Welfare Nation

I normally only blog from my phone when I am not at home, as I like full-sized keyboards and monitors. Currently, Mediacom is having some issues with Des Moines and I cannot use the Internet on my computer. Thankfully, I have 4G. Someday they are going to have to start addressing problems with addiction to the Internet. I'm sure Google will be blamed because they are working hard to put our entire life on the Internet.

You know, it's funny, cause when I was younger, they used to talk about backing up your stuff on the Internet on your harddrive and now they talk about backing up the stuff on your hard drive on the Internet. Google has a good portion of my music, my documents, my Google+, my email, my reader or list of things updated such a blogs... I predict someday that we will be able to go to any computer with an Internet connection and sign into our Google account and have our entire computer information right there. I can't wait! Go Google!

But anyway, based on my title, that is not what I planned on talking about. Unless I'd like to apply welfare abuse to Google. In which case, they are making us feel entitled to easy Internet searches, nice web browsing, and 7G+ of email storage...

No, that's not what I intended to talk about. Last night at small group we talked about welfare. I am sorry to say that we no more solved that than the guys who drink coffee at 8am every day at Panera solved the education system and whatever else they talk about. We all know better than the people actually making the decisions, right?

There are a few different takes on welfare. The first is from the government. The general Democratic viewpoint is that we are all humans and society and we owe it to one another to take care of each other, especially those with means helping those who don't. I mean, they have the money, they can afford it. How can you let your fellow man suffer? Obama said in one of his campaign speeches for his last election that after a man goes and works for his country all his life, his country will not abandon him when he gets old. This premise includes the idea that people go through hard times, and America should be there to help them.

The opponants of this idea, often Republicans, say that, one, the Democrats don't actually care, they are just buying votes. Get enough people hooked on welfare and they will keep voting for whoever keeps the money flowing. Republicans tend to side with rich people as the ones abused in this case, as their greater wealth gets taxed at greater rates. Republicans see the wealthy as job creators and successful businessmen who have contributed to the economy and think increased taxes would dampen their economic influences. They accuse the Democrats as being socialist in that they want to redistribute the money rightfully earned to those who have not. They see many of the welfare recipients as freeloaders who have no intention of changing their situation and intend to continue to live off of government funds.

Politically, I don't want to judge welfare recipients. I don't know them, maybe some of them are freeloaders, maybe some have horrible luck. However, I don't like the idea that the government should take care of them. I grew up learning that it was the government's job to protect its people from outside threats and inside abuse. It is there to catch criminals and protect your rights as outlined in the Constitution. I think it is very much overstepping its bounds to think that it should go and babysit the American people. Not to say that they don't need help, but that it is not the government's job to be the one to help them. They are so large and bloated that I think they are also incapable of discerning between actually needy people and freeloaders and make up for that by just giving taxpayer money to most people who ask. There are churches and charities who have much more discerning programs that can work with welfare recipients on the micro level to get them back on their feet or determine who is freeloading and deny service. They have to be more discerning because they have less rescources to work with and are trying to do the most good for their buck. I think people with means would give more to charities if they didn't feel they were already paying for a lot of welfare.

And that's where my thought process usually ended. Not the government's job. I didn't put a whole lot of thought into what it actually looked like from the church level. I know my dad is involved in some programs, such as temporary housing for people evicted and things like that and they have guidelines people have to meet to use the program. But my smallgroup leader, Greg, brought up the church food pantry. Long and short of that place is that it gives out food. And often the same people come every week, often an hour and a half early just so they can secure their spot in line. There seems to be no attempt at betterment, getting back on their feet, or even a humble gratitude for the constant aid (more, that person cut, what are you going to do about it?). Some of these people might be freeloaders, simply taking advantage of the church's good will. Is the church in this case actually helping them or making them dependant on another form of welfare? Where do you draw the line?

As far as the church goes, it is hard to say for sure. Should we change to service to be more discerning? Should we attempt to build multiple personal relationships to try and touch the problem at its root? Should we turn down the known freeloaders in hopes that they for the first time have had someone say no to them and will think about what they are doing? Or should we keep serving them in hopes that God will do what we cannot in touching their heart?

I find it frustrating that we have created a nation of entitlement. We seem to think we deserve things people used to have to work for. The Occupy Wall Street movement, while being hailed as an example of people willing to be active for what they believe and the rightful protesting of the bailouts, was at one level a huge entitlement movement. Wall Street has money and while we didn't work for it, we deserve it. Higher education should be a right. American Dream, which was called a dream because people aspired to it, but didn't always get it, is now supposed to be a right. We lost much of the idea of working for and earning the money we spend. We think we all need Internet, free health care, free education, as long as someone else pays for it. What gives us this idea, to think that we have a right to all these things that used to be privilages? Something needs to remind us that we can in fact do without some things. When I was younger, we didn't have a dishwasher. We put a microwave in that spot and thought the microwave was cool and washed our own dishes. We didn't have a dryer and hung our own laundry. Do I remember thinking, oh, we're so poor, so abused by these chores? No. I'm sure I had it a lot easier than a farm kid. We can live without some things. I find it sad we've gotten so uses to handouts that we don't remember that.