Hypocrisy and Right vs. Left Wing

[Ridgerunner]

I am sometimes tempted to paraphrase Chesterton’s remark about Christianity, and say that it’s not so much that government aid to the poor has been tried and found wanting as it is that it has never really been tried.

If you look at the truly poor; those who absolutely cannot improve their situations no matter what, particularly the disabled, the governmental assistance is grotesquely inadequate. The social encyclicals, from Rerum Novarum on, have condemned this situation. Neither political party ever does anything to rectify it, and no political candidate for president presently talks about it. When have you ever heard a presidential candidate talk about increasing SSI above its present $500 per month?

Rather, most social benefit programs are middle class programs. That’s where the votes are. Foreclosure relief? That’s big right now in the political posturings. People bought things they should not have bought, whether housing they couldn’t afford to start with or consumer goods for which they borrowed up the equity in their homes. In any event, it’s not that they can make no payments at all. It’s that they can’t make payments that are (and always were) too big for their incomes. The truly poor didn’t get mortgages to begin with. They couldn’t.

Universal subsidized healthcare? That’s largely middle class oriented too. The truly destitute already get Medicaid. Medicare prescription coverage? Again, that’s largely a middle class benefit. Guaranteed college education? Same. And so, this presidential election is, as always, all about who can deliver the most free stuff to the middle class.

And government dependency on the part of those who can actually improve their lot through their own efforts is condemned by the social encyclicals.

Even many of those we think of as “poor” are not “poor” in an unrecoverable sense. Most “poor” people are physically capable of working, and most do work. Many are undereducated, yet absolutely free G.E.D. programs go begging. In my rather smallish town, employers will actually subsidize further education and pay wages for class time. There is a university outreach program here. A two year associate’s degree here in agricultural economics, computer technology or production engineering will guarantee you a decent-paying, management track position, and they’re not tough programs. But not many do it. Sure, if you get a supervisory or technical position, you’ll make more, but you have to work a lot harder, you have to take a lot of responsibility and you’ll lose a lot of government benefits besides.

 

[ribozyme]

Here’s something about the coverage of government programs:

Although Medicaid and SCHIP have resulted in substantial progress in the provision of health care and long-term care coverage, large numbers of low-income Americans remain uninsured. The most recent Census data indicate that about 24 million people with incomes below 200 percent of the poverty line were uninsured in 2003. This includes approximately 18 million adults under the age of 65, as well as six million children.

Most of the low-income adults who are uninsured are not eligible for Medicaid.[28] Unless they are elderly or disabled, adults without dependent children are typically ineligible for Medicaid regardless of how poor they are. Medicaid does cover low-income parents, but the income limits for parents are typically set far below the poverty line. In the median state, a parent is eligible for Medicaid only if her income is less than 69 percent of the poverty line ($11,100 for a family of three).[29]

Most children with family incomes up to 200 percent of the poverty line are eligible for Medicaid or SCHIP. Many eligible children do not participate and remain uninsured, however, either because they are unaware of the programs (or unaware that their children are eligible) or because the enrollment and retention processes are too complicated.

cbpp.org/7-19-05health.htm

 

[cynic]

Lefties are pro-choice – but people cannot be allowed to make their own choices.

their own choices, yeah, but with money they don’t have.

This is tiresome, I would have thought that on a social justice forum most posters would support some form of government funding for education.

 

[vern_humphrey]

their own choices, yeah, but with money they don’t have.

If no one has any money, how will the government pay for all these things?

This is tiresome, I would have thought that on a social justice forum most posters would support some form of government funding for education.

We are perfectly willing to pay for education – the problem is, we pay and pay and pay – and the kids still get a lousy education (**if **they get any at all.)

Right now, about 30% of the kids who enter high school don’t graduate. And high school dropouts are the one cohort in America that has lost ground economically in the last 20 years. If we could educate that 30% (plus the other 10 to 15% who graduate unable to read and write), then they’d have money.

 

[cynic]

If no one has any money, how will the government pay for all these things?
.

some people earn less than others. A sizeable number of people could not afford private education for children with no government subsidy

We are perfectly willing to pay for education – the problem is, we pay and pay and pay – and the kids still get a lousy education (**if **they get any at all.)

Right now, about 30% of the kids who enter high school don’t graduate. And high school dropouts are the one cohort in America that has lost ground economically in the last 20 years. If we could educate that 30% (plus the other 10 to 15% who graduate unable to read and write), then they’d have money.

