Help the poor

[RecycleMichael]

I believe each of us has an obligation to help the poor. Many of us do. I am thankful for those who contribute time and money to the food bank, the homeless shelters, etc. I don't want to live in a society where this is not a priority. I don't want to belong to a church that doesn't step up to help those with less.

We are blessed to have so many local churches to address this problem. While some of you think the churches have too much influence in our lives, I say we must be willing to be led as a community to accomplish great things. It matters not what faith to me, as long as your faith embraces this service.

I also am grateful to live in a society that helps fund food stamps and unemployment benefits. If we can afford a war on foreign soil, we can find funds to wage a battle against hunger. Yes, there is abuse and often this handout can lead to a sense of dependancy, but this is also found in military spending as well.

It is one of the reasons I am a democrat. Say what you must against my political beliefs, but I know in my lifetime the party that has worked for the poor has been the Democratic Party.

"The righteous care about justice for the poor, but the wicked have no such concern."
Proverbs 29:7

"The moral test of government is how it treats those who are in the dawn of life, the children; those who are in the twilight of life, the aged; and those in the shadows of life, the sick, the needy and the handicapped."
Hubert H Humphrey
 

[TheArtist]

  Whether through Church, Governments, or private group or individuals, I think it wise to have measurement systems in place that make sure what is given, works for the people who are receiving it.  

 All programs need to be constantly reevaluated for effectiveness.  Church, government or otherwise.  What worked perfectly before, as the world changes, may not work as effectively today.  
 Metrics must be applied to measure success rates.  Church, govenrment or otherwise.  
 There must be constant evaluation of operational efficiencies.  Whether it be a Church, government etc. program.  Again, what was the best way to do things at one time, may not be the best way now as technologies change and so on.
  There must be as much cooperation as possible between different programs and groups.

I can look at both government, private and church groups programs and ask similar questions.   Is what your doing working and how does what your doing compare with other "best practices"?  Show me the numbers.  
Is the time/money spent being spent in the most cost effective and efficient way?  

I don't care who is doing it.  But if they are the ones saying they want to do it and must do it, then I would danged well expect that they will do it correctly and all should be held to the same efficiency, effectiveness, money/time given standards.  We should want that and they should want that.  We should ask that of our government, we should also ask that of our churches or other groups.

Is that what we are getting/doing in Oklahoma?

All the love and giving in the world is folly and death without knowledge and wisdom as their constant companions.

[we vs us]

Churches are important, and they play a vital role.  The argument that they should replace gov, though, is a nonstarter.  Gov can address need on a scale that churches, no matter how big or generous, just can't. They can also distribute help more fairly.  Meaning that, private and religious charities get to choose to whom and for what their charity dollars go.  That means that, by definition, there will be gaps somewhere in coverage.  That's where gov has a primary responsibility -- to reach into the places that smaller private orgs can't or won't go. 

[Conan71]

Churches are important, and they play a vital role.  The argument that they should replace gov, though, is a nonstarter.  Gov can address need on a scale that churches, no matter how big or generous, just can't. They can also distribute help more fairly.  Meaning that, private and religious charities get to choose to whom and for what their charity dollars go.  That means that, by definition, there will be gaps somewhere in coverage.  That's where gov has a primary responsibility -- to reach into the places that smaller private orgs can't or won't go. 

BS.  You think Catholic Charities only helps Catholics?  Church missions of every denomination exist to bring comfort and aid to people all over the world regardless of religious beliefs or nationality.  There literally is no place a church won't go.  They even exist in the worst ghettos.

The government is far more selective in who they help.  You must qualify for the aid and that takes time.  If you hit a rough spot and need a place to eat and lay your head for a month, the government won't be of any help.  Government has become a primary and permanent care-giver, not a gap filler. 

I think you need to study the issue a whole lot closer. 

[guido911]

Churches are important, and they play a vital role.  The argument that they should replace gov, though, is a nonstarter.  Gov can address need on a scale that churches, no matter how big or generous, just can't. They can also distribute help more fairly.  Meaning that, private and religious charities get to choose to whom and for what their charity dollars go.  That means that, by definition, there will be gaps somewhere in coverage.  That's where gov has a primary responsibility -- to reach into the places that smaller private orgs can't or won't go. 

How do you give and where does it go?

[heironymouspasparagus]

Churches are important, and they play a vital role.  The argument that they should replace gov, though, is a nonstarter.  Gov can address need on a scale that churches, no matter how big or generous, just can't. They can also distribute help more fairly.  Meaning that, private and religious charities get to choose to whom and for what their charity dollars go.  That means that, by definition, there will be gaps somewhere in coverage.  That's where gov has a primary responsibility -- to reach into the places that smaller private orgs can't or won't go. 

Gaps - as evidenced by the shrill harpy screeches about Planned Parenthood.  They do more for poor women - the vast majority of it NON abortion related - than any other entity in this country.  For women who literally have no where else to turn.  That is the fallacy of the "thousand points of light" carp.

