You may be right BF, but I don't think so. I think that many Americans already give a lot more than we are credited for. This is a very, very generous country. And I truly think that if people saw their tax rates reduced, as a result of no longer having fund the govt welfare programs, they'd increase their giving to their churches, to Red Cross, to the Salvation Army etc..

 

I think there would most definitely be an increase in charitable giving, but the problem is there are a multitude of charities, churches, etc attempting to meet needs in communities. The aid would be dispersed across each of these which would sort of dilute the pool of money. There's also no guarantee each area would be served equally, or each need in each area would be served at all. It would lack uniformity.

You may be right BF, but I don't think so. I think that many Americans already give a lot more than we are credited for. This is a very, very generous country. And I truly think that if people saw their tax rates reduced, as a result of no longer having fund the govt welfare programs, they'd increase their giving to their churches, to Red Cross, to the Salvation Army etc..

I think the resulting deficit would far exceed the willingness of people to give. But it would do wonders for the boating industry, the high-end real estate market, the sports car industry, the jewelry manufacturers, and luxury resorts around the world.

I think the resulting deficit would far exceed the willingness of people to give. But it would do wonders for the boating industry, the high-end real estate market, the sports car industry, the jewelry manufacturers, and luxury resorts around the world.

 

You are so destructively honest !:lol: It may be time to go back to your bobbing head avatar !

You are so destructively honest !:lol: It may be time to go back to your bobbing head avatar !

Which one?

Very true. But that doesn't qualify anyone to be President. I agree with you that his VP selection may be one of the most important in our history.

My thoughts are the same. He will have to have a strong VP, that is somewhat conservative.

I think you're making an awfully big leap of "faith." I think chuch organizations already feel like they're doing their part to help the poor. If you get rid of government support -- and I mean needed government support -- you would find that those that have will largely ignore those that have not.

Just think about this... if everyone in this nation one day a month, donated a certain amount to help feed the poor, there would be no need for welfare ... Just a thought.

I think the resulting deficit would far exceed the willingness of people to give. But it would do wonders for the boating industry, the high-end real estate market, the sports car industry, the jewelry manufacturers, and luxury resorts around the world.

 

There's a novel thought. The manufacturers and sellers of all those items and the companies that service all those items would then hire more Americans and instead of people being on welfare getting money for doing something, they'd get money for working. And if those people worked hard (sometimes even working two of those newly created jobs) and they'd urge their children to stay in school, go to college, get an even better paying job and we'd break the multi generational welfare family syndrome existing under the current system. Thus less need for welfare and federal bureacrat employees taking a big cut of the taxes collected and distributed in the form of welfare payments. Yes a novel thought indeed.

Just think about this... if everyone in this nation one day a month, donated a certain amount to help feed the poor, there would be no need for welfare ... Just a thought.

But would they? And if they don't...then what? If you force them to, you're back where you started from.

There's a novel thought. The manufacturers and sellers of all those items and the companies that service all those items would then hire more Americans and instead of people being on welfare getting money for doing something, they'd get money for working. And if those people worked hard (sometimes even working two of those newly created jobs) and they'd urge their children to stay in school, go to college, get an even better paying job and we'd break the multi generational welfare family syndrome existing under the current system. Thus less need for welfare and federal bureacrat employees taking a big cut of the taxes collected and distributed in the form of welfare payments. Yes a novel thought indeed.

And we all lived happily ever after...

Just think about this... if everyone in this nation one day a month, donated a certain amount to help feed the poor, there would be no need for welfare ... Just a thought.

 

At the risk of sounding negative , If the Government is in charge of distribution it would take five days from the population to pay clerical cost and shipping per month !

Then you complain about social programs, unwed mothers, and crime. I and my wife chose the responsibility to raise our childrens, some parent are not fit to raise children. Their choice is not my business nor problem. Have you adopt a child lately? Then dont preach pro-life if you have not.

I adopted 2 at the ages of 2 & 3. They are now 27 and 28 and doing well. I also helped raise 3 step-children. (now 21,24 & 29):thumb: