(If you’re just joining this series, feel free to read the previous installments.)
Welfare — Has it Helped the Poor? (Part 2)
In Part One, we looked at how the “War on Poverty” — as well intentioned as it surely was — turned out to be an abysmal failure, creating not only more poor, but trapping these unfortunate souls within a system escaped by all too few, while effectively stripping them of their dignity and sense of self-reliance.
I suggested that, quite simply, if we wanted to truly help the poor (as opposed to merely providing lip service to helping the poor) then we needed to get government out of the Welfare business; a place in which they have proved to be totally incompetent.
As this entire series places a high value on understanding premises in order to come to logical conclusions, here are the two very well-intended questions asked by those who care deeply about the poor, believe totally in the Welfare System and can’t see how anyone or anything other than a government bureaucracy (the same body that has failed miserably at this for more than 50 years) can possibly help them:
Question: “Are you saying then that we shouldn’t help the poor? That we should just leave them on their own to starve?”
Answer: Absolutely not. In fact, just the opposite. I’m saying that it is our absolute moral responsibility as human beings to help the poor. (The key word being “help”).
Question: But, if the government doesn’t do it, who will?
Answer: THIS is the crux of the matter, and I shudder in both disbelief and sadness hearing that question as often as I do, not just in terms of this topic but when asked about practically everything else government has managed to completely mangle while fooling its citizens into believing that they are helping.
Wait! I’m going to correct myself here. I don’t think government really has fooled its citizens into thinking it has helped (by and large, the masses no longer believe that), but here’s what it has done which is just as dangerous: it’s fooled its citizens into believing that nothing but government could possibly help. And, when that’s the case, people will helplessly sit back and say, “go ahead.”
When it comes to Welfare, of course, this results in numerous problems; just a few being:
#1 The same actions and the same results. We’ve all heard the well-known definition of insanity; “doing the same thing over and over while expecting different results.” What we’re doing now is even worse: the same thing over and over – that isn’t working – knowing we’re going to get the same results, and encouraging it anyway!
#2 Less volunteerism because “government is already doing it.” (Yes, there is still lots of volunteerism, but not nearly as much as there would be, and these volunteers and their organizations are often hamstrung by the very government agencies that see them as competition!)
#3 Less charity money raised because “government is already doing it.” Despite that, individuals still give a lot but not nearly as much as if government was not as actively involved.
#4 A huge waste of taxpayer money. This because, unlike charitable organizations, which must be accountable to their donors and typically have administrative fees around 25-35 percent, the government Welfare System (based on force, remember?) works on just about opposite numbers with an average of 65-75 percent of ever taxed dollar being used to support the bureaucracy administering the system.
#5 A much smaller percentage of people who are ever helped off of welfare. In fact, they are often encouraged to get on and, through numerous rules, regulations and some really weird reverse incentives outside the space and scope of this blog, are “encouraged” to stay on and stay dependent. This again is opposite of a private charity.
In the next installment … we’ll look at a Free-Market solution to helping those who cannot help themselves and need either temporary or ongoing assistance.
Enjoy this post? Receive an update when our next post is published by entering your best email address below and clicking Get Updates.
What I find most interested in speaking with government welfare advocates is many only hear that we don’t care about the poor which is not only completely false, it is completely opposite of our message.
Getting government out of Welfare and going with more efficient means to assist less fortunate Americans actually works to the benefit of those receiving the assistance and is better for the Nation as a whole.
Suggesting otherwise is either complete propaganda or a complete misunderstanding.
Karl, I think that, 9 times out of 10 the people who say that are well-intentioned but truly don’t understand. They’ve learned something based on certain false premises and they see everything based from that mode. Of course, there is that 10th out of 10 who does know but chooses to confuse things because they serve their own best interests. … Read MoreTypically, those are the politicians or bureacurats whose jobs depend on keeping everyone else ignorant. A shame indeed, but also why we’ve got to keep getting our message out, and in a kind and diplomatic fashion so that the well-intentioned people will listen.
And…by the way, great points!
Hi Bob,
I just saw a movie on the internet called Zeitgeist Addendum (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7065205277695921912)
Towards the end of the movie, the narrator says we’re approaching a doomsday scenario where the country will be in total bankruptcy resulting in an economic contraction never before seen that will collapse society.
I really don’t know what to think of the movie, because I don’t know how to check its premises. Is this fear mongering and propaganda to push a movement –or is there some truth to this?
I’d really like to know what you think about this as it relates to capitalism and socialism and the monetary system.
“It’s the job of the government” is certainly an expression that we all hide behind sometimes to justify our lack of involvement, especially where those in needs are concerned.
I believe that our problem lie in our desire to free ourselves from heavy responsibility. I believe so because I ask myself “who is the government?” I mean are there people somewhere whose last names are “The Government” and I am waiting for them to come and tell me what’s working and what’s not?
When I ask “If the government does not do it, who will?” Am I saying that when I am appointed to an office I’ll start caring for the poor but for now that I am not I won’t?
I believe that If we all go back to the thought that it is our responsability to take care of our own, then the question is not whether or not the government should be doing it, but instead what’s working and what’s not.
Hi David, I’ve never seen the movie, don’t know who produced it or the group behind it so I’m totally unqualified to answer any part of the question dealing with their motives or intent in producing the movie. And, regarding their conclusion, I certainly can’t make predictions such as that. However, there is no question that government meddling has caused the natural laws of supply and demand (as well as the general laws of free enterprise) to be broken. We are seeing some of those effects right now. Obviously, in reading the posts as you have, you know I don’t believe that the cure to government meddling is to have more government meddling so solve the very problems they created. But, that’s what they’re doing. What will be the result and when? I don’t know. Thanks for writing.
