The Illusion Of Welfare & The Reality Of Rothschildism.

Rothschild’s Humble Basement Apartment

Politics, Poverty, and Principles

When The Catholic University of America announced that Speaker of the House John Boehner would give the 2011 commencement address, a collection of faculty members sent him a letter chastising his failure to recognize “important aspects of Catholic teaching,” specifically, “the desperate needs of the poor.” Boehner’s most recent offense was shepherding  the passage of Paul Ryan’s budget, which “guts long-established protections for the most vulnerable members of society.”

Rothschildism: Blood Money

These professors imply that life is solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short without Uncle Sam’s helping hand and deep pocketbook. Their recent attack against Speaker Boehner’s record and, by extension, Paul Ryan’s budget, rests upon certain flawed assumptions about the nature of poverty and the role of government.

If the cause of poverty is reducible to the lack of specific material goods—money, housing, food, clothing, education, and health care—then providing those goods would eliminate poverty. Providing an income, supplying housing, food stamps, public education, and free health care does not require any complex knowledge of the poor. Indeed, a bureaucrat could enroll poor individuals in a program to receive welfare payments, designate housing for them, distribute food stamps, and provide them with access to education and medical care. If poverty is merely material want, then our current system of bureaucrats, paperwork, and a treasure trove of government money can solve it.

Rothschild’s Backyard

Yet this large “more compassionate” government has failed to eradicate or even significantly reduce poverty, as Ryan Messmore explains in his latest article “Does Advocating Limited Government Mean Abandoning the Poor?”. Since the War on Poverty began in 1965, the federal government has spent $16 trillion on welfare—to no avail. Rather than helping low-income families climb the ladder of social mobility, government programs have fostered welfare dependence. The total number of welfare recipients has tripled between 1960 and 1996 (the year of welfare reform). Out of wedlock births have increased (exceeding 70 percent among the African American population).The overall poverty rate has remained unchanged over the past four decades.

But, poverty is not primarily a material problem. Therefore, no amount of government spending can overcome poverty. Moreover, as Representative Paul Ryan explains in his letter to Archbishop Timothy Dolan, relying on government spending to solve poverty is a failed strategy, especially when government is approaching bankruptcy. These government programs inevitably fail, because the paradigm for approaching the problem is false. Poverty is usually more complex than a simple lack of material resources. There is a third option besides a cradle to grave welfare program and the poor dying in the streets alone and ignored.

Poverty in America is often the result of a relational problem, such as fatherlessness or community breakdown, which government programs cannot adequately address. People receive the most effective care from those who know and interact with them regularly: friends and family members can tailor solutions to particular needs. In cases where no family structure exists or the severity of the problems overwhelm a single family unit, local congregations and ministries cultivate and restore the foundational relationships of life and provide personalized help. Indeed, churches historically have led the way in developing schools, hospitals, disaster relief agencies, and savings and loan programs. Lastly, businesses provide employment opportunities that are essential to overcome poverty.

Obama Printing Money For World’s Richest 1%: $Trillion Dollar WallStreet Bailout Accrues At $110 Billion Dollars In Debt Each & Every Month ~ Which Subjugates Each U.S. Citizen, To Labor Into The Future For London’s Banking Cartel!

The primary purpose of government, then, is to create and maintain an overall environment of safety, order, freedom, and peace, which includes upholding justice through laws and responding to threats to social harmony. By maintaining public safety, the rule of law, and justice, government protects all citizens (including the weak and the vulnerable) and ensures that healthy relationships can grow and thrive in the context of family, church, and local community. In those rare and dire situations, when civil society organizations cannot meet people’s basic tangible needs, the government can provide a safety net of material support. This safety net, though, should be temporary and should not foster long-term dependence on government or supplant the family, the church, or the community.

The idea that “a community of a higher order should not interfere in the internal life of a community of a lower order, depriving the latter of its functions” is not alien to America’s principles. What Archbishop Timothy Dolan explains as the principle of subsidiarity, Representative Paul Ryan praises as federalism.

Limited government does not harm the poor. In fact, a properly limited government encourages the institutions and associations best suited to serve the poor.  Creating a dichotomy between an expansive (and expensive) anti-poverty government programming and people dying in the streets is false and misleading. Together, limited government, free enterprise, and a strong civil society foster the kind of communities that enable people to escape poverty.

No comments yet... Be the first to leave a reply!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s