Charity: private sector, not gov't.

Northland

Sexy Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2007
Posts
5,924
Media
0
Likes
39
Points
123
Sexuality
No Response
Charity and control has been the Democrats method to power and it has worked well but it is time to end this non sense and perversion of the America people.

Save a few, very rare exceptions, we need get gov't out of the business of charity.

This wasn;t a Dem vs. Repub rant. It is a rant against gov't. I'm sick of the gov't unsing my tax dollars to gain favor with anyone.
That's a crock, your opening post clearly took aim at the Democrats.


conntom said:
Let's see the people of this country and the Bill Gate types help our country so the gov't can focus and what it needs to do. Proect and defend. Provide infrastructure. Govern international situations and manage business to avoid the evil that can and would otherwise come out of Capitalism.

We the people can take care of the charity and most of the social welfare situations.

I believe, once we actually became good at this we could talk to the world about how to run a country. Instead we have people in our own society, poor, broken, can;t afford to be sick or take care of a sick child, can;t afford medical coverage, jobless - don;t get me started on the condition of our cities and people that live in fear due to rampant crime. Drugs. How about the people in our country that live ass second class citizens?
It is not up to Gates, Bloomberg, Winfrey, Forbes or others to take the people out of their situation. The Government asks for and reciieves monetary revenue from the people (as in taxes), these monies need to be distributed properly, through correctly administrated programs which are designed to help people move back onto and up the ladder of life, when adversity knocks them down.
conntom said:
Our system is all messed up.

No I have no article. I didn't think that was a prereq. It's just one person's opinion.

Yes, there are difficulties with how things are, taking all away, and then expecting the Millionaires Club to finance everything is not the answer. Vote in new people to change who is in charge, if you think the current people (Congress, Senate, local leaders) are doing a terrible job. Run for office yourself, if you think you can do a better job.
 

houtx48

Cherished Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2006
Posts
6,900
Media
0
Likes
309
Points
208
Gender
Male
I once read that Americans gave more to charity than any other country in the world, don't know where so can't quote it, but I believe it's probably true.
 

Satsfakshun

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2004
Posts
843
Media
0
Likes
57
Points
248
Location
Indianapolis, IN
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
He is right. Let's see the people of this country and the Bill Gate types help our country so the gov't can focus and what it needs to do.


How in the world would charitable groups, churches and Bill Gates be able to provide a meaningful, coordinated response on the scale of something like hurricane Katrina? Yep, those lifeboats always seem like a big waste of time and money until you bump into an iceberg.
 

D_Davy_Downspout

Account Disabled
Joined
Dec 5, 2004
Posts
1,136
Media
0
Likes
18
Points
183
Charity belongs to the private sector and the population and not gov't where it can be used to control people and garner votes.

Charity and control has been the Democrats method to power and it has worked well but it is time to end this non sense and perversion of the America people.

Save a few, very rare exceptions, we need get gov't out of the business of charity.

The government does not engage in charity. It provides for the welfare of the people that make up it.

If you're trying to say that if the government were to cut social spending completely, that the private sector would fill the void, that's remarkable.

That has never happened in the history of the world, ever, and there's little evidence to expect it would. You might want to crack an economics textbook at some point.
 

maxcok

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2009
Posts
7,153
Media
0
Likes
125
Points
83
Location
Elsewhere
Gender
Male
Guess who are the most charitable givers in American society? Surprise, surprise:

"In fact, America's poor donate more, in percentage terms, than higher-income groups do, surveys of charitable giving show. What's more, their generosity declines less in hard times than the generosity of richer givers does.

"The lowest-income fifth (of the population) always give at more than their capacity," said Virginia Hodgkinson, former vice president for research at Independent Sector, a Washington-based association of major nonprofit agencies. "The next two-fifths give at capacity, and those above that are capable of giving two or three times more than they give."

What makes poor people's generosity even more impressive is that their giving generally isn't tax-deductible, because they don't earn enough to justify itemizing their charitable tax deductions. In effect, giving a dollar to charity costs poor people a dollar while it costs deduction itemizers 65 cents."

chart ..America's poor are its most generous givers | McClatchy


". . . the most common explanation for the lack of giving is a perceived deficiency of means: Two-thirds of nondonors say that they simply cannot afford to give. This sounds reasonable. There are plenty of Americans having trouble making ends meet, so why give away what little money they have? Thus we can logically assume that most of the Americans who don't give are poor, right?

