Who cares about the poor the most?

[Votto]

 

[kkline99]

Compare charitable contributions between liberal politicians and conservatives. Liberals only want to use your money but conservatives use their own. When jfk first ran for office he walked along the poor and talked about how if he was elected he would make sure the federal government helped these people. He can from one of the richest families in America at the time and he didn't want to use a penny of his own money but he thought something needed to be done in Washington for the poor.

 

[Publius1787]

View attachment 28763

The question "who cares about the poor the most" presupposes that caring about the poor is a responsibility.

 

[Votto]

View attachment 28763

The question "who cares about the poor the most" presupposes that caring about the poor is a responsibility.

It is only your responsibility if you feel that it is your responsibility or if someone forces you to assume responsibility.

Clearly there are those who don't feel this way.

Having said that, it would appear that those of faith are much more likely to help the poor.

Religious Faith and Charitable Giving | Hoover Institution

 

[Publius1787]

View attachment 28763

The question "who cares about the poor the most" presupposes that caring about the poor is a responsibility.

It is only your responsibility if you feel that it is your responsibility or if someone forces you to assume responsibility.

Clearly there are those who don't feel this way.

Having said that, it would appear that those of faith are much more likely to help the poor.

Religious Faith and Charitable Giving | Hoover Institution

I would argue that we help the poor best when helping ourselves and capitalism has done more for the poor than any religious or bleeding heart liberal organization. Bill gates, for example, does way more good via jobs created by his greedy corporation as opposed to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

 

[bianco]

It's the federal govt's responsibility to see that all its citizens have enough food, enough shelter from the elements, enough warm clothes and blankets, and a job.

 

[Votto]

Compare charitable contributions between liberal politicians and conservatives. Liberals only want to use your money but conservatives use their own. When jfk first ran for office he walked along the poor and talked about how if he was elected he would make sure the federal government helped these people. He can from one of the richest families in America at the time and he didn't want to use a penny of his own money but he thought something needed to be done in Washington for the poor.

The interesting thing here is, over 90% of those of faith give to the poor and about 67% volunteer their time to the poor. However, those not of faith the numbers drop dramatically.

In addition, those who are of faith account for 57% who identify as conservative.

Even among liberals, those who were of faith gave much more than those who were not.

I think that the reasons for this are obvious. Most of us feel compelled to help those in need. However, conservatives usually get off their arse and help while the statist alleviates their conscience by supporting the role of the state take care of them.

 

[PixieStix]

It's the federal govt's responsibility to see that all its citizens have enough food, enough shelter from the elements, enough warm clothes and blankets, and a job.

You're kidding...right?

 

[Asclepias]

Its not about money. You get to write that off. Donate your time. There is no telling who donates more time and or money. It is a responsibility if you consider yourself human. So far we personally have helped 5 families this year have a christmas that would not have happened without assistance of time and money. Especially hard hit are some foster children. Anyone got any good stories of donating time or money this season?

 

[Votto]

The question "who cares about the poor the most" presupposes that caring about the poor is a responsibility.

It is only your responsibility if you feel that it is your responsibility or if someone forces you to assume responsibility.

Clearly there are those who don't feel this way.

Having said that, it would appear that those of faith are much more likely to help the poor.

Religious Faith and Charitable Giving | Hoover Institution

I would argue that we help the poor best when helping ourselves and capitalism has done more for the poor than any religious or bleeding heart liberal organization. Bill gates, for example, does way more good via jobs created by his greedy corporation as opposed to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

So you do care?

That is an argument, but the fact remains that those of faith statistically are actively making a difference while philosophers like yourself just have a theory.

Do you have any peer reviewed material to back up your claim?

 

[Votto]

It's the federal govt's responsibility to see that all its citizens have enough food, enough shelter from the elements, enough warm clothes and blankets, and a job.

You're kidding...right?

This is the thinking of many Progressive secularists. They have no responsibility other than expanding the government to take care of all of life's needs, including the need to take care of the poor for them.

 

[Mojo2]

It's the federal govt's responsibility to see that all its citizens have enough food, enough shelter from the elements, enough warm clothes and blankets, and a job.

Philosophically incorrect, mate.

The Government MAY address the needs of those who are indigent or dependent children or those out of work for whatever reason, but that isn't the Government's responsibility.

Once people think, as you do, that it is the government's responsibility, that is when abuse begins because people come to EXPECT the handouts to be provided.

Like bears at Yellowstone Park. Tourists are discouraged from feeding them because their health may suffer, because they become unfortunately well accustomed to humans and because it teaches them they needn't act like bears.

Instead they become dependent on handouts.

That means the people who get handouts become dependent on them and too many decide to stop striving for the optimal...a job...self sufficiency.

Independence.

At the sugar teat of Government entitlements. That's when and where all kinds of social ills begin to spawn.

LBJ tried it with his Great Society Program in the 1960's but it turned out to be a VERY mixed bag.

Many say more bad came from his good intentions than good.

[ TITLE: 11pm, JULY 25th 1967 ]

PRESIDENT LYNDON B. JOHNSON: Law and order have broken down in Detroit, Michigan. Pillage, looting, murder…

VO: Only a few years before, President Johnson had promised policies that would create a new and a better world in America. He had called it “the Great Society.”

[ TITLE: President LYNDON JOHNSON, 1964 )

JOHNSON: The Great Society is in place where every child can find knowledge to enrich his mind. It is a place where the City of Man…

VO: But now, in the wake of some of the worst riots ever seen in America, that dream seemed to have ended in violence and hatred. One prominent liberal journalist called Irving Kristol began to question whether it might actually be the policies themselves that were causing social breakdown.

IRVING KRISTOL: If you had asked any liberal in 1960, we are going to pass these laws, these laws, these laws, and these laws, mentioning all the laws that in fact were passed in the 1960s and ‘70s, would you say crime will go up, drug addiction will go up, illegitimacy will go up, or will they get down? Obviously, everyone would have said, they will get down. And everyone would have been wrong. Now, that’s not something that the liberals have been able to face up to. They’ve had their reforms, and they have led to consequences that they did not expect and they don’t know what to do about.

http://billstclair.com/nightmares/11.html

And now the liberals are at it again, without ever fixing the damage they caused in 1967!

 

[Spiderman]

And that guy walked away after got into his car with a few hundred bucks of tax free money and drove to his house.

 

[Asclepias]

It's the federal govt's responsibility to see that all its citizens have enough food, enough shelter from the elements, enough warm clothes and blankets, and a job.

You're kidding...right?

This is the thinking of many Progressive secularists. They have no responsibility other than expanding the government to take care of all of life's needs, including the need to take care of the poor for them.

Provide for the common good..... How do you interpret that?

 

[Publius1787]

It is only your responsibility if you feel that it is your responsibility or if someone forces you to assume responsibility.

Clearly there are those who don't feel this way.

Having said that, it would appear that those of faith are much more likely to help the poor.

Religious Faith and Charitable Giving | Hoover Institution

I would argue that we help the poor best when helping ourselves and capitalism has done more for the poor than any religious or bleeding heart liberal organization. Bill gates, for example, does way more good via jobs created by his greedy corporation as opposed to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

So you do care?

That is an argument, but the fact remains that those of faith statistically are actively making a difference while philosophers like yourself just have a theory.

Do you have any peer reviewed material to back up your claim?

Yes I do have material to back my claim. See below. Oh, and trust me, charity did not do this. Capitalism, industrialization, trade, and liberalization did this.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo]Hans Rosling's 200 Countries, 200 Years, 4 Minutes - The Joy of Stats - BBC Four - YouTube[/ame]

 

[percysunshine]

Who cares about the poor the most?

I do. Prove me wrong.

 

[Spiderman]

That "homeless " guy in the pic has more Tupperware than I do

 

[SteadyMercury]

The religion angle is interesting, but I wonder how much of those that check the box were considering what they give at the church as qualified giving, when much of that is to pay for the church itself.

I saw a stat that showed Utah was by far the most generous state in terms of charitable giving. That is very likely related to the high Mormon population which from my understanding has a much more regimented tithing process than most others. I doubt it is possible to know what percentage of that is used for things like temples and sending young men in white shirts to ride around on bikes in Argentina, but to me it kind of stretches giving when trying to make an apples to apples comparison with secular donors.

 

[Asclepias]

The religion angle is interesting, but I wonder how much of those that check the box were considering what they give at the church as qualified giving, when much of that is to pay for the church itself.

I saw a stat that showed Utah was by far the most generous state in terms of charitable giving. That is very likely related to the high Mormon population which from my understanding has a much more regimented tithing process than most others. I doubt it is possible to know what percentage of that is used for things like temples and sending young men in white shirts to ride around on bikes in Argentina, but to me it kind of stretches giving when trying to make an apples to apples comparison with secular donors.

There is no way to claim that one group or the other cares the most. There is no way to measure the value of time. Just get out and do both if you can.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Democrats wanna raise the minimum wage which results in fewer poor people. Republicans don't. Pretty clear who cares most.

Am for raising it to whatever amount keeps a full-time minimum wage worker above the Federal Poverty line. No reason a full-time worker should be below that threshold.