I respect the fact that you support some form of government funding in the form of vouchers

 

[wabrams]

So, I’m curious … would some of the younger parents / younger posters comment on how much science and math high school students get these days? It would be helpful to the discussion.

I went to high school from 1993 to 1997 in a small, somewhat rural county w/ only 3 high schools. I took 4 English courses, 2 Algebra classes, 1 Geometry, 2 Biology, and 1 Chemistry class. They were all CP or College Prep classes, though some of my friend’s took the higher version called AP or Advanced Prep.

 

[vern_humphrey]

some people earn less than others.

If they got a real education in the Public School System, they could learn a lot more.

A sizeable number of people could not afford private education for children with no government subsidy

I support 100% public funding for education. The difference between my position and that of some others is that I demand that the children** get **an education.

The quality of public schools varies widely – often schools only a few miles apart are widely separated in quality. To require a child to attend a poorly-performing school is a violation of that child’s 14th Amendment right to equal protection under the law.

I respect the fact that you support some form of government funding in the form of vouchers

No, I do not support vouchers.

I support True Choice in education. Let the parents pick the school and pay a standard tuition to the school they choose.

I also support a national system of internet-based computer-aided education, piped for free into every school.

If you want to talk about these proposals, we’ll need another thread.

 

[estesbob]

their own choices, yeah, but with money they don’t have.

This is tiresome, I would have thought that on a social justice forum most posters would support some form of government funding for education.

The governement doesnt fund education-parents do. The way the scam works is they take our money-use to run lousy public schools with overpaid staff and the rich parents opt their kids out of the mess and get their kids a good education in a private school.

Best bet is to let the money follow the student. Vouchers is the only way to go.

 

[cynic]

If you want to talk about these proposals, we’ll need another thread.

yes, because if a parent can direct government funding to any school of their choice then I don’t see how that differs from vouchers.

 

[vern_humphrey]

yes, because if a parent can direct government funding to any school of their choice then I don’t see how that differs from vouchers.

Almost all voucher laws have poisoned pills:

First of all, if your state average per-pupil expenditure is $9,000 per year (as Arkansas’ is), the typical voucher is good for somewhere between a third and a half that amount.

Secondly, vouchers are not universal.

Third, they are usually circumscribed – so if your child is left-handed, red haired, with one brown and one blue eye, and has been in a sub-standard school for 15 years, you get a voucher entitling you to $10 off on your next oil change at Wal-Mart.

 

[cynic]

Then change those things. They’ll still be vouchers.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Then change those things. They’ll still be vouchers.

No, they won’t.

The key (for those who just joined the thread) is that vouchers are an extraordinary tool. True Choice, when enacted, would be the standard (and only) way of doing business.

 

[BamaRider]

Vern said-

First of all, if your state average per-pupil expenditure is $9,000 per year (as Arkansas’ is), the typical voucher is good for somewhere between a third and a half that amount.

So that made me wonder-

9,0000 per year? What kind of private school can that buy in Arkansas Vern?

 

[vern_humphrey]

Vern said-

So that made me wonder-

9,0000 per year? What kind of private school can that buy in Arkansas Vern?

Nine thousand per year. That would buy a top-notch private education.

I was in the commercial education and training business for many years. The loaded labor rate runs about 100% – that is, you take the salary of the professional who does the actual work and add 100%. The add-on pays rent, light, water, taxes, benefits and so on, and includes 5% profit.

If our teacher has 20 pupils (a very low figure), then he or she is bringing in $180,000 per year – and we can afford to pay him $90,000 a year and still make a profit.

 

[geraldffff]

Nine thousand per year. That would buy a top-notch private education.

I was in the commercial education and training business for many years. The loaded labor rate runs about 100% – that is, you take the salary of the professional who does the actual work and add 100%. The add-on pays rent, light, water, taxes, benefits and so on, and includes 5% profit.

If our teacher has 20 pupils (a very low figure), then he or she is bringing in $180,000 per year – and we can afford to pay him $90,000 a year and still make a profit.

