

As for “overcoming” many of the wealthiest among us have had to overcome and did so without any “help” from anyone…in fact, one GREAT man comes to mind…Ronald Reagan! He was born into complete poverty and had an alcoholic father…he moved countless times as a child, never having one “home” to call his own for longer than a few months. He grew up during the depression and delt with all sorts of attrocious conditions…yet…he didn’t “quit” school…he didn’t use his lack of a stable home as an excuse and he didn’t look for handouts from anyone!

He applied himself…made sure he got an education and WORKED to provide himself with opportunity!

Plus, you assume that those of us on this board have not had our own difficulties to overcome…which is typical of those on the liberal left…sigh…

 

[vern_humphrey]

That’s because they’ve been outnumbered by the other party - who don’t believe in govt helping the poor, only the rich, IMO.

In the last 50 years, the Republicans have held the Presidency and a majority in both houses for a total of 4 years.

 

[neat62]

I don’t have a lot of time for this right now, but I want to say a couple of things. First of all, all folks don’t start on a level playing field. Some are born poor, sick, etc., while some are born wealthy and healty. In other words, some folks have a lot more to overcome. What about babies? They can’t help themselves, but are often born into horrific poverty. How are they going to get out if no one helps them? If there is no decent housing, nutrition, education, health care? Are these infants suppossed to pull themselves up by their bootstraps before they can even stand? If you start with one generation and keep improving their chances, eventuaylly many will make it out of the cycle of poverty. But you can’t expect the baby born to uneducated drug additcs to have the same chance as the one born to the well off suburban couple. The gov. should serve the people - that’s why it’s there. Otherwise, we end up serving the system. We have all kinds of corporate welfare and tax breaks for the wealthy while those that hurt just keep getting knocked down. Right now there are more services for the poor getting cut than in recent memory. So who will suffer? Children, the elderly, the ill - folks who can do little to help themselves. Jesus told us to help them and he didn’t seem to care a lot about how we went about it. When we raise up the lowest in society, it benefits all of society. Don’t you think we’d do better if these kids grew up to be contributors to society instead of us paying for them to sit in prison? It’s pay now or pay later - and ruin lives while you do it.

That too is a blatant liberal lie…sigh…there are also MORE PRIVATE organizations, churches and non-profit goups available to help the “needy” then ever…so government doesn’t “need” to do it for us…as we, the citizens are doing so through private donations of all sorts, as well as offering our time, efforts and enegy participating and running these groups and organizations.

 

[vern_humphrey]

That too is a blatant liberal lie…sigh…there are also MORE PRIVATE organizations, churches and non-profit goups available to help the “needy” then ever…so government doesn’t “need” to do it for us…as we, the citizens are doing so through private donations of all sorts, as well as offering our time, efforts and enegy participating and running these groups and organizations.

I work with Catholic Charities Disaster Recovery programs. As a counselor, my job is to match resources to needs. We have an embarassment of resources! We have so many volunteers, with so many skills, and so much money, goods and other donations that sometimes we have to turn donors away.

 

[neat62]

I work with Catholic Charities Disaster Recovery programs. As a counselor, my job is to match resources to needs. We have an embarassment of resources! We have so many volunteers, with so many skills, and so much money, goods and other donations that sometimes we have to turn donors away.

Which proves, what I always say…privatization is always more efficient and effective!

Heck to recognize that private organizations work better, all one really has to do is examine what and when government has “stepped in to help”…i.e, FEMA, Social Security, Medicare, Dept. of Education, etc, etc.

 

[leftistdestroye]

Swan;3626194]

That’s because they’ve been outnumbered by the other party - who don’t believe in govt helping the poor, only the rich, IMO

.

Outnumbered?? Are you serious? And why not let Hillary “109 million” Clinton lead by example? How about Ted Kennedy leaf drop millions in the inner cites? Maybe Jon Corzine, and his mega millions can let the poor have it all. Gimme a break! Those people do and say what they say only to get re elected. You rparty does not care about the poor, and they shouldn’t…WE should.

 

[leftistdestroye]

Swan;3626286]

The gov. should serve the people - that’s why it’s there.

Where does the Constitution say that? If the government ends up serving the people, the people will end up serving the government.

Jesus told us to help them and he didn’t seem to care a lot about how we went about it.

He certainly did not say the government should do it. Jesus called on us as Christians, not tax payers.

Don’t you think we’d do better if these kids grew up to be contributors to society instead of us paying for them to sit in prison?

You want to help them, then teach them how to help themselves. Nobody is stopping them from getting a job, and Jesus said that the poor will always be among us.

Hi sweety! Just read your post and MAN we think the same! LOL

 

[Swan]

Swan;3626286]

Where does the Constitution say that? If the government ends up serving the people, the people will end up serving the government.

He certainly did not say the government should do it. Jesus called on us as Christians, not tax payers.

You want to help them, then teach them how to help themselves. Nobody is stopping them from getting a job, and Jesus said that the poor will always be among us.

Hi sweety! Just read your post and MAN we think the same! LOL

What part of helping the helpless didn’t you understand? Newborns usually don’t have many job skills. The elderly and infirm don’t have the ability. I said not one word about able adults in my post. I asked what about those that can’t help themselves. Letting them suffer and die because life is bad doesn’t seem very “pro-life” to me. I have no problem at all with private charity, but it isn’t enough (obviously). Blaming the victim is a classic strategy of those who simply want to absolve themselves of the care of their fellow man (it’s not your fault or your problem, right). But, IMO, that’s a lame excuse for a pro-lifer. Somehow, should you ever be needy, I’ll bet you’d gladly accept help from the government it that’s all you could get.

I know you disagree with me and, interestingly enough, I don’t really care. I’m stating my opinion, not trying to change your mind. I actually find your rabid rants quite amusing.

 

[neat62]

What part of helping the helpless didn’t you understand? Newborns usually don’t have many job skills. The elderly and infirm don’t have the ability. I said not one word about able adults in my post. I asked what about those that can’t help themselves. Letting them suffer and die because life is bad doesn’t seem very “pro-life” to me. I have no problem at all with private charity, but it isn’t enough (obviously). Blaming the victim is a classic strategy of those who simply want to absolve themselves of the care of their fellow man (it’s not your fault or your problem, right). But, IMO, that’s a lame excuse for a pro-lifer. Somehow, should you ever be needy, I’ll bet you’d gladly accept help from the government it that’s all you could get.

I know you disagree with me and, interestingly enough, I don’t really care. I’m stating my opinion, not trying to change your mind. I actually find your rabid rants quite amusing.

And who said that we shouldn’t help those who can’t help themselves? You are basically talking in circles and making little progress at moving your thoughts into any sort of convincing argument…and your personal attacks on the posters are pretty petty…and frankly pretty boring…is that the only thing you can do to offer a better rebuttal?

 

[Swan]

And who said that we shouldn’t help those who can’t help themselves? You are basically talking in circles and making little progress at moving your thoughts into any sort of convincing argument…and your personal attacks on the posters are pretty petty…and frankly pretty boring…is that the only thing you can do to offer a better rebuttal?

You’re funny. Really. I sometimes come here just to read your posts for a smile.

 

[neat62]

You’re funny. Really. I sometimes come here just to read your posts for a smile.

You must…cause I see you have yet to reply or refute any of the facts I have mentioned…so glad to know you are easily amused.

 

[SoCalRC]

Sorry, but I am not buying it…first off, Christ told us the “poor” will always be among us…in addition, He told us we INDIVIDUALLY have the obligation to help one another…NOT government. Government’s job is NOT to provide its citizens with a job, a home, money, food, etc…and its NOT because the ONLY way it can do so is to TAKE from other citizens…government DOES NOT have a magic money tree with endless resources to pull from, it gets what it “gives” from you, me and BUSINESS OWNER - tax payers!

We have to be careful about confusing political ideology with Catholic Doctrine. In Matt 25, the Son of Man calls all “nations” before him, and judges them on 6 important criteria.

The Church, in explaining our obligations in political life, has explained that, while Democracy is the best reflection of the will of the people, no nation is legitimate if it neglects the inalienable rights of the human person, as defined by the Pastoral Constitution of the Second Vatican Council. That means that the Church does insist that nations deal with basic human needs.

Hunger is a real problem, with about 25,000,000 receiving food assistance, about about 1/3 of them experiencing real deprivation:

hungerinamerica.org/key_findings/

And it is difficult to see how even the immediate effects can be dealt with soley by individuals. Most of the food given out by emergency services come from Food Banks, which have banded together for economics of scale, and rely on relationships with manufacturers. The manufacturers, in turn, take advantage of tax breaks on charitable contributions.

In addition to that form of public subsidy, there are also direct federal funds. So, the system is not wholly private now. It also is feeling the effects of the economy, and the current food shortages on food staples, like rice.

secondharvest.org/

But it is important to remember that this just addresses the end result of hunger, it does not address any underlying causes. Solutions like education are almost certainly not solvable privately.

 

[neat62]

We have to be careful about confusing political ideology with Catholic Doctrine. In Matt 25, the Son of Man calls all “nations” before him, and judges them on 6 important criteria.

The Church, in explaining our obligations in political life, has explained that, while Democracy is the best reflection of the will of the people, no nation is legitimate if it neglects the inalienable rights of the human person, as defined by the Pastoral Constitution of the Second Vatican Council. That means that the Church does insist that nations deal with basic human needs.

