Let me just make sure I'm following your line of thinking.

 

A mom has a child. Mom is poor. Mom can't afford a place to live for her child and/or food for her child.

 

You're saying you're not giving the mother welfare/food stamps in order to feed and house her child? Before you say "let her live with family" let's just assume that's not an option. She has no other source of support. Let's say she has a job but it's not enough to support her child.

 

You're going to let the child die just so you can hang on to your belief that the govt should not give money to parents?

 

You can't pick and choose on a case by case basis. Either it's offered to everyone or no one. I'd much rather err on the side of the least amount of government intervention.

 

A couple notes about your fantasy scenario here....

 

A) If mom is that poor, she shouldn't have a child.

 

B) If she has a full-time job making minimum wage, she can afford to shelter and feed her child.

 

C) Life's not fair.

You can't pick and choose on a case by case basis. Either it's offered to everyone or no one. I'd much rather err on the side of the least amount of government intervention.

 

A couple notes about your fantasy scenario here....

 

A) If mom is that poor, she shouldn't have a child.

 

B) If she has a full-time job making minimum wage, she can afford to shelter and feed her child.

 

C) Life's not fair.

 

Fantasy? Saying she shouldn't have a child is not only fantasy but 1000% irrelevant.

 

You never answered my question. No qualifiers. She needs financial help or her child suffers - maybe dies.

 

You sticking to "life's not fair?"

Ahhhh...to never have had to live the tough life.

Someone point me in the direction of the shelter and food that can be had....both of them, while working a minimum wage job. Oh...and also utilities.

Fantasy? Saying she shouldn't have a child is not only fantasy but 1000% irrelevant.

 

You never answered my question. No qualifiers. She needs financial help or her child suffers - maybe dies.

 

You sticking to "life's not fair?"

 

I haven't wavered from my position.

 

We need to stop with the handouts.

 

Yes, life's not fair. It's the cold, hard, tragic reality of the world.

One of the best exercises my son says he ever went through was in a Religion Class at Trinity. He and his classmates were given budgets, then dropped off at a grocery store to buy groceries for a family of four. He was given $20 and had to get 3 meals for his family of four.

 

Y'all think that's extreme. But I personally have lived that way. I have also lived without electricity because I couldn't afford the bill.

You can't pick and choose on a case by case basis. Either it's offered to everyone or no one. I'd much rather err on the side of the least amount of government intervention.

 

A couple notes about your fantasy scenario here....

 

A) If mom is that poor, she shouldn't have a child.

 

B) If she has a full-time job making minimum wage, she can afford to shelter and feed her child.

 

C) Life's not fair.

 

But in this country we can make it fair for children and those that. We have the wealth to do it, can't even question that are working sand doing all they can or have a pre-existing condition. Budget adjustments can be made Again It is not Christian, moral, ethical, decent, to let a child suffer because of their parents in this country. Now id a person is this way in their life I get where they are coming from.

But in this country we can make it fair for children and those that. We have the wealth to do it, can't even question that. Budget adjustments can be made Again It is not Christian, moral, ethical, decent, to let a child suffer because of their parents in this country. Now id a person is this way in their life I get where they are coming from.

 

Here's the thing. Saying the government shouldn't give handouts doesn't mean I'm against helping these people. But it shouldn't be the government doing it. It should be families, communities, churches, etc. People giving of their time, efforts, and money on their own accord. Government intervention in our lives should be as minimal as humanly possible.

Here's the thing. Saying the government shouldn't give handouts doesn't mean I'm against helping these people. But it shouldn't be the government doing it. It should be families, communities, churches, etc. People giving of their time, efforts, and money on their own accord. Government intervention in our lives should be as minimal as humanly possible.

 

I didn't say you weren't and these agencies and organizations do a lot, but they get government assistance in many cases. I see nothing wrong with government helping the truly oppressed and helpless. If only it could be the way you suggest, it never has and never will. In a libertarian point of view and implementation it is the inequalities that exist and will always exist that causes these issues, not the government. It is the individuals. If a government cannot have money then they can't help people and now it falls on individuals and well huge inequalities happen. Thus we have to have some government intervention.

I didn't say you weren't and these agencies and organizations do a lot, but they get government assistance in many cases. I see nothing wrong with government helping the truly oppressed and helpless. If only it could be the way you suggest, it never has and never will. In a libertarian point of view and implementation it is the inequalities that exist and will always exist that causes these issues, not the government. It is the individuals. If a government cannot have money then they can't help people and now it falls on individuals and well huge inequalities happen. Thus we have to have some government intervention.

 

Fair enough. Differing views on it.

You can't pick and choose on a case by case basis. Either it's offered to everyone or no one. I'd much rather err on the side of the least amount of government intervention.

 

A couple notes about your fantasy scenario here....

 

A) If mom is that poor, she shouldn't have a child.

 

B) If she has a full-time job making minimum wage, she can afford to shelter and feed her child.

 

C) Life's not fair.

 

I agree, the world can be cruel. But it's more than a little shocking to hear such a cold, heartless viewpoint. There are many reasons why people end up needing assistance. And while some of those situations are self inflicted, many are not....many of us are one tragedy, one devastating illness, one disaster from being in a world of trouble financially. It's really easy to tell those people to work harder, especially when one is fortunate.

I agree, the world can be cruel. But it's more than a little shocking to hear such a cold, heartless viewpoint. There are many reasons why people end up needing assistance. And while some of those situations are self inflicted, many are not....many of us are one tragedy, one devastating illness, one disaster from being in a world of trouble financially. It's really easy to tell those people to work harder, especially when one is fortunate.

 

It may be a heartless take. I'm okay with people thinking that. I'll remind you, we're talking about government intervention. I'm all for assisting and providing aide to people as we each individually see fit. I'm just not okay with it being mandated by the government.

Ahhhh...to never have had to live the tough life.

 

No kidding...

Ahhhh...to never have had to live the tough life.

 

You aren't the only one who grew up poor on this board. But our life choices should not impact other peope. With how I grew up I'm a very generous person with my money now. But the government should not dictate who I take care of. Why should a person in Kansas pay for the mistake of a person in New York? I can care for the poor but still be against government intervention. If you want assistance you should work for it.

I have very strong libertarian beliefs. I also am a realist and realize that at some point those beliefs will need to be compromised for the greater good. As I grow older and get more experienced in the world this becomes more and more true.

 

I get where UKMF is at, I really do. It angers me to no end that the mother in Clyde's scenario is undoubtedly going to get benefit from having a child she had no business having OR there's a very good chance the child's welfare will be put in jeopardy. To not acknowledge that is being quite obtuse.

 

I would love for all the assistance that is needed to come from private sources however that isn't the reality. Unfortunately if we want to help those that can't help themselves sometimes we will end up helping those who choose not to help themselves. There will be abuses. It's a fact. But the world isn't as black and white as I once pretended it was.

 

I struggle with an answer for healthcare. I don't think Obamacare was it but I do applaud him for having the cojones to try something big and bold. The one thing I'd love to see President-Elect Trump do is go after Big Pharm. If he wants to clean the swamp that's about as swampy as a place as you'll find...