Wow! My wife and I were both working to keep a meager roof over the heads of our four children some 15 years ago and what did we get in the public schools for our children, ****. There were some wonderful teachers but then there were those telling my children the wonders of the homosexual lifestyle. The educational system in Massachusetts where they teach first grade children about the wonders of the homosexual life style is a good reason to provide Choice rather than the mess that is now supported by the perverted teachers unions. The hypocrisy of the Right is clearly shown by their massive efforts to undermine Huckabee. The hypocrisy of the left could be an endless list but the decay in the public education (brainwashing" system is a good place to start…

 

[goofyjim]

No, lefties are PRO-CHOICE… but if you want to know some reasons that lefties do not like school vouchers, go here:

epi.org/subjectpages/edu.cfm?CFID=989102&CFTOKEN=69708096

I haven’t read any papers on it, but that think tank did some work on that subject although the think tank’s specialities are labor markets, globalization, and living wages.

Not all leftists are prochoice. I believe in government support of the poor but am firmly against abortion. You have to stop generalizing so quickly.

 

[pnewton]

I am sometimes tempted to paraphrase Chesterton’s remark about Christianity, and say that it’s not so much that government aid to the poor has been tried and found wanting as it is that it has never really been tried.

If you look at the truly poor; those who absolutely cannot improve their situations no matter what, particularly the disabled, the governmental assistance is grotesquely inadequate.

Thank you for the excellent and detailed post. I am drawn to this topic because I think the OP has some valid points. I do not agree that there is anything charitable about voting to use the government money to help the poor. Charity is what compels us to us our own. money.

Yet there are many areas which disagree on the best course of action. Therefore, we must examine our own conscience and ask if our opinions and votes are political first or Christian first.

I think the area of the handicapped is not one that has been touched on much. It is surely a greater act of charity to help one who can not help themself. In Texas, we have slashed assistance to the mentally impaired to the point that those who are too far gone to function in society will spend more time in jails than in hospitals or group homes. The state had some great ideas to rectify this situation, including regional state mental hospitals, under Gov. Bush, but when he left the next administration cut the funding.

So I am liberal on a few issues. I think WIC (women’s infants and children) is a great program, even though it is a straight handout. This is not charitable of me, though. That would be when I reach in my own pocket.

 

[fnz2thrght]

. I do not agree that there is anything charitable about voting to use the government money to help the poor. Charity is what compels us to us our own. money.

So I am liberal on a few issues. I think WIC (women’s infants and children) is a great program, even though it is a straight handout. This is not charitable of me, though. That would be when I reach in my own pocket.

I disagree. If you’re voting to use government money who’s money do you think that is? Yours. None of these programs are free and we all pay for them. So you’re voting to support legislation to provide for the least in our society then you must expect that there is a price tag that you will pay - usually in tax dollars. So, I think it is Charity. Your money being used.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Wow! My wife and I were both working to keep a meager roof over the heads of our four children some 15 years ago and what did we get in the public schools for our children, ****. There were some wonderful teachers but then there were those telling my children the wonders of the homosexual lifestyle. The educational system in Massachusetts where they teach first grade children about the wonders of the homosexual life style is a good reason to provide Choice rather than the mess that is now supported by the perverted teachers unions. The hypocrisy of the Right is clearly shown by their massive efforts to undermine Huckabee. The hypocrisy of the left could be an endless list but the decay in the public education (brainwashing" system is a good place to start…

In a rational world, True Choice would solve many problems. No one would be forced to attend a school that taught things morally objectionable to them. Don’t like prayer in schools? Send your kid to a school where they don’t pray. You do like prayer in schools? Send your kid to the appropriate school.

You see by that a major objection to True Choice – there are those who believe you should be forced to send your kids to a school that teaches things you don’t like.

 

[fnz2thrght]

Wow! My wife and I were both working to keep a meager roof over the heads of our four children some 15 years ago and what did we get in the public schools for our children, ****. There were some wonderful teachers but then there were those telling my children the wonders of the homosexual lifestyle. The educational system in Massachusetts where they teach first grade children about the wonders of the homosexual life style is a good reason to provide Choice rather than the mess that is now supported by the perverted teachers unions. The hypocrisy of the Right is clearly shown by their massive efforts to undermine Huckabee. The hypocrisy of the left could be an endless list but the decay in the public education (brainwashing" system is a good place to start…

Why are statements like this allowed to stay? Have you actually ever looked at the massachusetts health curriculum? both my children attended public schools in MA and neither received any sort of “homosexual lifestyle” training. It’s laughable at best that you would make that assertion. Read the framework.