Sandrine, you make an excellent point. People use the term “the government” as though it’s some mysterious, all-wise, all-knowing benevolent entity. Of course, it is simply a group of individuals, all of whom have their own personalities, styles, levels of intelligence, etc. I would say they are neither better nor worse than anyone else, though typically, one distinguishing characteristic about the actual politicians is that they love power – power over others. And, the bureacrats; again, while individuals, tend to have personality types that are more interested in protecting the status quo than in helping those they supposedly work for (i.e. the taxpayers).
So, why would the typical citizen choose to put their trust in this entity called the government? I don’t know. It most likely has to do with a sense of expediency; that being that it is simply easier (at least in the short run) to not bother thinking about the ramifications of such.
You also make a great point when you say, “Am I saying that when I am appointed to an office I’ll start caring for the poor but for now that I am not I won’t?”
It’s a great point. And, as Charles Murray pointed out (paraphrased)years ago, “Government typically doesn’t enact policy that people then follow. The wait until the people have made it know that’s what they want, and then government enacts policy in accordance with the publics’ wishes. Of course, because they make it law, they (that mysterious body known as “the government”) get the credit for it.
Thank you for sharing.
hey bob,
Watching the movie has disturbed me. I am not very bright, so i am hoping you will watch the movie and tell me it’s not true….or at the very least have an opinion about it. Just watch the movie when you get the chance and give me your reaction. Thank you.
Hi David, I disagree with your saying that you’re not very bright. I’ve been receiving correspondences from you for a couple of years now. You’re very bright.
Regarding the movie, I choose not to invest my time in watching this one. One thought, however: I know you are a fan of Wallace Wattles and his 1910 classic, “The Science of Getting Rich.” Go back to what he would say regarding outside circumstances beyond your control. Would have have you focus on those and all the negative feelings that would ensue? You know the answer to that.
Of course, that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t take interest in them in order to best protect ourselves and those we care about. And, it doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try and actively do something about it in order to hopefully bring about awareness and hopefully begin to change things for the better(which is why I write the blog posts on this very politially-incorrect topic).
However, it also best to not get so emotionally caught up in it that it keeps us from doing the best possibly thing, holding the best possibly thoughts, and taking the best possible action at the present moment.
Thanks again.
Hi Dear Bob,
It might be too late to comment on this one, and if so, it doesn’t have to go anywhere but to you. 🙂
I know that your BLOG is talking about Welfare and I’m going to swing back around and pick that up by bringing in what I know best, first:
I’ve asked lots of doctors and nurses if they would be willing to volunteer some of their time to help uninsured patients?
And the answer is always, “Yes, but…”
They would if they could breathe again and practice medicine with joy and freedom.
Why can’t they breathe?
The government has suffocated healthcare for so long that the volunteer time doctors and nurses could use to help the uninsured is being set aside for trying to please the government and the government’s regulations in regard to healthcare.
The money spent by the government to reform healthcare since 1982 could have been used in so many more important and healthy ways. (Is it too late to go there?)
Healthcare, like people on Welfare, is in a trap of help.
When people start looking to others to help them, they stop looking to themselves.
I have a friend who was a missionary overseas for one of the poorest countries, and he was told ahead of time, “You will want to give people money, but don’t do it…because if you do, they will be in a trap of looking to you for help, instead of themselves. You can teach them, yes, but do not stifle their ability to learn and to help themselves.”
When my friend told me that story, I thought of enablers and then I thought of the government as an enabler…(but for what?)
The government begins helping and then stifles.
I THANK my stubborn, southern, self-reliant mind-set that would never allow me to take handouts from the government, even when I was told at one time in my life (and I knew it was true for a short time), “You would be better off on Welfare than what you are now.”
I missed out on a lot of free stuff in my life, but that free stuff would have cost me a lot more than it was worth in the long run. (If I had been in that trap, I don’t think I would have fought so hard to prove I didn’t need help).
How much do we really want the government’s help?
Did you hear about the latest stimulus package? It’s the AIG bailout. (Sorry, I couldn’t help myself…but it IS kind of funny!)…
Thank you for the opportunity to comment, even if it is just to you, 🙂
Pamela
Pamela, it is never too late to post a comment on an article, especially when the comment has so much useful information, as does yours. The lessons you cite are powerful and, especially with regards to healthcare, your knowledge is totally first-hand. Eventually I’ll be writing a multi-part article regarding what the government has done to our once terrific, market-based healthcare system. When I do, I hope you’ll repeat some of the comments from the above in that comment section. Thank you again.
By the way, what comes through from you is another great lesson. You truly want to help the less fortunate. So often, believers in big-government believe that proponents of small government don’t care about the poor. As Karl Dickey commented above, that’s simply false. The question – I believe – still comes down to, “Who is more qualified to help the poor?” I don’t believe the answer has in any way proved to be “government.”
Thank you, Bob,
I look forward to reading anything you have to write about. And I look forward to commenting on things I know a little about.
I’m trying not to comment too much because I could probably comment too much! 🙂 In fact, I wanted to comment on Karl Dickey’s comment (because he completely understands).
Thank you again,
Pamela
Very good info thank you, keep us up to date.