Recently, a neighbor of mine has asked many of us for loans. I offered to buy one of his boats. Not an expensive boat but a small aliminum jon boat. No was his answer. He just needs 10K to get through the next "few" months.
2 Harleys, 2 boats, 2 jet skis, a new Camaro, late model truck and SUV and his wife drives one of those SUV small Lexus is just a small sampleopf his assets.
But according to my neighbor he needs my $ more than I do. Sound familiar?
I am a proponent of many social programs that ACTUALLY help people. However, many of the people that "qualify" under the absurd rules and regulations government bureaucrats set to determine what qualifies as "need" do not need, or deserve, my money more than I do.
Accordingly, the first question that should be asked when government, at the point of a gun, takes my $ is whether the person that will be getting my $ needs it more than me.
Does that person that qualified under some government bureaucrats' rules to get my $ actually have a need greater than my need to take care of my family? Is that program that government has set up that takes my $ to fund it more important than the needs of me and my family?
Now I will await the sewer, standing army,roads, military, police and the other arguments which will correctly be made. But those arguments are moot in this discussion. I am speaking of programs where it is a direct transfer of my $ to someone else that government has determined needs my $ than I do. And thos transfer will be to individuals THAT DO NOTHING OTHER than hold out their hand to get the $ and provide no service.
A thank you would seem appropriate but the sense of entitlement and the lack of pride associated with this mentality has spread like the plague nationally.
What is wrong with someone that has earned their $ objecting to the transfer of that earned income to someone that refuses to work for it or any $.
2 Harleys, 2 boats, 2 jet skis, a new Camaro, late model truck and SUV and his wife drives one of those SUV small Lexus is just a small sampleopf his assets.
But according to my neighbor he needs my $ more than I do. Sound familiar?
I am a proponent of many social programs that ACTUALLY help people. However, many of the people that "qualify" under the absurd rules and regulations government bureaucrats set to determine what qualifies as "need" do not need, or deserve, my money more than I do.
Accordingly, the first question that should be asked when government, at the point of a gun, takes my $ is whether the person that will be getting my $ needs it more than me.
Does that person that qualified under some government bureaucrats' rules to get my $ actually have a need greater than my need to take care of my family? Is that program that government has set up that takes my $ to fund it more important than the needs of me and my family?
Now I will await the sewer, standing army,roads, military, police and the other arguments which will correctly be made. But those arguments are moot in this discussion. I am speaking of programs where it is a direct transfer of my $ to someone else that government has determined needs my $ than I do. And thos transfer will be to individuals THAT DO NOTHING OTHER than hold out their hand to get the $ and provide no service.
A thank you would seem appropriate but the sense of entitlement and the lack of pride associated with this mentality has spread like the plague nationally.
What is wrong with someone that has earned their $ objecting to the transfer of that earned income to someone that refuses to work for it or any $.
