How Government Takes the Giving out of Giving
Oct 26
We live Bactrim antibiotic in a Buy Evista Online period of Prometrium 200mg - 90 pills American history Evista 60mg - 90 pills of increasing government involvement in our lives. The government takes care of the poor and needy in our society. They provide health care to people who need it, food to those who don’t have it, housing to the shelterless, and money to those who cannot make it for themselves. Some who receive these gifts really do need them; others do not.
Since the government provides such services, many people flock to the political party that supports government involvement in these areas thinking that they are doing something good. I would contend that they are not. We are a wealthy nation. We should provide to those who cannot provide for themselves. I agree with that statement. What I disagree with is that it is the government that should be the one giving these gifts (that is what they are).
It is not the government’s job to give generously. It is your job and mine.
When we give of ourselves freely (time, money, etc.) there is great satisfaction that comes with the giving. If you see someone in need and, out of your own caring, help them, there is a response in us that encourages us to even greater giving.
On the flip side, when we are personally given to, there is a great sense of gratitude that comes with the gift. What a feeling to know that someone genuinely cared enough to recognize a need and then to fill it.
Unfortunately, when the government steps in and takes the role of the recipient and the giver (tax and redistribution) both the satisfaction from giving and the gratitude from receiving are removed from the equation.
Not only does it remove the satisfaction and gratitude of personal giving, it replaces them with something else. Most people will see the government’s involvement as a reason not to give of themselves. They are already surrendering their money in the form of taxes and the government is taking care of the problems. If people don’t see a need to give, they will spend their money in other ways. This type of mindset fosters greed. People hold on to what they have all the tighter to spend the way they want. Instead of seeing needs and taking care of them, they see things the government needs to take care of. Satisfaction is replaced with greed and disconnectedness.
On the other side of the equation, we see a loss of gratitude. When there is nothing personal about a gift and no one to attach gratitude to, the person on the receiving end can begin to think they deserve what they are getting. If their check from the government is late, they are on the phone demanding to know where it is. And when the feeling of entitlement comes in they inevitably want more. Gratitude is replaced with malcontent and demotivation.
Unfortunately, when the government first steps in it starts a cycle that is hard to break. People become more greedy, disconnected, and malcontent. In turn the government steps in to make up for the greed it perceives and to pacify the malcontents. This encourages nothing except more greed and discontentment. As a result we become a society that gives less and thinks we deserve more than we do.
What are the alternatives? It starts with you and me. Let’s look at some numbers. The government projects that it will spend 419 billion dollars in 2010 on welfare programs. That is Ibuprofen bleeding quite a Zocor 10mg - 60 pills bit of cash. I wonder Chloramphenicol 250 mg how much Trandate 100mg - 30 pills of that actually makes it to people. I have no idea. There will be an estimated 114 million households in the US in 2010 each with a median income of $50,233. If each household gave only 10% of their income to help others, that would be 577 billion dollars in 2010. This doesn’t even include the people that could afford to do much more. In 2008 307 billion dollars were given. We can Ranitidine for infants do more.
If you Minipress 1 mg saw that 10% figure and Lasix 100 mg immediately thought, “Wait a minute, Brian. That is Keftab 250mg - 60 pills quite a bit of money” then you have proven my point about greed. That still leaves 90% for you. I know that it is possible to come up with that kind of money out of a budget (if you have one). I have done it. So we don’t get to get the newest gadget. So what? Instead we strengthen our society as a whole, making us a more gracious, thankful and satisfied nation.
And we cut out the need for the government to take up our slack. That is what it is. We are slacking as a nation, not taking care of those who need it. We, as individuals, are responsible for taking care of those who can’t take care of themselves.
There will always be those who need help but I think if we become a more giving nation we can drastically decrease the number of people who think they deserve help. The more gratitude one feels toward the giver, the more willing they will be to pay it forward. This would result in people who can help themselves beginning to do so and to help others.
Our government is not “promoting the general welfare” by helping to create a society that does not care for itself. Are we past the point of going back to people taking care of people? Not if we wake up and figure out that we deserve nothing but have everything to give.
