Why should not those who have been blessed financially help those who have not?

I am sick and fucking tired of Rethugs and conservatives with their "me-me-me" attitude. These rich fatcats want to think that they live in an isolated world unto themselves. These are the same people who look down on the homeless, muttering under their breath "Why don't you get a job, you bum". The only charities they give to are the ones that match their particular religious beliefs, or ones that will help them get a bigger tax deduction. Conservatives claim that they are "compassionate" - yet want to deny children basic health insurance.

Maybe they should re-read the Preamble to the Constitution - that document that they claim to hold so dear, yet selectively memorize.

We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

One of the basic duties of government is to help provide for its citizens! There is something fundamentally wrong in this country when millions of people do not have basic health coverage, adequate food to eat, or a home to live in. At the same time, the number of millionaires and billionaires in this country is increasing at a record rate. Call me a "pinko" if you want, but it is our DUTY to ensure that EVERYONE in this country is properly cared for.

but you're painting with a v-e-r-y wide brush there. Not every wealthy person is Republican, looks down on the homeless (or anyone else, for that matter) or decides which charity to give to based on potential tax write-offs.

The issue isn't as black-and-white as you try to make it.

The ones in power and on the talk-show shows tend to have this "me-first" attitude, and look down on the less fortunate.

again, it's dangerous to paint with a wide brush. Are you saying EVERY wealthy person in power has a "me-first" attitude and looks down on the less fortunate? And are these people you know personally and have had personal insight into how they look at life or do you base this general assessment solely by what you see on TV, read in the paper or your own upbringing?

It's a bit like saying every Democrat is a "hippie" or every Republican is a rich idiot when, obviously, there are people in the South who aren't wealthy, but still vote Republican and there are Democrats who work on Wall Street and are anything but "hippies".

I generally agree with the premise of the OP, but I also recognize that some qualifiers might be handy.

don't think so - there are plenty of rich democrat politicians and donors.

have that 'I earned, I should get to keep it and screw the poor.' attitude.

There are many conservative, wealthy people who also happen to be very philanthropic. I think broad strokes like this usually back-fire.

I heartily agree that we all have a responsibility to each other, and that as a people, we have a responsibility to make priorities of ending hunger and homelessness. I *do* think there's an obligation, that we all share. Though I work in the non-profit world, I do not think that charity is the only answer to these entrenched problems. In many cases, government is the only really effective delivery system if we want to tackle the problems head-on.

We have to decide, as a society, whether we want to care for each other or to continue down the slippery slope we're on, where the "rugged individualist" is prized above all else, where "greed is good" and where those who advocate for cooperation, for the "common good" or for having compassion rather than disdain for those who are less fortunate are ridiculed.

You know, when I was a kid, I actually LIKED the song "Kum Ba Ya". And what the hell IS so funny about peace, love and understanding????

God simply blessed some people with wealth.

Now sure. God did bless SOME people with wealth, and it annoys the hell out of me that they act like having that money is a mark of virtue whether or not they (or anyone) earned that money for them. But there are certainly Americans who have earned their money. Many are Democrats. Many of those Democrats have limits when it comes to how much they want people who are of able body and mind who are not earning their own money to get help from the government; as a matter of law, 'the general welfare' guarantees nothing to any specific individual. (This is in the same manner as how police are obligated to protect the public, but cannot be sued for not protecting YOU if a mugger beats you over the head in a dark alley where no policeman happened to be close at hand.)

When you say it is our duty to ensure that everyone is properly cared for, you are wrong.

We can choose to make it our duty, but that is a matter of political policy, not a constitutional mandate. And for the record, inasmuch as it is done properly and wisely, I support such political policies.

My family is wealthy. My grandfather's grandfather's grandfather made a ton and it has been passed down generation after generation, so not only do I have insight into how one CAN be raised to look at it -- we were taught it's no big deal and not a qualifier for what kind of person you are --, I also have insight into how those who aren't in the same financial situation can attempt to take advantage. In essence, getting a lot for doing nothing despite the clear ability and intelligence to work hard and achieve.

I believe we, as a society, can do better when there's a more equal playing field. But that's assuming that everyone has the same honorable intentions, is willing to give back when they find themselves in a position to do so and that one's natural competitive streak won't rise to the surface, creating another cycle of "I have more, so I'm better than you" and attempt to exert power over everyone else.

None of that can be guaranteed, so it's quite difficult to put into place what you speak of.

this world could do well without-

I can't say it is only a 'republic' problem,-
but I agree with your idea that when we all have enough, everyone benefits.

peace~

But did you have title the thread in King James English?

A lot of rethugs that I know will say that they've been "blessed" when they're well-off. It's just a saying that I've gotten used to, and I really couldn't come up with a better way to put it off the top of my head.

in other words, I basically agree with your point, not any stereotypes, but the basic contention that if you have a lot you should give a lot.

one of the basic duties of government is to help it's citizens provide for themselves.

some of those rich people you are dissing ARE LIBERALS and GIVE MONEY to good causes

Paint with wide brushes much?

By the way... blessed, how Protestant Ethic of you.

Re-read the post. I'm not calling out everyone who is wealthy - it's squarely aimed at rethugs and conservatives who think that government should keep its dirty paws off their money, that those less fortunate should just pick themselves up by their bootstraps.

But can any government guarantee your success? You can attempt to give everyone the same starting line but some people are going to do better than others.

but about providing a social safety net, and preventing severe poverty.

Some people will indeed do better than others in any society. Absolute economic equality has never happened *anywhere* - certainly not in the so-called communist countries that claimed to guarantee it. But many countries do expect to provide sufficient social support that (at least in theory) no one will be at risk of starving, or of suffering extreme deprivation. I agree with the OP that those rich or would-be-rich people who condemn such policies, and think that poor people deserve their fate, make society more uncivilized, and should also bear in mind that one day they or a family member could be in a vulnerable position and need help.

What do they do when hard knocks or unfortunate times hits them? They blame any minority or oppressed peoples they figure TOOK their good fortunes away.

It's a vicious cycle they live where actual compassion or basic empathy is NOT ALLOWED. In their world, compassion and empathy is a weakness.

If I ever have the good fortune of acquiring wealth, I would avoid the world of the "ENTITLED" with a passion.

Democrats Think The Glass Is Half Full and Republicans Think The Glass Is Theirs.

Selfishness, Narcissism, It's all about ME, ME, ME, ME!!!!!!!

Good post! :hi:

when they know that others are in need. I work for every penny I make, but I NEVER keep it all for myself.

have some assurance that the money was going to help those less fortunate, rather than being pissed away on some stupid fucking pointless war.

I really would.

Redstone