Hunger is a real problem, with about 25,000,000 receiving food assistance, about about 1/3 of them experiencing real deprivation:

hungerinamerica.org/key_findings/

And it is difficult to see how even the immediate effects can be dealt with soley by individuals. Most of the food given out by emergency services come from Food Banks, which have banded together for economics of scale, and rely on relationships with manufacturers. The manufacturers, in turn, take advantage of tax breaks on charitable contributions.

In addition to that form of public subsidy, there are also direct federal funds. So, the system is not wholly private now. It also is feeling the effects of the economy, and the current food shortages on food staples, like rice.

secondharvest.org/

But it is important to remember that this just addresses the end result of hunger, it does not address any underlying causes. Solutions like education are almost certainly not solvable privately.

Can you tell me what basic human needs we in America are lacking??

As for the rest of the world, I have addressed that issue previously…we have been sending money, food and other resources to locations like Ethiopia, but until the corruption and strife within their own countries is resolved…the situations are not going to change. It is the corrupt leaders who prevent the aid the world has been sending to various locations around the world, from getting to the people…it is how they remain in power.

Heck, even Saddam horded food from his people, again to remain in power. Remember that Food for oil scandal…and remember…the numerous warehouses found that contained the food received?

 

[Sheeniac]

Yes and no. Culture definitely plays a role. But there is a definite shortage of fresh food in inner city areas and it is not because the residents don’t want it:

I have always believed (and in the last few years studies have come out in support of it) that fresh food is not all it’s cracked up to be. Sorry - but you can get the same or better nutrition from canned or frozen fruits and veggies as you can fresh. “Fresh” can mean picked 2 weeks ago.

Being in the Midwest, I think we have the best selection of fresh fruits and veggies (besides NYC), but I can go weeks eating non-fresh foods. Just stay away from extra salt and extra sugar, and you’re fine.

 

[strngrnrth]

I think the government should step in in emergencies and provide what people need to pull through the emergency.
In the kind of cases of hunger affluent countries have when there is no emergency, only people who actually know the individual situation can know how to solve the problem. Accountability tends to be missing in government budgets and hiring/firing practices as well, at least sometimes. When a social worker visits a sick person or abused person and writes a report and an agent reads the report and sends another worker to feed someone, all three must be competent and diligent or the person won’t get the food. But a neighbor can just slip somebody a couple of box lunches and head off to work. I have seen how a complicated system can lose a piece of information like “deadly allergic to such-a-food” in transit, leaving someone who has been waiting with nothing edible. Governments are there to make sure things get done that absolutely must get done somehow, like putting murderers away and preventing invasion, and helping disaster victims, not to do everything all the time. They aren’t the best source of education, unless a child literally has absolutely no other source. They aren’t the best at feeding people, unless there is literally no one else who can and will do it and someone really is helpless, and they aren’t the best at building houses, unless there is literally no other way people can get houses built. Some of these tasks are suited to individuals, some to families, some to churches, some to charities,a nd some to casual groups of neighbors and acquaintances. Government is a last resort for several reasons, one being its inability to do the job as well as some smaller social unit can.

 

[leftistdestroye]

Swan;3627107]

What part of helping the helpless didn’t you understand? Newborns usually don’t have many job skills. The elderly and infirm don’t have the ability. I said not one word about able adults in my post. I asked what about those that can’t help themselves. Letting them suffer and die because life is bad doesn’t seem very “pro-life” to me. I have no problem at all with private charity, but it isn’t enough (obviously). Blaming the victim is a classic strategy of those who simply want to absolve themselves of the care of their fellow man (it’s not your fault or your problem, right). But, IMO, that’s a lame excuse for a pro-lifer. Somehow, should you ever be needy, I’ll bet you’d gladly accept help from the government it that’s all you could get.

Nice attempt at diversion. I didn’t blame ANY “victim”. I explained why big government 1) is not the answer and 2) nowhere to be found in the Constitution. You have no good comeback, so you attack. Typicle Lib. As a matter of fact, I specifically said that it is up to US, to help who we can.

I know you disagree with me and, interestingly enough, I don’t really care. I’m stating my opinion, not trying to change your mind. I actually find your rabid rants quite amusing.

And I stated my opinion. Again, typical lib, if you disagree with them, you are branded as "blameing the “victim”. BS. And I find your opinons, disturbing.

I am a pro LIFER, not a pro quality of lifer. And you do not know me, I will not accept government handouts.

 

[leftistdestroye]

Swan;3627295]

You’re funny. Really. I sometimes come here just to read your posts for a smile.

LOL I love it when you guys are beaten. You get personal. That is how I knoe we won. Thanks!