[heironymouspasparagus]

If you hit a rough spot and need a place to eat and lay your head for a month, the government won't be of any help.  

Salvation Army.  Food, clothing and shelter.

One of the best 'efficiency ratios' out there.

But still not able to handle the whole thing.

[heironymouspasparagus]

How do you give and where does it go?

Unfair question.  You know that is not something to be 'bragged' about or really even talked about much.  He gives/participates according to the spirit that is in his heart.  As you and I do - we cannot be comparing 'size' here - not on that topic!  Everyone can probably guess my favorite entity, but I have been on both sides of their efforts, and like the side I'm on now the best.

[TheArtist]

  All of us who pay taxes chip in to help the poor and needy.   Rather than trying to get rid of programs simply because they are taxpayer funded, I think it would be better to either make sure they are working better/correctly or get rid of them because they are not and replace them with ones that do.  And again, that holds true with church/private programs as well.  I would like to see comparative analysis of programs showing how each program was improving peoples lives and the stats to back it up.  

The other day I saw a church group giving bicycles to needy families.  There is one thing I really believe that is true, nothing in life is free.  It didn't appear that these people were doing anything to earn these bicycles or would be required to in the future, and thus harm would likely result.  Of the church members that I knew, they are ones that would readily criticize the government for it's "efficiencies/waste", yet here they were not setting the same standards for themselves.  They were spending time and money doing this (rather than doing something with their time and money that could better help these people "teach a man to fish"), but were not measuring the success rates and analyzing the results and were not being at all efficient.  All organizations, whether church, private or government can have waste, fraud and abuse, or programs that can be bettered or replaced with ones that work better.  We shouldn't hold one to lesser standards than the others. They should all be held to the highest standards possible.  If your going to try and destroy the other guys "way of giving" look at your own first.   

[we vs us]

How do you give and where does it go?

None of your business. 

Also, this isn't about me.  Or you. 

[we vs us]

BS.  You think Catholic Charities only helps Catholics?  Church missions of every denomination exist to bring comfort and aid to people all over the world regardless of religious beliefs or nationality.  There literally is no place a church won't go.  They even exist in the worst ghettos.

The government is far more selective in who they help.  You must qualify for the aid and that takes time.  If you hit a rough spot and need a place to eat and lay your head for a month, the government won't be of any help.  Government has become a primary and permanent care-giver, not a gap filler. 

I think you need to study the issue a whole lot closer. 

You misunderstand.  I'm not talking about discrimination, I'm talking about size and scope.  There are going to be places that Catholic Charities doesn't have an office, or can't send aid.  Places that don't have a traditionally large Catholic population, or are isolated, etc.  This is true for all nonprofits of any size, up to and including the Salvation Army, the Red Cross, etc.  The government is the only entity big enough to serve all of us everywhere.  And government can do food aid and healthcare and unemployment insurance and can also offer help with educational training.  The gov can offer more and in more places than any single church or group of churches.  Finally, when I said fairness I meant that, Catholic Charities can chose to close any office anywhere they'd like for whatever reason they'd like.   And that city (or parish, or whatever) would from that point on not have the services Catholic Charities provides.  That's their right, but it leaves the people who rely on their services out to dry and without recourse.  Conversely, look at how the closing of the post offices has worked to get a sense of how a full scale rework of government services has progressed.  It has been messy, no doubt, but there has been a lengthy period of warning, there has been a lot of input from the public, there has been the opportunity for municipalities and states to argue for their branches.

Again, I'm not arguing against church charity, I'm arguing for both smart and active churches and governments.

[Conan71]

Problem is Wev, for the government, it's not a simple cash in cash or property in property out proposition.  The government is borrowing billions and billions to provide aid.  Certainly there are people who benefit from government benefits but it serves to create dependence as there's really no interaction other than sitting with a clerk at the Social Security office or welfare office periodically, if that.  When it comes to church or community based charity, there's usually frequent interface and an effort to help solve the problem which caused the need for charity in the first place.

[nathanm]

it serves to create dependence as there's really no interaction other than sitting with a clerk at the Social Security office or welfare office periodically, if that.

Other than the job training requirements and the EITC and the referrals to other services (usually paid for by the government) that can help with the underlying problem, yes, it's just a check.

[guido911]

None of your business. 

Also, this isn't about me.  Or you. 

Well then quit criticizing how other organizations such as churches give. It's none of your business either. And if you know first hand who to help and who is not being reached, then share it with us.

And this absolutely has everything to do with me. If you think government can do an adequate job at reaching the poor, then tell me how they can directly do so unless they use MY tax money.

[nathanm]

Well then quit criticizing how other organizations such as churches give. It's none of your business either.

If they're tax exempt, it's very much my business what they do with their money. We're paying, after all.