How did government get involved in charity?

Events occurring and how they relate/affect Anabaptist faith and culture.
User avatar
Bootstrap
Posts: 14445
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2016 9:59 am
Affiliation: Mennonite

How did government get involved in charity?

Post by Bootstrap »

Josh wrote:Perhaps private charity could rise to they level if it (a) didn’t have to compete with free cash from the government, and (b) private citizens had more resources to spend on charity since the government wasn’t taking it from them in the first place.
There was a time that government provided almost no aid to the poor and this wasn't an issue. And a very large percent of the population was Christian, but they weren't doing enough to meet the need, so the government stepped in.

I believe in private charity, and I give more than I am taxed for welfare programs. But until we are managing to carry the load together, I think government programs are still needed. If anyone wants to argue the contrary, I invite them to lead the way in creating and funding private charity programs that will make government aid obsolete. I'm sure politicians would love to stop spending money on welfare. But if we had been doing a good enough job of that before government got so involved, we wouldn't have these programs in the first place.

Origins of the State and Federal Public Welfare Programs (1932 – 1935)
Prior to the 1900’s local governments shared with private charitable organizations major responsibility for public assistance or as it was often termed, “public relief.” As the nation’s economy became more industrial and the population more concentrated in urban areas, the need for public relief often grew beyond the means, and sometimes the willingness, of local public and private authorities to provide needed assistance. During the Progressive Era, some state governments began to assume more responsibility for helping the worthy poor. By 1926, forty states had established some type of public relief program for mothers with dependent children. A few states also provided cash assistance to needy elderly residents through old-age pensions. The programs and the size of the benefits varied widely among the states.

State financed public assistance programs were often inadequate to meet the challenges of large-scale unemployment and urban poverty that often afflicted states and urban areas. But it was the Great Depression of the 1930’s that led to the collapse of state financed public relief programs. State systems of public relief were simply unprepared to cope with the volume of requests for help from individuals and families without work or income. On top of that, the economic depression reduced state and local revenues. Conditions were so grave it became necessary for the federal government to step in and help with the costs of public relief.
0 x
Is it biblical? Is it Christlike? Is it loving? Is it true? How can I find out?
appleman2006
Posts: 2455
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2016 1:50 pm
Affiliation: Midwest Mennonite

Re: How did government get involved in charity?

Post by appleman2006 »

They got involved in charity because it got them votes. It made them look good. They care sooooooo much. (How do you make the dripping with honey sound in writing?)
Added to that people lobbied to have them get involved. Some with good intentions and some that probably felt that if they paid into charities everyone should. The fact is though that many of the hospitals and schools were run almost totally by charity in years go by. There was a much bigger understanding of the importance of families first taking care of the needs in their own families and then the broader community if it was needed.
Also, as late as the 30's there was still enough of a work ethic that a man was willing to do any work all day for a meal and a bed if he had to. Handouts were not taken for granted but you ask anyone from that era and they would tell you how common it was for them to feed hobos that were moving through the area.
I am not at all convince that the welfare and social programs as run by our governments is a net good thing and I am absolutely convinced that most of the programs would be run far more efficiently on a privately run basis where the charities were actually responsible to their donors.
0 x
User avatar
Bootstrap
Posts: 14445
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2016 9:59 am
Affiliation: Mennonite

Re: How did government get involved in charity?