 

[vern_humphrey]

What part of helping the helpless didn’t you understand? Newborns usually don’t have many job skills. The elderly and infirm don’t have the ability.

Newborns usually have parents to help them. The elderly and infirm usually have family.

3 Honor widows who are truly widows.
4 But if a widow has children or grandchildren, let these first learn to perform their religious duty to their own family and to make recompense to their parents, for this is pleasing to God.
5 The real widow, who is all alone, has set her hope on God and continues in supplications and prayers night and day.
6 But the one who is self-indulgent is dead while she lives.
7 Command this, so that they may be irreproachable.
8 And whoever does not provide for relatives and especially family members has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.

(1st Timothy, Chapter 5, verses 3-8)

 

[Swan]

We have to be careful about confusing political ideology with Catholic Doctrine. In Matt 25, the Son of Man calls all “nations” before him, and judges them on 6 important criteria.

The Church, in explaining our obligations in political life, has explained that, while Democracy is the best reflection of the will of the people, no nation is legitimate if it neglects the inalienable rights of the human person, as defined by the Pastoral Constitution of the Second Vatican Council. That means that the Church does insist that nations deal with basic human needs.

Hunger is a real problem, with about 25,000,000 receiving food assistance, about about 1/3 of them experiencing real deprivation:

hungerinamerica.org/key_findings/

And it is difficult to see how even the immediate effects can be dealt with soley by individuals. Most of the food given out by emergency services come from Food Banks, which have banded together for economics of scale, and rely on relationships with manufacturers. The manufacturers, in turn, take advantage of tax breaks on charitable contributions.

In addition to that form of public subsidy, there are also direct federal funds. So, the system is not wholly private now. It also is feeling the effects of the economy, and the current food shortages on food staples, like rice.

secondharvest.org/

But it is important to remember that this just addresses the end result of hunger, it does not address any underlying causes. Solutions like education are almost certainly not solvable privately.

You make excellent points! And thanks for the link. There is plenty of substantiated info out there on hunger in the US and the world. Much of it has to do with growing corporate control of resources. It’s not so much that there is not enough food as that the poor cannot afford the food. The same with health care. We have gotten to the point where money is more important than human life and human dignity. *The CCC says this:
2424
A theory that makes profit the exclusive norm and ultimate end of economic activity is morally unacceptable. The disordered desire for money cannot but produce perverse effects. It is one of the causes of the many conflicts which disturb the social order.204

A system that “subordinates the basic rights of individuals and of groups to the collective organization of production” is contrary to human dignity.205 Every practice that reduces persons to nothing more than a means of profit enslaves man, leads to idolizing money, and contributes to the spread of atheism. "You cannot serve God and mammon."206

2425
The Church has rejected the totalitarian and atheistic ideologies associated in modern times with “communism” or “socialism.” She has likewise refused to accept, in the practice of “capitalism,” individualism and the absolute primacy of the law of the marketplace over human labor.207 Regulating the economy solely by centralized planning perverts the basis of social bonds; regulating it solely by the law of the marketplace fails social justice, for "there are many human needs which cannot be satisfied by the market."208 Reasonable regulation of the marketplace and economic initiatives, in keeping with a just hierarchy of values and a view to the common good, is to be commended.*
Yet too many Catholics and Christians want to do away with all regulation - yet here we have the CCC saying outright that this doesn’t work and that it’s wrong. The system should serve the people otherwise the people become human cogs in a machine. The idea that we are only worth how much we can earn in dollars is a perversion of God’s creation. The free market in not Christian.

Regarding labor, paying fair wages is required and laborers have the right to unionize. *Again, the CCC:

The development of economic activity and growth in production are meant to provide for the needs of human beings. Economic life is not meant solely to multiply goods produced and increase profit or power; it is ordered first of all to the service of persons, of the whole man, and of the entire human community. Economic activity, conducted according to its own proper methods, is to be exercised within the limits of the moral order, in keeping with social justice so as to correspond to God’s plan for man.209
A just wage is the legitimate fruit of work. To refuse or withhold it can be a grave injustice.221 In determining fair pay both the needs and the contributions of each person must be taken into account. "Remuneration for work should guarantee man the opportunity to provide a dignified livelihood for himself and his family on the material, social, cultural, and spiritual level, taking into account the role and the productivity of each, the state of the business, and the common good."222 Agreement between the parties is not sufficient to justify morally the amount to be received in wages.*
*
2435
Recourse to a strike is morally legitimate when it cannot be avoided, or at least when it is necessary to obtain a proportionate benefit. It becomes morally unacceptable when accompanied by violence, or when objectives are included that are not directly linked to working conditions or are contrary to the common good.

2436
It is unjust not to pay the social security contributions required by legitimate authority.*

They say it far better than I ever could so I’ll just leave it at that.