Wrong. In fact, Americans at the bottom of the income-distribution pyramid are the country's biggest givers per capita. The 2000 Social Capital Community Benchmark Survey shows that households with incomes below $20,000 gave a higher percentage of their earnings to charity than did any other income group: 4.6 percent, on average. As income increased, the percentage given away declined: Households earning between $50,000 and $100,000 donated 2.5 percent or less. Only at high income levels did the percentage begin to rise again: For households with incomes over $100,000, the number was 3.1 percent.*

If the poor are doing so much giving, who are the folks who claimed in Independent Sector's 2001 survey that they can't afford to? Ironically, this is a typical upper-income excuse. Among the people with above-average incomes who did not give charitably in the year 2000, a majority of survey respondents said they didn't have enough money. And they probably believe it. We live in a country in which three out of five families carry balances on their credit cards from month to month and the average household debt for consumer items is about $18,000."

Poor Give More To Charity - News Markets - Portfolio.com

* Note: This is from a much earlier study included here for comparison with the McClatchy survey. Giving among those earning $100K or more is now down to between 2% and 2.1% of income, the lowest percentage of income on the survey. I guess the Great Recession hit everybody hard. :rolleyes:

Of course, comparing giving as a percentage of income doesn't even begin to tell the story. The fact that the most generous people are those struggling to pay for basic necessities is remarkable. The more disposable income one has, the percent that could be given to charity increases exponentially, but instead, it drops. The numbers clearly show that the higher people are on the economic ladder, the stingier they are. Furthermore, the wealthy are very good at using charitable contributions to offset their tax 'burden'. Most rich people don't get that way by accident. Those who complain about social welfare programs are just stingy bastards who want somebody else to pay. "Greed is good." :biggrin1:

If we rely on those of means to provide 'charity', the disadvantaged will surely be up shit creek.
 
Last edited:

Levi

1st Like
Joined
Apr 10, 2010
Posts
41
Media
2
Likes
1
Points
43
Location
England
Sexuality
90% Straight, 10% Gay
Gender
Male
I'll tell you what Cletus, the world has gone to hell in a handcart, next thing you know they will be giving jobs 'n votes to 'em uppity nigroids instead of giving 'em a good ole hangin like in the good ole days.A good ole hanging an flogging is all these gay single mothers understands.Now we've got starving kids expecting the state to help them out, disgusting is what I calls it. Also now we have gay single mothers getting free health care, we should rename the country the United States of goddam commie Russia.
Anyway look out for 'em goddam commie liberals they is agettin all uppity agin, you fetch the smell hound and uncle Earl, I'll fetch the shotgun.
 
Last edited:

FuzzyKen

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2006
Posts
2,045
Media
0
Likes
98
Points
193
Gender
Male


I am a little puzzled here. The main thing I seem to hear from the original poster is a great deal of ultra conservative rhetoric. It is exactly the same rhetoric that we have all heard from generations of ultra conservatives.

Historically Republicans tend to run on anti-taxation platforms. Yet, the two most respected members of that Party namely Ronald Reagan and Georege H.W. Bush were involved and a major part of the largest tax increases in United States History. Ronald Wilson Reagan was also in office and responsible for the largest tax hikes in the history of the State of California after he became Governor of that State. This would kind of tend to indicate that the rule at least under these two revered examples of conservatism was say one thing to get elected and then do something else after the people said "we trust you".

George W. Bush was an insult to every ideal of the Republican Party. Under George W. Bush a program came into being called "No Child Left Behind". He came up with it, he talked about it, it was passed, and many school districts still have never seen funding from that program because it seems that this much touted and talked about program never has really done much of anything.

The ever conservative Republican party under the effervescent leadership of Daryl Issa started a smear and removal campaign to remove Democratic Governor Gray Davis from office in the State of California before he was even elected. The paperwork to remove Gray Davis was filed the same day he took office. He had not even had a chance to screw up the job.

They bankrolled Arnold Swarzenegger into that position. Swarzenegger, a bright man, but not knowing that he had been a "sacrificial lamb" took office and followed the ideals of his party. California DMV offices designed for a staff of 60 people under repeated budget cuts were cut to a staff of less than 20 people. To renew a Drivers License in some California DMV offices can require sitting in a chair for as many as 5-8 hours. School budgets were cut to the point that teachers were buying classroom supplies out of their own pockets. Teachers having gone many years without a pay raise have left California Schools in large numbers simply because they can no longer put food on the table for their own families.

