Most people think charity a good thing in order to help those in need, or to help a cause that one values and finds worthy of giving to in the form of money, time, a place to meet, one’s own expertise, or whatever else they may need. I too feel this is a great thing, and my wife and I both give to a host of charities for reasons which are our own and we decide which they will be on a number of factors — none of which are the government’s concern.
We, the People of the United States of American are some of the most giving and generous people in the entire world; we know we have a good life and do not mind sharing it with others who, through sudden tragedy, or circumstance of location at birth have lost or simply do not have a chance to attain what we have here in our great country. Western culture as a broad and general group all feel this way and it shows, and not a shocking surprise it is also Western culture which is the driving force of the entire world.
When one gives his or her wealth, or time, or efforts, freely and without coercion this is a very worth-while endeavour and something that shows the moral fiber of the individual and is a positive reflection of their society as well. There is another form of giving more akin to Robin Hood, though in the story of Robin Hood is made clear that the money is not so much being taken from the rich a it is being taken from corrupt and abusive merchants and government officials (tax collectors, nobility, etc.) to give back to the down trodden and abused. This is a story far worse than Robin Hood, this is a story of theft against the populace without regard to how they came about their wealth.
When the government, and federal government particularly, takes money from one person and simply hands that money to another person because the federal government had deemed the receiver more worthy to have that money, this is immoral at its core and unconstitutional to boot. The Constitution outlines the reasons the federal government may raise taxes, and nowhere is it listed that government financed re-allocation of wealth is permitted. Whether this is for giving money to a homeless person, or a failing large corporation, there is no enumerated provision listing any such actions as permissible. Some misguided souls find this government redistribution to the akin to charity, or supplementing charity when we the people have not given enough (an appraisal they made based on what?). Charity stops being charity when the government can come and take your property and your freedom by force if you fail to comply with the edicts issued by our own ‘public servants’. When the government decides some people are less worthy of their own money than others who have not earned their way the government is in the business of redistribution, of ‘spreading the wealth’ and this is not a function of the federal government.
There is another problem with these government hand outs to those making less money: If half the nation pays almost no taxes as it is, where is the money coming from? The money is coming from a small minority of people who do not have anyone looking out for their own interests. Both parties do this, but the Democrats have made it into a campaign pillar: they promise the world of money to the poor and to the ‘forgotten middle class’ the whole time inciting class warfare by railing on about the rich not paying ‘their fair share’. If the rich, the top 10% pay the majority of the bill, then they are already paying more than the average person and thus their fair share is already done. But if the top 10% are forced to pay for the vest majority of the social hand-outs, then all the Democrats need to do is bribe (YES, BRIBE) the other 90% to vote for them. We’ve heard this from the current administration in the form of, 95% of the country will see a tax break (thus 5% will have to make up the difference), to pushing for government hand-outs for health care, to President Obama’s own words about spreading the wealth.
Unfortunately bribing the poor used to be harder because at one time they had pride and dignity and would not take such charity. Now, they have been conditioned to live off the efforts of the more productive and they have become greedy in their ways wanting more and more, and now we have a substantial portion of the population ready to taken ill-gotten money in order to perpetuate their own lifestyles. These people rarely ask what is best for their country, they only care for what seems best for their own immediate future. They willfully drive the nation into debt for their own personal benefit. not only is this unpatriotic, but completely immoral since it adversely effects us all.
It is immoral for politicians to make the poor become dependent upon those same politicians in order to survive. This dependency is similar to a drug deal stringing out their customers on addictive substances – the customers become dependent upon these substances and will do whatever it takes to have them continue – including losing their dignity, self-reliance, and any form of pride.
The immorality is obvious, appreciation for the work and efforts of others has diminished, and the idea that getting free money from the efforts of others as a ‘right’ has taken hold. Pathetic we have become.
We need to, as a country, stop and reverse this trend.
Zeno Sees, Zeno Writes 