I am struggling to think of justification for this, and I would like to understand if anybody knows some reasonable explanation for why this happens. The closest I've heard to an explanation is that individuals should take care of people around them. I agree that they should, but why shouldn't the government also help? Especially since individuals don't seem to be sufficiently helping all our poor...
If you have respectful thoughts and ideas, I would love to hear them!
4 comments:
In terms of government assisting those in need as opposed to private organizations/citizens/enterprise doing so, my observations would lead me to believe that society has begun to see that sort of assistance as the job of government where it previously was not. Prior to the 1930’s, government did very little to aid those of its citizens who had fallen on hard times. As the New Deal began, followed by the massive expansion of the scope and influence that came with World War II, followed by the social programs of the Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, and Carter administrations, the shifting of responsibility became more complete. This was, and is, accompanied by a not-so-subtle ostracism of organized religion from the public sphere. Whereas something like a soup kitchen or homeless shelter used to be a religious undertaking, these activities are now often undertaken by government. Religious organizations are discouraged from doing so under the theory that people in need should not have to endure a sermon should they not want to. Case in point; President Bush and Republicans in Congress were heavily criticized when they directed Federal social service funds to churches and other similar organizations.
So would you say that by allowing our government to take the role of providing social assistance, it destroys more individual/small scale operations since individuals begin to feel less responsibility? I can see that as being a problem, sadly. You know a lot more about history and government than I do, so out of your understanding of history, do you think that the poor would be better off with the majority of the responsibility on individuals or on the government (which should be OF the people, we hope!)?
Also, are religious organizations discouraged or simply not encouraged by the government? I understand the worry of people when the government gives money to religious organizations. However, churches and other organizations are still just as free as before to do programs in their communities, aren't they?
Thanks for your reply! :)
As to your first question, I would say yes. I would also say that given a choice between seeking assistance from a private operation, particularly a small one, and the government, most people would choose government. Thus when government provides these services, others who might wish to do so are boxed out by simple economics. However, it must also be said that I could be completely wrong.
Whether religious charity is discouraged or simply not encouraged is very dependant on who you ask, their view of religion, and their view on the role of government. Government will not simply come out and say “Stop giving food to the homeless, you mean, mean church,” but where the money goes and where it doesn’t go speaks far more than words ever could. You are correct in saying that religious organizations are still free to act as they please, but the food and shelter they provide have to come from somewhere. As government ramps up the social services it provides, it too must pay for it somewhere, and taxes go up accordingly. With less money coming in each month due to those tax hikes, people are less inclined to donate what they have left. Granted, that is a fairly anti-tax argument, but I’m a fairly anti tax person.
Glad I can be of help. ☺
Thanks, Rockne. It was good to hear what you have to say.
On a separate note, thanks for being brave enough to admit that your ideas could be wrong. It's really hard to fully understand cause and effect with such a large-scale thing, isn't it?! I respect that quality about you.
I hope you are doing well!
Post a Comment