It is true that public schools can no longer in many cases compete with private schooling. The reason for this is that there is simply no money going to these institutions of learning. The teachers working in private schools in fact tend to have lower educational requirements than those in public schools, but, they have greater success because they have the equipment.

Websters Dictionary has some very interesting definitions of the words "Conservative" and "Liberal". The word "liberal" has been completely demonized by the extreme right and extreme conservatives. It's actual definition is far different from what has been done to it by political causes out to feather their own nests.

There was a time that the Republican Party stood for good things with a different viewpoint.

The sad truth is that the Republican Party has been "bought and paid for" by Corporate America and has become a rubber stamp for everything that Corporations and Individuals of vast wealth want. We now for a second time in United States History have the poor and middle class supporting the ultra wealthy in the style of life in which they want to continue to live. We tighten our belts again and again, they could care less, and the lies become more and more blatant.

The saddest fact is that many who support the current Republican ideals do not realize that in so doing they are heavily damaging themselves. Under Republican and past financial guidelines the laws that protected all of us were totally undermined by those who stood to profit from their modification into nothing or their elimination completely.

After the 1929 Crash and resulting economic disaster which spread world wide, laws were enacted to prevent runaway Corporations and "Robber Barons" from doing what they wanted at the expense of the American People. It took over 60 years for the erosion of the laws and another twenty to place us back exactly in the same place again. The difference is that this time good or bad the stinking corporate welfare as bad as it is has slowed or prevented the complete crash that we had 80 years ago.

Right now oil costs per barrel are plummeting to lower and lower costs. Have you noticed the increases in motor fuel costs over the past few weeks? Oil Companies are just one of the industries that needs to come under heavy Government Regulation.

If we cannot trust a Corporation to be honest and police itself we have not alternative but to have Government or some equivalent legal force step in and say. You cannot gouge the American People and get away with it because somebody will speak up and defend the American People against abuses. The same is true for banking and many other industries which have screwed the American Consumer into the ground.

To complicate all of this we now have former 3rd world countries emerging as huge economic powers simply because Americans can no longer afford to purchase the goods we make here. Our industrial giants then take production of our consumer goods away from American workers and place it with less qualified foreign workers. The jobs are lost and the Americans in the short sighted glory of corporate wisdom can no longer afford to buy the goods they make. As the markets dwindle from this thinking we now have Corporations bought out by foreign concerns and this short sighted thinking is happening world wide.

A few examples:

Jaguar of England: Sold to Ford Motor Company of the United States then sold to TATA of India.

Rolls Royce of England: Sold to BMW of Bavaria.
Bentley of England: Sold to Volkswagen of Germany
Ferrari of Italy: Sold to Fiat
Saab of Sweden: GM bit off more than they could chew and folded the company.
Hummer: GM bought and literally hounded AM General to buy the product. They wanted the military contracts. GM then cheapened the military versions, refused to update the powertrains in corporate blunder and only well heeled rich children bought the luxurious H1. They created the H2 based on a 1/2 ton truck chassis and invented one of the worst gas guzzlers in history. GM in a typical GM move ran the company into the ground by building gas guzzling SUV's until the genius H3. Until the H3 they built things people did not want and ran it into the ground and folded it.

It doesn't stop there. How many remember the Zenith Television Set? Zenith was started in Chicago Illinois in the early years of the 20th century. By the 1960's the were the largest selling television in the U.S. They are now owned by LG of Korea and are marketed as LG's cheapie entry level product. RCA is now made in Mexico and is foreign owned.

The American People have been fed a great deal of false information for decades. The ultimate successes of SONY is but one example. Before the advent of plasma, LCD and LED televisions we had CRT based sets. SONY made many good portables, but when they went to consoles they made total crap and then did not support the sets. The 26" SONY CRT based televisions used a 19" chassis and boosted the voltage to the focus coils to make a 19 inch chassis work on a 26" picture tube. It did work until it blew the flyback transformer again and again.

What we need are people in office with balls who will tell Chrysler, GM, and Ford that you can't build trucks in Mexico with Cheap labor because we are going to tax every vehicle you bring in this way.

