US Bishops' Conference Largely Disappointed by Debt Ceiling Agreement

[CMatt25]

Great, since my car is much older will you be upgrading me or just trading?

I have no plans to upgrade or trade mine for years to come. The body will probably rust apart before then. Not even thinking about it. Nor am I envying my neighbors’ Acura, Lincoln, or Lexus.

 

[rlg94086]

Nor am I envying my neighbors’ Acura, Lincoln, or Lexus.

Why point out your neighbors’ car makes?

 

[iamrefreshed]

I see no reason not to expect the rich to contribute more than the less wealthy: to whom much is given, from them much is expected.

Now are you pushing your beliefs on others?

The rich do contribute more. Many contribute nothing.

 

[CMatt25]

Oh, and you don’t think you sound like the arm of liberal politics?

Sure but I’m not representing the Catholic Church and the conservative politics trumpeted by the majority here is partly why you don’t see Catholic in my profile. Yet like Prodigal Son I don’t believe Christ would turn down a government role to add additional support for the poor and the sick.

 

[iamrefreshed]

What does it mean to give the government carte blanche? I think arguments about how much should be taken and how it should be spent are valid, but in these kinds of discussions I tend to seem lots of generalizations about how the poor don’t deserve what they are being given and very little validation of their actual needs.

Simply saying that someone should get a job instead of relying on gov’t assistance for example, does not take into consideration the fact that some low paying jobs may not allow people to meet the basic needs of their families. Consider also the fact that because of planning and zoning patterns (and the lack of reliable public transportation), even the poorest of people often need a car to get to any kind of job on time…then they need gas money…and money for daycare…and on and on. Poor people surely had the least (name removed by moderator)ut as to how our cities and towns were planned!

Are there irresponsible poor? Is there waste? Sure, (factors seen even with charitable organizations) but what we need to do is not paint the poor with a broad brush and instead address those specific problems. For example, mandatory financial management training for recipients of public support, far more stringent requirements to qualify and remain qualified and a system whereby the public can monitor and report on violations.

I see no reason not to expect the rich to contribute more than the less wealthy: to whom much is given, from them much is expected.

Why is it all or nothing? Can’t someone take a job that won’t support their family, still receive some assistance AND learn a trade?

Why let them sit home and collect for nothing?

 

[estesbob]

Now are you pushing your beliefs on others?

The rich do contribute more. Many contribute nothing.

The top 25% of earners in the United States pay 84% of all federal income taxes. Which leads to the question just how much is enough?

 

[ComputerGeek25]

What does it mean to give the government carte blanche? I think arguments about how much should be taken and how it should be spent are valid, but in these kinds of discussions I tend to seem lots of generalizations about how the poor don’t deserve what they are being given and very little validation of their actual needs.

Simply saying that someone should get a job instead of relying on gov’t assistance for example, does not take into consideration the fact that some low paying jobs may not allow people to meet the basic needs of their families. Consider also the fact that because of planning and zoning patterns (and the lack of reliable public transportation), even the poorest of people often need a car to get to any kind of job on time…then they need gas money…and money for daycare…and on and on. Poor people surely had the least (name removed by moderator)ut as to how our cities and towns were planned!

So, you propose the best way is just to pay people not to work, as opposed to actually find solutions to this?

Are there irresponsible poor? Is there waste? Sure, (factors seen even with charitable organizations) but what we need to do is not paint the poor with a broad brush and instead address those specific problems. For example, mandatory financial management training for recipients of public support, far more stringent requirements to qualify and remain qualified and a system whereby the public can monitor and report on violations.

I see not reason not to expect the rich to contribute more than the less wealthy: to whom much is given, from them much is expected.

I believe I’ve heard less money, as a percentage, gets to recipients from the government than from private charity.

 

[iamrefreshed]

Why point out your neighbors’ car makes?

Tassels and phylacteries.

 

[seekerz]

Why is it all or nothing? Can’t someone take a job that won’t support their family, still receive some assistance AND learn a trade?

Why let them sit home and collect for nothing?

Who’s the “them” sitting at home and collecting for nothing? I know several people who work/study and receive government assistance in some form or the other but I would not generalize to say that this is the case for all recipients because, generally speaking, I am not an “all or nothing person” - I like to take a balanced view of issues.

 

[seekerz]

Now are you pushing your beliefs on others?

The rich do contribute more. Many contribute nothing.

I’m simply stating my belief, once pointedly directed at me by a priest from the pulpit (I’ll save that story).

What’s wrong with people not paying taxes if they don’t make enough money for their basic needs? The problem is that the tax code sometimes allows those who do make enough to escape with paying nothing and I do agree it needs to be revised.

 

[iamrefreshed]

Who’s the “them” sitting at home and collecting for nothing? I know several people who work/study and receive government assistance in some form or the other but I would not generalize to say that this is the case for all recipients because, generally speaking, I am not an “all or nothing person” - I like to take a balanced view of issues.

I assumed that is what you meant by your comment about a job not meeting income needs. I’m glad you agree someone can still work while receiving assistance.

 

[seekerz]

So, you propose the best way is just to pay people not to work, as opposed to actually find solutions to this?

Where exactly did I propose that? I’m simply saying that not all jobs allow people to meet their basic needs and they may still require some assistance.

I believe I’ve heard less money, as a percentage, gets to recipients from the government than from private charity.

You have that belief and I have personal experience of blatant waste and mismanagement in more than one charitable institution (which is why I stick to one that I trust), no different from what government is often accused of. Maybe one of us should get some firm statistics to bolster our respective stances.

 

[iamrefreshed]

I’m simply stating my belief, once pointedly directed at me by a priest from the pulpit (I’ll save that story).

What’s wrong with people not paying taxes if they don’t make enough money for their basic needs? The problem is that the tax code sometimes allows those who do make enough to escape with paying nothing and I do agree it needs to be revised.

Well, we need to define basic. To me, it’s food, shelter and clothing. Not cable, cell phones and a PS3.

I’ve lived without the latter and two jobs. Calling for free stuff would have been easier but against my principles. Not so for many.

 

[CMatt25]

You don’t have a religion in you profile, so a “lurker” would easily assume you are Catholic since its a Catholic forum. That said, my point is that you, Prodigal, seekerz and many, many other misguided liberals are part of CAF. You can’t place CAF in the “them” category when you are playing the victim, since you are part of CAF.

I would think faithful Catholics would place Catholic in their profile on a Catholic forum. That said, when I see the word, Catholic, listed on a profile, I presume they are indeed Catholic as defined by the teachings of the Catholic Church as to who is. When I don’t see it, I don’t assume just because it’s a Catholic forum given that others are allowed to participate in discusions.

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

More…

US Catholics Largely Disappointed by Bishop’s Conference Handling of…well …Just About Everything.

 

[ComputerGeek25]

Who’s the “them” sitting at home and collecting for nothing? I know several people who work/study and receive government assistance in some form or the other but I would not generalize to say that this is the case for all recipients because, generally speaking, I am not an “all or nothing person” - I like to take a balanced view of issues.

I know many people who are quite the opposite; they may be disabled in some mental aspects, but are more than able to hold down a job as a cashier or stocking shelves to help offset their respective burdens on society. However, they view these jobs as “beneth them” and would rather claim 100% of what they are offered from the government, and then get scared when there’s a threat of budget cuts.

I know other people who teach in urban school districts. Many of the parents don’t care about their children and they don’t take an active interest in their childrens live, academics, discipline. No matter how much money the districts throw at them, or what new techniques they try or extra staff they bring on, it does no good. The school is treated like a giant day care, all at tax payer expense. The schools are rife with reverse racism. Quite simply, these people do not value education as they do not need to; Uncle Sam pays them to do nothing.

We can argue anecdotal evidence all day. Can you provide any hard evidence to refute us?

 

[ComputerGeek25]

Where exactly did I propose that? I’m simply saying that not all jobs allow people to meet their basic needs and they may still require some assistance.

You have that belief and I have personal experience of blatant waste and mismanagement in more than one charitable institution (which is why I stick to one that I trust), no different from what government is often accused of. Maybe one of us should get some firm statistics to bolster our respective stances.

I agree that some people will still need some assitance with even menial jobs. However, it would make their respective burdens light.

 

[CMatt25]

Why point out your neighbors’ car makes?

Because Iamrefreshed seems to have a need to know that I am not envious of them. My make is a Hyundai only because it was the least expensive one at the time of the purchase. If I were replacing it, I’d probably go with something like a Ford.

 

[ComputerGeek25]

I have no plans to upgrade or trade mine for years to come. The body will probably rust apart before then. Not even thinking about it. Nor am I envying my neighbors’ Acura, Lincoln, or Lexus.

So, I’m assming you’re going to be mailing your savings directly to the IRS?

 

[seekerz]

Well, we need to define basic. To me, it’s food, shelter and clothing. Not cable, cell phones and a PS3.

I’ve lived without the latter and two jobs. Calling for free stuff would have been easier but against my principles. Not so for many.

Basic means what people need to live. For me that might include a cell phone (since landlines are generally more expensive). Cable or a PS3 to keep latch key kids occupied and off the streets might also be a consideration if I were personally donating, but I wouldn’t expect tax money to be used for that.