Post by Bootstrap »

appleman2006 wrote:They got involved in charity because it got them votes. It made them look good. They care sooooooo much. (How do you make the dripping with honey sound in writing?)
I really do not know of a country or a period of time in our own history where (1) the government was not significantly involved in helping the poor and (2) the poor were not much worse off than in modern America.
appleman2006 wrote:Also, as late as the 30's there was still enough of a work ethic that a man was willing to do any work all day for a meal and a bed if he had to. Handouts were not taken for granted but you ask anyone from that era and they would tell you how common it was for them to feed hobos that were moving through the area.
Yes, that's true. But still, there was very significant poverty then, and programs like the CCC gave them useful work. These days, I wonder where a hobo / homeless person would go to find a day's work. The economy has changed.
appleman2006 wrote:I am not at all convince that the welfare and social programs as run by our governments is a net good thing and I am absolutely convinced that most of the programs would be run far more efficiently on a privately run basis where the charities were actually responsible to their donors.
I'm convinced that we have to keep looking for better ways to help, and charities are doing a lot of important and innovative work. That said, an awful lot of charities have ineffective programs, and an awful lot of charities have waste and fraud. I don't know a fair basis to compare the two.

Of course, we can design our own charities to do the best we know how to and keep them clean. But do you think our charities are up to the total load? How many poor people's needs is your congregation able to provide for? By all means, give, help with charities, look for better solutions. If we do that well enough, government can safely get out of the business. But not until then.
0 x
Is it biblical? Is it Christlike? Is it loving? Is it true? How can I find out?
appleman2006
Posts: 2455
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2016 1:50 pm
Affiliation: Midwest Mennonite

Re: How did government get involved in charity?

Post by appleman2006 »

I am not convinced that the poor are really better off today. At least when you take into consideration the overall big picture. The fact that there is no work in many cases for the poorest among us is often not because of lack of available work as much as a lack of willingness to do the work that is available. We have raised up a society of babies to a large extent. Also we have developed a welfare state where to a large extent the expectation no longer is that you will ever get out of it. It becomes a lifelong and even a generation to generation expectation. That is very different than it used to be not that terribly long ago.
0 x
User avatar
Bootstrap
Posts: 14445
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2016 9:59 am
Affiliation: Mennonite

Re: How did government get involved in charity?

Post by Bootstrap »

appleman2006 wrote:I am not convinced that the poor are really better off today. At least when you take into consideration the overall big picture. The fact that there is no work in many cases for the poorest among us is often not because of lack of available work as much as a lack of willingness to do the work that is available. We have raised up a society of babies to a large extent. Also we have developed a welfare state where to a large extent the expectation no longer is that you will ever get out of it. It becomes a lifelong and even a generation to generation expectation. That is very different than it used to be not that terribly long ago.
I agree with you that there willingness to work is a problem - but I also think many people just don't know where to find work.

In the 1930s, a construction site would hire a guy with a shovel to work all day. Today, that same work is done using equipment so expensive that the interest or insurance is more than a minimum wage job would pay, and we don't trust someone like that to operate the equipment.

In the 1930s, nobody had to check a box every time they apply for a job for the rest of their life if they are convicted of a serious crime. That makes it seriously harder for people who are trying to reform their lives.

So what do we have to offer them? I can find you a large number of people with shaky work histories and perhaps felony convictions who have few marketable skills. Where should they work?

Many of the poor are already working, but minimum wage may not be enough to pay for their families, at least in some areas where the cost of living is not in keeping with minimum wage. What do you suggest for them? Teaching frugal living is perhaps a viable approach, but are we doing that? Where and how?
0 x
Is it biblical? Is it Christlike? Is it loving? Is it true? How can I find out?
ken_sylvania
Posts: 3975
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2016 12:46 pm
Affiliation: CM

Re: How did government get involved in charity?

Post by ken_sylvania »

Bootstrap wrote:
appleman2006 wrote:I am not convinced that the poor are really better off today. At least when you take into consideration the overall big picture. The fact that there is no work in many cases for the poorest among us is often not because of lack of available work as much as a lack of willingness to do the work that is available. We have raised up a society of babies to a large extent. Also we have developed a welfare state where to a large extent the expectation no longer is that you will ever get out of it. It becomes a lifelong and even a generation to generation expectation. That is very different than it used to be not that terribly long ago.
I agree with you that there willingness to work is a problem - but I also think many people just don't know where to find work.

