Government killing private charity

[gallantwarrior]

Uh, shithead, children in America don't starve. The parents of these Afro kids get food stamps and an incredible amount of welfare. The government does an adequate job. More than adequate, considering that practically every Afro in the country gets free food from the government at some point in their lives.

And, she's not providing the food. Whites in the Catholic Church are providing the food. Her family benefits from the arrangement by getting first dibs on the food, for hosting this daily recreational event.

This has nothing to with a belief that only government should feed the hungry. It's about an institution running a public kitchen in a residential neighborhood. It sucks enough to be a stupid Afro without your neighbor pulling down the neighborhood by hosting something like this.

OK, I get it, you missed the point entirely...the libs are always harping about how government welfare is absolutely mandatory because private charity and local people don't care. Private welfare is alive and well. Children will be fed without the government robbing you and I to do it. Got that?

But, then things like what happened in the OP screw with private charity stepping up and taking care of people.
Notice who defends the government restriction of private entities providing charity. (Liberals)

Well and duly noted, I can assure you.

 

[IGetItAlready]

When good Americans step up to do the things that made welfare unnecessary for so very long in this nation, the heavy hand of power takes offense.

Helping our neighbors runs counter to all that the massive entitlement state espouses as in their minds, we're all a bunch of dumb animals who would happily treat each other like dirt were it not for big brother's guidance and instruction on living like compassionate human beings.

"It takes a village goddamnit!" And more than that, it takes OUR FEDERAL village. And those who disagree will be crushed.

 

[antagon]

The laws and codes are flawed when they restrict the ability of individuals and private charity organizations from alleviating hunger and poverty.

No, the charities are flawed when the conduct of their business has to violate code. We don't need soup kitchens out of homes in the ghetto. The ghetto's ghetto enough.

It's a nice thought and a great gesture, but codes help to alleviate poverty and improve quality of life, too. People should just keep their nice thoughts and gestures within those lines.

Feeding the hungry is a noble and worthy endeavor. Too bad too many see it as the sole purview of government, which has proven time and again to be woefully inadequate to the task. I say, bravo to this woman and those providing the food for children who would otherwise have poor or none.

This is not about the govt doing better or anything like that. Without attaching any of your own concepts about my position on the matter, the simple fact is that codes are there for a reason. This is one of the most obvious distinctions between the developed world and elsewhere.

People are homeless. Regardless of how valiant it would be to set up a sheet metal favela in my driveway, it is better that I find a code-compliant means whereby to help.

There is a right and wrong way to do things. Codes can make identifying the wrong way to go about things much easier. They certainly have to be consistent to be fair and the government, at any level, should not make judgements about this based on how nice or thoughtful the violation is.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

even a non profit operation is considered a business.

Particular by politicians that want money, as this case shows.

Still it must comply with city codes, are you against city codes also? I was, That is why I bought 43 acres and live in a sparsly poulated area.
but there are ways to redress the situation, and sarcasm and belittleing on this forum is not one of them.

Am I against city codes? Most of them.

 

[AmyNation]

Particular by politicians that want money, as this case shows.

Still it must comply with city codes, are you against city codes also? I was, That is why I bought 43 acres and live in a sparsly poulated area.
but there are ways to redress the situation, and sarcasm and belittleing on this forum is not one of them.

Am I against city codes? Most of them.

I agree city codes are a hassle. But I also don't want my neighbor deciding to run a strip club out of his house, or to horde broken down car parts in his front yard.

Yes they are a hassle, but I'd bet most of them serve a legitimate purpose.

 

[uscitizen]

Still it must comply with city codes, are you against city codes also? I was, That is why I bought 43 acres and live in a sparsly poulated area.
but there are ways to redress the situation, and sarcasm and belittleing on this forum is not one of them.

Am I against city codes? Most of them.

I agree city codes are a hassle. But I also don't want my neighbor deciding to run a strip club out of his house, or to horde broken down car parts in his front yard.

Yes they are a hassle, but I'd bet most of them serve a legitimate purpose.

Hey it is my property and I can raise hogs in my back yard if I want!
Liberty!

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Still it must comply with city codes, are you against city codes also? I was, That is why I bought 43 acres and live in a sparsly poulated area.
but there are ways to redress the situation, and sarcasm and belittleing on this forum is not one of them.

Am I against city codes? Most of them.

I agree city codes are a hassle. But I also don't want my neighbor deciding to run a strip club out of his house, or to horde broken down car parts in his front yard.

Yes they are a hassle, but I'd bet most of them serve a legitimate purpose.

Funny how everyone always brings up the things that don't happen to justify the way government controls people, isn't it?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Am I against city codes? Most of them.

I agree city codes are a hassle. But I also don't want my neighbor deciding to run a strip club out of his house, or to horde broken down car parts in his front yard.

Yes they are a hassle, but I'd bet most of them serve a legitimate purpose.

Hey it is my property and I can raise hogs in my back yard if I want!
Liberty!

If you got enough land, go for it. My guess is you don't.

By the way, hogs are a lot cleaner than you think they are.

 

[uscitizen]

Actually things like that do happen.
NOt too often now because of zoning and community regs though.

Just think if the regs did not exist.
But you are perhaps to young for that?

 

[AmyNation]

Am I against city codes? Most of them.