Welfare and Social programs are an example of the failures not of party but of corporate greed gone unchecked. If people had jobs available with medical coverage and the rest this would all be a mute point.

Given the results of the past forty years of conservative dominance and the results it has brought us, I am sad to say that in all honesty I have to give the other guys a chance and see what they can do.

It was not always this way, but right now what we have is Democrat equals change good or bad and Republican seems to equal Roadblock to anything in any direction unless it is creating more wealth for the top 5% of U.S. incomes.

Americans have historically been the most giving nation worldwide and this is something of which we can be proud. We have historically helped others unable to fight for themselves. However for the most part this has come through the American People NOT through the American Corporation.
Under current Corporate Ideals the ONLY interest in the world is profit and grab the gold while you can get it. When Bob Nardelli was first fired from Home Depot as CEO he was given a huge milti-million dollar severance package just before he was hired to become CEO of the American Portion of Daimler-Chrysler which he also made a mess of. Mr. Nardelli was again given a huge severance package to say goodbye from Chrysler. Nardelli, not a "gear head" after leaving financial disaster at Home Depot then started stripping the good out of Chrysler. Nardelli was the one who really placed Chrysler in heavy red ink. This must be a really philanthropic guy.

As much as the concept of corporations funding social programs sounds interesting the problem is that there is no manner in which it can be done, policed, regulated and watched to prevent worthless CEO's from profiting or trying to turn a profit from a charity.

With regards to a certain software executive I can not imagine how efficient a corporate charity would be if it operated as well as Windows Vista.


 
D

deleted3782

Guest
Charity belongs to the private sector and the population and not gov't where it can be used to control people and garner votes.

Charity and control has been the Democrats method to power and it has worked well but it is time to end this non sense and perversion of the America people.


Save a few, very rare exceptions,
we need get gov't out of the business of charity.

Seems the government will put a quarter of all charities out of business by revoking their tax-exempt status.
"The new law, embedded in the 393 pages of the Pension Protection Act of 2006, also directed the Internal Revenue Service to revoke the tax exemptions of groups that failed to file for three consecutive years. Three years have passed, and thus the deadline looms."- NYT.
 

Zeuhl34

Expert Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2008
Posts
2,027
Media
19
Likes
144
Points
208
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
If any "charity" should be revoked of their tax exemption status, it should be religion.

Agreed. If a religious group has enough spare cash to buy TV airtime for political ads (the Mormons in CA and the Catholics in ME), they really ought to be made to pay taxes.
 

Bbucko

Cherished Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2006
Posts
7,232
Media
8
Likes
325
Points
208
Location
Sunny SoFla
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
The OP seems to have started this thread after more than a coupla cocktails, offered a flaccid response to some of the more pointed refutations of his "points" then abandoned his thread entirely.

Where I come from, this is called a drive-by shitting.

As to his argument against food stamps: what would he say to the tens of thousands of troops whose families depend on food stamps* to feed themselves?

*Note: a legitimate counterpoint made with a link to a non-partisan news article, in this case a story from military.com: imagine!
 

conntom

Cherished Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2008
Posts
2,170
Media
1
Likes
253
Points
208
Location
Boston (Massachusetts, United States)
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
Not so fast Bucko!

The idea was simple. You clowns made it hard.

1)The business of taking care of folk when they need it is easily abused into a vote gathering mechanism.

2) This does not include making people pay into a system they later receive a benefit from.

3) We have a somewhat independent system running our banking system. We should start something similar for "charity" :)

4) Learn how to properly take care of our own country and people before we tell the world how to do it when we screw it up at home thoroughly...

It's an idea folks. I thought it good to discuss, but their is no discussion on the lpsg.org political area. Therefore I have dropped out of it mostly.

Bucko...What would I say about the army families? I think we treat them horribly and underpay them vastly. Meanwhile our elected reps give themselves pay raises and stuff pork into many bills. That is what I would say.
 
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Posts
106
Media
0
Likes
1
Points
53
Yeah I just decided to skip all the stupid comments and respond directly to your first post: the democrats are not part of some big evil conspiracy to control every aspect of your life and if private charity was the amazingly perfect solution to everything, then Africa would be a paradise on earth. How about we try building airports or a national highway network with private charity? Of course not, because that's just silly and you know it.

This sort of attitude is the outcome of the worst aspects of politics where people ignore all reason and accept only the most extreme and illogical stances on their side.