should we give money to the poor?

[LatinaHottie]

hey ,
i did this topic the other day in my debate class and i was wondering what you all thought about it-!! write back.-

[Seeker_Of_Sins]

What money are we giving them?

What are they using it for?

Where doe's the money come from?

Who qualifies for the money?

Is it distributed locally or internationally?

Is it distributed by a government or charity agency?

[Scribbler1]

Why not? It's our money and we can spend it any way we want. I prefer to do it mainly because it goes where I want it and isn't decided by the government as to who is deserving. Seeker asks valid questions but I don't give a lot at any one time and I have a fair idea whatever the recipient may be is legit. That's good enough for me.

I read some time back that the U.S. is the most charitable society in the world, based on the amount of money we give to charities. I'm not sure is that is still correct but I hope so.

[Bob]

Both by biblical and common sense standards one should not just give money to the poor, and anything else for that matter. Jesus never gave anyone anything that was not a saved righteous person. He never healed a person who was not a saved righteous person.

Charity to make any sense must only be given to saved righteous people. For each of us is responsible for the charity we give. If you give a quarter to a bum on the street and he uses it to buy and knife and kill someone, whoever gave them the quarter is a murderer. So be careful what you give to whom.

I think the sort of person, (Democrat) who would give a quarter to a bum on the street is the most evil, hateful and destructive of persons. Does that answer your question?

[castille]

I would prefer to give a job to the poor rather than money. If you give your money to those beggars, they get all their friends to go to you and beg for more.

You teach a man to fish and he'll do it for life. You give him a fish and he'll ask for another.

[Karin]

Boob, what bible are you reading? Even the night before his death he healed a soldier that was attacking peter. I hope I am misreading sarcasm. Also, it is 2004, I can't buy a stick of gum for a quarter, let alone a knive.

By your logic, all of the parishoners who drop money into a collection basket each week are responsible for the priests molestation of little boys.

I think that there is no way we can expect people to come up from rock bottom to become productive members of society. It is a bigger drain on us to NOT help them than it is to try and do what we can. I am all for giving help to the poor.

[bishop]

money has been spent on the poor in sweden, and they've completely eliminated poverty.

oppositely, the german government doles out large sums of welfare to east germany (which has 20% unemployment) and they don't look like they're getting any better.

it depends on how you use the money. there is no magic bullet.

[harumscarum]

Bob what if you give money to a "poor" person and they are finally able to buy that suit for that interview. They end up getting the job and are able to get off the street and move into a house. I also don't understand why would label a person who gives money a democrat.

Should we give money to the poor? No. It seems that it is the American way to sprinkle money on those unfortunate ones and turn our backs. I am a little unclear on how to define "poor" but I will just go along with the stereo type. A poor person should be given opportunity and hope to succeed. Whatever it takes for them to see,feel this I am all for. If they do not accept the help and want to continue to live in poverty then fuck em.

I agree with you a sentence in your last paragraph Karin about "bigger drain on us to NOT help them than it is to try and do what we can".

[Paavo]

Giving money isn't the best thing to do, as money is the means to anything. Why not directly give the things they need to get on their own feet?

Giving money to a corrupt administration in an African country is a waste, the money will not buy the things the giver intended. Instead, see to it yourself -- go there, give the things they need, bypass the corrupt element.

If it's a homeless person, give him an apple or a slice of pizza instead of change, as it might go to booze rather than food.

Don't be greedy and egoistic, but don't be naive either.

[Magpie]

Yes, you should give money to the poor but this money should not be given by the government ! That is because you are giving tax money for an uncertain cause.

[giuliano]

i agree bishop, it depends how you spend it.

i think we should justify to ourselves how accumulating personal wealth is actually the right thing to do, those who are poor deserve and choose to be, then go to church on sunday

[prettyredhead]

UGGHGGGHH quit shoving the Bible down peoples throats. The "bible" is a book, not a idol to worship. God has all but abandoned these people. Why would they want to worship him? In this country, you are free to worship what ever you want. Be it a idol, oak tree, or Jesus. But you cant discriminate against those who dont share YOUR views. Religion has no place in government, 200 + years ago they knew this, why dont you? I dont worship your God I hate him, as a matter of fact. He doesnt exist, and if he does he is a sadist.
Fact is, you are all alone. Religion is a coping mechanism and a business.
Poor people deserve to be fed, housed and given a second, or even third chance to be active in their own lives. Help them, dont try to crucify them for their shortcomings. Many of them are MENTALLY ILL but, then again, that is just a "cop out" isnt it?