I agree city codes are a hassle. But I also don't want my neighbor deciding to run a strip club out of his house, or to horde broken down car parts in his front yard.

Yes they are a hassle, but I'd bet most of them serve a legitimate purpose.

Funny how everyone always brings up the things that don't happen to justify the way government controls people, isn't it?

Who says they don't happen? Cities fight with people over hoarding all the time. As for opening a strip club, probably a straw man on my part. However kennels, daycares, there are plenty of businesses that people run put of their homes.

 

[antagon]

Actually things like that do happen.
NOt too often now because of zoning and community regs though.

Just think if the regs did not exist.
But you are perhaps to young for that?

Maybe just grew up too wealthy to appreciate that. We lived in the hood growing up and similarly to the trend of this thread, people only approve of code enforcement in middle class or better neighborhoods. The slightly more privileged think that shade-tree repair shops, dog, cat and chicken raising, perpetual yard sales, hoarding, scrapping and neighborhood stereo broadcasting is desired in the hood.

They're in the position to tisk, tisk the govt's 'oppressive' codes because they are well enforced in their neighborhood. They just ignore the oppressive value of a front-lawn soup kitchen at your neighbor's house or the cavalcade of ghetto lifestyle described above.

 

[Katzndogz]

Government is killing private charity, but this isn't the best example. Tax laws that reduce or eliminate tax deductions for charitable contributions is what is killing private charity. The government needs to eliminate private charity because people might donate to charitable institutions that the government does not wish to support but wishes to end. If left to the individual, they might donate to Focus on the Family rather than Planned Parenthood and the government would rather Family Support organizations do not exist.

 

[gallantwarrior]

Am I against city codes? Most of them.

I agree city codes are a hassle. But I also don't want my neighbor deciding to run a strip club out of his house, or to horde broken down car parts in his front yard.

Yes they are a hassle, but I'd bet most of them serve a legitimate purpose.

Funny how everyone always brings up the things that don't happen to justify the way government controls people, isn't it?

Or stupid laws made to protect stupid people. When I see all the stupid-people laws that exist now, I just wonder how so many of us, many posting on this board, made it to adulthood. Seat belts: didn't exist in most cars when I was a kid. It wouldn't have mattered if we had them, either. My parents had more kids than most modern cars have seat belts. Bicycle helmets? Didn't exist either. As a matter of fact, unless there was a bone poking through the skin, or blood pumping copiously, my mother hosed the "owie" off, sprayed it with disinfectant and out you went. My parents also kept firearms in the house. We never touched them because we knew we'd get the shit beaten out of us...that went for everything else forbidden. Personally, I think we should just let the stupid ones die off, it would definitely improve the remaining stock.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Actually things like that do happen.
NOt too often now because of zoning and community regs though.

Just think if the regs did not exist.
But you are perhaps to young for that?

I saw a story about a guy that turned his yard into a junkpile. It made the news because it was rare. Another interesting tidbit, it didn't violate any zoning laws, despite the fact that it was in California. One in 100 million is not a big enough number for anyone with a brain to start writing stupid laws, which probably explains why politicians think they are needed.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I agree city codes are a hassle. But I also don't want my neighbor deciding to run a strip club out of his house, or to horde broken down car parts in his front yard.

Yes they are a hassle, but I'd bet most of them serve a legitimate purpose.

Funny how everyone always brings up the things that don't happen to justify the way government controls people, isn't it?

Who says they don't happen? Cities fight with people over hoarding all the time. As for opening a strip club, probably a straw man on my part. However kennels, daycares, there are plenty of businesses that people run put of their homes.

Cities fight people over all sorts of things, like planting vegetable gardens in their front yards. Frankly, I think the cities have better things to do.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Actually things like that do happen.
NOt too often now because of zoning and community regs though.

Just think if the regs did not exist.
But you are perhaps to young for that?

Maybe just grew up too wealthy to appreciate that. We lived in the hood growing up and similarly to the trend of this thread, people only approve of code enforcement in middle class or better neighborhoods. The slightly more privileged think that shade-tree repair shops, dog, cat and chicken raising, perpetual yard sales, hoarding, scrapping and neighborhood stereo broadcasting is desired in the hood.

They're in the position to tisk, tisk the govt's 'oppressive' codes because they are well enforced in their neighborhood. They just ignore the oppressive value of a front-lawn soup kitchen at your neighbor's house or the cavalcade of ghetto lifestyle described above.

I do not approve of code enforcement anywhere. I especially despise the codes adopted by home owner associations that make laundry lines a violation. Can anyone explain the rationale behind making the greenest method of drying clothes impossible for anyone to use?

 

[AmyNation]

Some people think they are an eyesore.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Some people think they are an eyesore.

That is not a rationale, that is an excuse.

 

[AmyNation]

Some people think they are an eyesore.

That is not a rationale, that is an excuse.

That is the reason, they ban them.

 

[gallantwarrior]

Funny how everyone always brings up the things that don't happen to justify the way government controls people, isn't it?

Who says they don't happen? Cities fight with people over hoarding all the time. As for opening a strip club, probably a straw man on my part. However kennels, daycares, there are plenty of businesses that people run put of their homes.

Cities fight people over all sorts of things, like planting vegetable gardens in their front yards. Frankly, I think the cities have better things to do.

They should have better things to do, but they'd rather hassle people planting veggie gardens in their yards.