I don' t disagree Shampoo with ketoconazole with you, but allow Minocin 50mg - 45 pills me to Motrin 600 mg play the Devil's advocate… I see Mobic 15mg - 90 pills two problems. First, someone has to distribute the money, food, etc. to the needy. I would prefer this to be a non-profit org. run by concerned and loving individuals, but ultimately the most important qualification for the job is that the distributor can be neutral and fair. I'm not sure we can, honestly, but if we can't trust our publicly-oversighted, elected government to be just, why should we trust anyone else to be just?Second, if we see supporting the needy as our civic or moral duty, then is it not precisely the job of the government to enforce such support?
Answer…no
When you "enforce" giving, it ceases Cialis Soft Accutane 40mg - 30 pills 20 mg to be giving.
yeah, but it Trental 400 mg makes selfish people, like me, who don' t care Ethionamide 250mg - 20 pills about others, give once Anafranil 25mg - 90 pills in a while.
You are Buy Glucotrol Biaxin 250mg - 60 pills XL Online absolutely right, and if Chloramphenicol 250 mg your concern Keftab 250mg - 60 pills is only for the emotional well-being of those giving, then forcing benevolence is counter-productive. But if your concern is only for the needy, then whether or not the (relatively wealthy) 'giver' is edified is irrelevant.Of course, it's hardly so simple is it? Monetary donation is not always the best way to help the needy, who gets to decide who is "wealthy" and who is not? Just because someone is wealthy does not mean that their emotional health doesn't matter – or that it doesn't affect the health of society ("Ask not for whom the bell tolls…") Etc. My point is simply that government helping people is not necessarily the opposite of "people helping people." There will always be agencies whose purpose it is to distribute the alms, because if everyone is spending all their time being benevolent, then no wealth is produced for anyone. Furthermore, without a neutral, impersonal (to a certain degree) entity, those people who have no one personally close or capable to them have no where to go for help.So there has to be some entity whose purpose it is to fairly distribute benevolence. So how do we assign specialists to the field (to maximum productivity – the very basis of civilization) without become personally detached from the needy?Furthermore, what do we do about the deadbeats who will not help? If it is not the government's duty to enforce *that* civic duty, why do we enforce military registration (draft) or traffic laws or jury duty or etc. etc.In other words, there are some very complicated questions that hide at the bottom of this problem. Again, I don't disagree with you, I just think there is more to consider here.
What depresses Micardis 40 mg me about Mevacor 20mg - 60 pills having to Allegra 30mg - 90 pills disagree with Plendil 10 mg taking the government out of the equation is that I have met that person who would never give to another. I went on a few dates with him! But his statement of not even being willing to pay $50 for a wine tasting (that was a fundraiser for a non-profit) because he would never give to another ended that one really quickly. I asked what he would do if he didn't have to pay any taxes, and he said he would still never donate. It's people like him (because he can't be the only one out there) that make the government necessary to enforce "giving".
Just so Buy Cleocin Online every one knows, I was Aciclovir 800mg - 60 pills not suggesting Arimidex 1mg - 30 pills that my solution is viable in the state I described it in. I was just saying that if we cared enough there could be something done. Drew,It is not for the "emotional well-being" of the giver only, but also of the receiver and for societal "well-being" as well. When gratitude comes into the equation it can act as a motivator to rise above one's situation (obviously only if that is even possible for the person). Hopefully the receiver would respond by becoming someone who wouldn't need to receive anymore. They could become a giver.I realize I am scratching the surface here and I am by no means suggesting that I have answers. Just wanted to get my thoughts out there and get some reaction. I am glad that is happening.Jennifer,I don't think we can take the government out of the picture in the current state of things. There are too many people who would act just as the person you described would. There will always be those who will opt out of being part of society but that doesn't mean that we should give up. We can still take actions at a personal level that could eventually change the way things are. Change starts with the individual. If I change me then I am stepping in the right direction. Thanks everyone for the discussion. It keeps me on my toes.