[prettyredhead]

Church is a business, sir. Lets help those less fortunate, and deport illegals who break laws. Homelessness isnt against the law last I heard.
Also, I do agree that food is a better alternative than to hand out cash. Give them food, a blanket, a pillow, a new suit, shampoo, ect. Give out "goody bags" instead of money, likely used by mentally ill people to buy drugs to kill their mad feelings. These people should be housed, at your expense since they make you feel "unsafe"

[syracusa]

Hi everyone. Haven't been around in a looong time, hope everybody's doing good.

I have reached the conclusion that forums and debates are basically a very addictive waste of time where you think you may make a difference by saying something or bringing up a topic - when in reality, you don't.
I managed to get myself upset several times simply by participating.
So I thought I would never post again anywhere because it really doesn't mean squat.

And now, look at me, I sucomb again to the no. 1 human frailty - that of wanting to voice one's opinion. But this is not to say that I am trying to convince anybody of anything, I am just saying it to hear myself typing. I also tend to have opinions that feel quite "foreign" to the general American mind - if I am allowed a gross generalization. So there I go:

Yes, I should give money to the poor. (Please note that I said "I", I am talking about myself). I believe there are plenty of selfish, self-righteous egomaniacs in this world who believe that whatever they have it is 100% their own making (to be read "merit") and whatever those unfortunate people DON'T have, is also 100% their own making (to be read "fault"); plenty enough to make me feel ecstatic for being different.

People are not born with the same abilities but they ARE born with the same basic needs and wants. It is what I firmly believe.
I consider those with extra-abilities to do whatever - lucky - and those with fewer or no abilities - unlucky. It is as simple as that and nobody in this world could convince me that if only so and so "bum" worked harder/applied free will, bla-blah-blah, he too could be a,b,c. No he could't.
There is a reason why he is in the situation that he is; because he cannot apply the "free will"; and even he does, the results would be meager anyway.

And that's before even taking into account his disadvantaged start compared to the self-righteous who tells him "oh, if only you did so and so you would be like me".

It just happens that those "unlukcy bastards" bother me less when their lack of abilities prevent them from having "whatever" than the extent to which the "lucky bastards" bother me when they trumpet their merits, wealth, well-being and more importantly self-righteousness all over the place.

I do not trust the "self-righteous" side because they are trully annoying, mediocre minds, too busy to compare themselves with the bums and declare themselved "winners" (oh, sweet ego!) but too stupid to realize what pathetic losers they are in reality when the "big fish" on top of them live off of their "hard-work" (ever heard of heavy dividends?) - never having to work or worry a day in their entire parasitic lives.

Real scenario that made me went ga-ga (thankfully, only in my mind, I had the good inspiration to keep my mouth shut).

My sister-in-law: exasperatingly mediocre suburban housewife, librarian in theory but never bothered to actually use that "library" diploma and work a day in her life; managed to marry a guy who makes very good money and whose family also has a lot of money; lives in an embarassingly humangous house for the two people left in it; never had to worry about anything in her life, never had to work, nor does she need to worry about her children's future given that they will inherit from their father's parents big time. Both of her children screw around with some "occupations" that resemble a hobby much more than they resemble "work".
So life is good - hence we've got time and disposition to judge others.

One day I was with my husband's family (she was there too) and we were talking about the names that black people choose for their children. Everyone knows that they are very unusual.
I said that I am amazed at their resourcefulness for coming up or making up such unusual/unheard of names.
To which the 'HARD-WORKING LADY" replies:

Ahhh...yeah...if only they spent as much energy working as they spend choosing names for their children!

WAOW. WAOW. THREE TIMES WAOW.
That I wanted to bitch-slap her and see her stupid blond head flying over the room in that moment - is needless to say.
Fortunately, I didn't.

