Jobless Growth Forecast

[Gaspar]

I find this rather odd. . .

The SNAP/Food Stamp Program, administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, celebrates their success in distributing the greatest amount of free meals and food stamps in their history.  A triumph preached from the alters of the poverty pimps  like Jessie Jackson.  Benifits for the unemployed have also been extended to historic durations and amounts, and that too is celebrated by people like Nancy Pelosi and Vallerie Jarritt as "the best economic stimulus" to help people help themselves.
 
However, the National Park Service, administered by the U.S. Department of the Interior just down the hall, asks us to "Please Do Not Feed The Animals." This is because the animals may grow dependent on handouts and not learn to take care of themselves.

[nathanm]

I find this rather odd. . .

Try drinking your morning coffee before posting. It will help you not make stupid comments that imply that people who work low wage jobs or are out of jobs are animals. I know you didn't mean it that way, but not everyone is inclined to be so generous.

[Red Arrow]

but not everyone is inclined to be so generous.

One "aw crap" wipes out 1000 "atta boys"

[Gaspar]

Why is the psychology any different for humans than animals.  We both habituate to situations in similar ways.

If you give a person food, shelter, and other subsidies, they grow to expect that just like animals.  My point is clear.  Food stamps, and other subsidies may be a fantastic safety net, but no matter how you wish to spin it, increasing the subscription by a population on such subsidies is not economic stimulus, and WILL increase overall dependence for a very long time.

[we vs us]

Why is the psychology any different for humans than animals.  We both habituate to situations in similar ways.

If you give a person food, shelter, and other subsidies, they grow to expect that just like animals.  My point is clear.  Food stamps, and other subsidies may be a fantastic safety net, but no matter how you wish to spin it, increasing the subscription by a population on such subsidies is not economic stimulus, and WILL increase overall dependence for a very long time.

Your point is disgusting and simplistic.  People respond not only to physical needs but also to a host of emotional and intellectual and spiritual factors.  We may share animal qualities but we are very very different beasts. 

It's also worth noting that most primates are pack animals and will share feeding grounds amongst themselves.  Not a whole lot of free market action amongst lion prides on the Serengeti.

[Conan71]

Your point is disgusting and simplistic.  People respond not only to physical needs but also to a host of emotional and intellectual and spiritual factors.  We may share animal qualities but we are very very different beasts. 

It's also worth noting that most primates are pack animals and will share feeding grounds amongst themselves.  Not a whole lot of free market action amongst lion prides on the Serengeti.

Did you take behavioral psych?  Learned helplessness cuts across many species.

[we vs us]

Did you take behavioral psych?  Learned helplessness cuts across many species.

Yep but it isn't the only consideration, and from a moral standpoint should be very far down the list in how we make decisions to govern.   Why?  Because it undercuts the rationale for every building block of society and of governance.  Why offer any sort of help doing anything if it promotes learned helplessness?  It's antithetical not only to big government but to the idea of government at all. 

[Conan71]

Yep but it isn't the only consideration, and from a moral standpoint should be very far down the list in how we make decisions to govern.   Why?  Because it undercuts the rationale for every building block of society and of governance.  Why offer any sort of help doing anything if it promotes learned helplessness?  It's antithetical not only to big government but to the idea of government at all.  

I don't know of anyone who doesn't think a hand-up or temporary assistance is good.

What's moral about creating a permanent underclass?  You, more than anyone on here, seem to buy the social justice meme.  There are people who whose grandparents raised their parents on welfare and food stamps, who are now raised their own kids on food stamps, and now the third (or more) generation is raising their own family on food stamps.  I mean really, what is moral about government-sanctioned impoverishment?

I mentioned this the other day:  I personally know of four people who are not actively seeking employment until they've completely exhausted their unemployment benefits.  I don't suspect they are the only four people in Tulsa County who aren't going to put down the bong and go look for work until a lack of government-supplied resources dictates they will have to.

Allowing people to starve is immoral.  There's nothing just or moral about providing too many avenues to take the easy way out though.  JMO, I think charity was far better handled by the spiritual community and within the family.  Government, by nature, simply cannot be compassionate enough to properly administer charity and a hand-up.

[Gaspar]

Yep but it isn't the only consideration, and from a moral standpoint should be very far down the list in how we make decisions to govern.   Why?  Because it undercuts the rationale for every building block of society and of governance.  Why offer any sort of help doing anything if it promotes learned helplessness?  It's antithetical not only to big government but to the idea of government at all. 

I understand what you are saying, but go back and read again.  I am talking about touting such programs as stimulus or some kind of economic success.

Yes, they may be moral or spiritual successes, but to somehow spin them and example of your great economic prowess is just wrong.

. . .and no matter how you view the expansion of dependency, it is still dependency.

[Gaspar]

I don't know of anyone who doesn't think a hand-up or temporary assistance is good.

. . .  I mean really, what is moral about government-sanctioned impoverishment?

Nutin, but it sure helps turnout at the polls.

[nathanm]

What's moral about creating a permanent underclass?  You, more than anyone on here, seem to buy the social justice meme.  There are people who whose grandparents raised their parents on welfare and food stamps, who are now raised their own kids on food stamps, and now the third (or more) generation is raising their own family on food stamps.  I mean really, what is moral about government-sanctioned impoverishment?

Correlation is not causation. There was generational poverty long before food stamps and there will be generational poverty long after food stamps.