Rightwing Lie: Families and Charities Can Take Over for Social Programs

Jason Y writes:

It’s funny when the right wing bring up churches (They bring up this topic on Fox News.). They say the church does the social service in a libertarian society. Really? I’ve not seen it.
Another laughable right wing argument, is that charity from private individuals, would make up for any deficits caused by the end of socialism.

The rightwingers say we should wipe out all social programs for various reasons.
First they do not like their tax dollars going to poor people.
Second, they do not like the very idea of these programs because they are government social programs so in some sense they are a form of socialism. Rightwingers are automatically opposed to all forms of socialism no matter what as part of their ideology. They don’t care if these programs work or not. They don’t believe in them for ideological reasons.
Another reason is that in the US, the Republican Party wants to get rid of the idea that the government can help you in any way whatsoever. They hate the idea that some of these programs may actually work because they want everyone to hate government and think it does nothing good for you. If government doesn’t help you, you will want a minimal government on an ideological basis. Once good working government programs start making people happy and giving them what they want and need, people will start thinking that government is a good thing and that it helps me. They will come to like Big Government and government social programs and they do not people to like those things.
Rightwingers say that private charities and families can replace all the social programs they are going to wipe out. They are either ignorant or lying when they say this because they must know it’s not true. These guys are pretty smart, so I think most of them must know it’s a lie.
Wouldn’t it be cool if private charities and families could just cover all this stuff? We could wipe out a lot of stupid programs that just make White people vote Republican, save a lot of government money and lower our taxes.
Yes sure private charities, families and whatnot can bridge the gap somewhat. They are correct on that. But they already do that anyway to a great extent. And the fact that charities and families are not always able to step up to the plate and help everyone is the reason why we need government programs. I can’t pay for all my medical care, and my family can’t either. You think some private charity is going to step in and pay for my medical needs? Forget it.
So many people get no health care because they have no insurance. So many don’t get enough food. So many cannot afford a place to rent. So many are unable to work due to disabilities. Charities and families are not able to provide monthly living support cash, rent, food and health care to a lot of these folks, so that is why we have government medical aid (Medicaid), government housing (Section 8) and government food assistance (food stamps).

Please follow and like us:
Tweet 20

0 thoughts on “Rightwing Lie: Families and Charities Can Take Over for Social Programs”

  1. Neither families, private charities, churches, or corporations are able to help anyone on a massive scale. In addition, corporations in particular, have no motive to do so.
    The mechanics of poverty are too complex for private handouts to do the job. For one thing you have to fix the machine which causes poverty. For instance, what about the begging question, “Why are those starving children on TV infomercials poor, year after year?” ? Finally, if your unwilling to make massive changes (as the US is unwilling to do), then any handouts have to be state given to work.

  2. QUOTE “Rightwingers say that private charities and families can replace all the social programs they are going to wipe out. They are either ignorant or lying when they say this because they must know it’s not true. These guys are pretty smart, so I think most of them must know it’s a lie.”
    I don’t know. They might really believe it. Who knows what the brainwashed, even smart ones, will believe.

  3. A small portion of taxes that we pay should go to social programs. An itty bitty amount contributed by everybody. Then the non tax paying entity know as THE CHURCH should start doing out compassion for the needy. Followed by mandatory contributions from corporations. That is how it will work when I am elected

  4. If once you have property, the property tax was eliminated, families could stay on their properties for generations without having to be homeless if someone for some reason can’t pay the tax.

  5. There should be social programs for emergencies and disabilities but I think its being abused clearly. Welfare has created a lot of the recent crime of the 60s and later we didn’t really see before. It gives incentives for women to have multiple kids out of welfare. Europe is also attracting nonproductive immigrants because of welfare.

  6. How about National Socialism? A far-right racist ideology that provided a lot of government social welfare, though @ the expense of perceived internal & enemies such as Jews, Poles, & also stole a lot from the lands they conquered. Conquered people’s homes were given to homeless germans, Jew money provided health care, unemployment insurance, subsidized housing. It also provided incentives for women to have more children, as Germany’s population growth was slowing down compared to its neighbors.

    1. Conquered people’s homes were given to homeless germans

      Well 😆 isn’t that sweet of them, to provide homes for poor Germans at the expense of “conquered people”. 😆

  7. Two wrongs don’t make a right. Sure, Germany got a bad deal after World War I, but that didn’t justify murdering Jews and handicapped people, not to mention the massive military and civilian casualties of World War II. Also, overall, it was a sicko ideology.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Enjoy this blog? Please spread the word :)