But what I did do was to remember that I use public transportation to go to work everyday; and I immediately saw in front of my eyes all those black mothers in the bus, dragging their kids to day-care at 6:00 am in the morning, then rushing to some nasty job...and then to another becasue they often need 2 to make ends meet.

And there was this spoilt bitch, thoroughly convinced that if only those people worked "hard enough" ('cause God know SHE did all her life), then this world would would be ...oh, so much better!

What is truly sad is that she is not the only one with this kind of perverted mind in this country. (Ever wonder how slavery was possible in the 18th century? Perverts will come up with anything to justify the lack of ethics and justice in their blood).

In any case, I am starting to believe that mental mediocrity is scarier than the atomic boms in and of itself.

[prettyredhead]

Very true. The ones who have worked the least, or have had more advantages than others are the first to throw a hissy fit about their "hard earned tax dollars" are going to help those less fortunate. What kind of world have we created? It makes me very ill, not to mention very angry.
Homeless is a small problem that isnt beyond remedy. It can be remedied. No one is more valuable (in the big picture) than anyone else. I really wish that for a long period of time, the American dollar's value would be worth nearly nothing. Irony is that the poorest people would fare well, moreso than the CEO and the blonde bubble head mentioned by Syracusa. They would be floundering and lost without their money to hide behind. The poor can and have done without. It would be some adjustment, but they would be relatively unscathed by this imaginary scenerio. Live and let live, help those who cant help themselves.
I hate ppl like mentioned above. Ironic that most of these :housewives: have hubbys who screw their secretary and she turns a blind eye to keep her money and reputation. While someone poor whose hubby does this isnt afraid to leave and work to survive without his money.

[Nono]

Originally posted by syracusa I believe there are plenty of selfish, self-righteous egomaniacs in this world who believe that whatever they have it is 100% their own making (to be read "merit") and whatever those unfortunate people DON'T have, is also 100% their own making (to be read "fault")

Well said, as in: I'm rich because of my many virtues (not because I screw people, or am privileged, or just plain lucky) and you're poor because you deserve to be, or "want" to be.

As for giving alms (pizza, blankets, etc.) it will keep them from starving or freezing to death. But they'll still be on the street. Somebody has to redistribute the wealth, and that ain't gonna be the Salvation Army. Only government.

[voyager]

I think that somewere in the bible it says that"you will always have them (the poor) with you". This is because the monied people feel so good when they can do something for the poor. That is anything except give them the where withall to fend for them sefves. In short the rich like to have a class that they can be better off than.

Personnaly I don't give to United Way or any other charity. Instead I do volunteer work that will make their life better.

[m5lange1]

The Bible also says ".... the greatest among these is charity".

Not being able to eradicate all poverty is a poor excuse for doing nothing. The question of what "YOU" should give is entirely a personal one. You can make it religious if you wish to, or keep it a matter of personal morals.

Enforced charity is more contovertial. Just hating government handouts because it relates to "socialism" is silly, but there are some legitimate objections out there regarding the use of tax money to support the poor.

As with most things, the welfare system is highly abused and enables people to live an indolent lifestyle. Also as with most things there are people out there who desperately need the help and it may well be preventing us from going through the streets with meat wagons picking up the dead.

It comes down to opinion.... One, charity, is personal and you fully control. The other is political and you have to argue for your control.

[Nono]

Originally posted by m5lange1 Charity is personal and you fully control (it).

Are you talking about handing out quarters (or pizza or blankets) on the street? Or giving money to charities? When you give money to a large charity (and many are huge) what makes you think that it will be used the way you would wish? It ain't that simple: as soon as any organization exceeds a certain (pretty small) size, the symptoms usually attributed to Big Bad Government set in. That's just bureaucratic human nature, and entropy.

[m5lange1]

As I said. You control it. You can give to United Way, or if you don't trust them you can hand it to someone you know personally or who knows you through someone. Or you can say to hell with them, I am just glad it is not me.

You control it. So Pizza and blankets if you want. Or perhaps donate your own time instead of cash.