In the 1930s, a construction site would hire a guy with a shovel to work all day. Today, that same work is done using equipment so expensive that the interest or insurance is more than a minimum wage job would pay, and we don't trust someone like that to operate the equipment.

In the 1930s, nobody had to check a box every time they apply for a job for the rest of their life if they are convicted of a serious crime. That makes it seriously harder for people who are trying to reform their lives.

So what do we have to offer them? I can find you a large number of people with shaky work histories and perhaps felony convictions who have few marketable skills. Where should they work?

Many of the poor are already working, but minimum wage may not be enough to pay for their families, at least in some areas where the cost of living is not in keeping with minimum wage. What do you suggest for them? Teaching frugal living is perhaps a viable approach, but are we doing that? Where and how?
Are they willing to work a shovel all day, or throw blocks or carry concrete all day? And show up to work on time five days a week? Can they survive for a week without drugs.

I find it quite difficult to find people willing to do this. Sure, a certain percentage of my guys need to be able to operate equipment and drive vehicles, but I can use unskilled manual labor as well.

Over the last couple years, we've hired a number of people despite their checkered backgrounds. Some had spent time in prison or were on probation. Few lasted longer than a couple of months. Either they got themselves in trouble with the law again, or just got tired of the work, or couldn't be bothered to show up for work every morning.

Current employment law complicates this as well. I figure it takes between 4-8 hours just in administrative time to onboard a new employee. It's no longer legal to just pick up laborers at the street corner, work them for the day, and pay them cash wages at the end of the day. We have to verify ID and work authorization, get employment forms filled out, provide them with notices about their rights as employees, and then at the end of the day figure out what portion of their pay needs to be withheld and sent to the county, how much to the state, and how much to the federal government.
Then if I want to hire someone for just a couple weeks because I am extra busy, I have to reckon with the fact that when I let them go they will likely be eligible for unemployment benefits at my expense. In my opinion this all suppresses work opportunities for the people who need work most. I can't really afford to take a chance on someone who seems like they might not work out, because of the cost.
0 x
temporal1
Posts: 16279
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2016 12:09 pm
Location: U.S. midwest and PNW
Affiliation: Christian other

Re: How did government get involved in charity?

Post by temporal1 »

appleman2006 wrote:I am not convinced that the poor are really better off today. At least when you take into consideration the overall big picture.

The fact that there is no work in many cases for the poorest among us is often not because of lack of available work as much as a lack of willingness to do the work that is available.

We have raised up a society of babies to a large extent.
Also we have developed a welfare state where to a large extent the expectation no longer is that you will ever get out of it. It becomes a lifelong and even a generation to generation expectation.

That is very different than it used to be not that terribly long ago.
appleman2006 wrote:They got involved in charity because it got them votes.
It made them look good. They care sooooooo much. (How do you make the dripping with honey sound in writing?)
Added to that people lobbied to have them get involved.
Some with good intentions and some that probably felt that if they paid into charities everyone should.

The fact is though that many of the hospitals and schools were run almost totally by charity in years go by. There was a much bigger understanding of the importance of families first taking care of the needs in their own families and then the broader community if it was needed.

Also, as late as the 30's there was still enough of a work ethic that a man was willing to do any work all day for a meal and a bed if he had to.
Handouts were not taken for granted but you ask anyone from that era and they would tell you how common it was for them to feed hobos that were moving through the area.

I am not at all convince that the welfare and social programs as run by our governments is a net good thing
and I am absolutely convinced that most of the programs would be run far more efficiently on a privately run basis where the charities were actually responsible to their donors.
agreed.
i see one sinister change to add.
during the former administration, there was a serious government movement to aggressively remove private charities from the table [most being both faith-based, AND, known for both effectiveness and fiscal efficiency] .. i.e., they recognized what was being done “right,” couldn’t bear that it was to the credit of Christians.

so, they moved in with government’s deep pockets, either replacing those services altogether, or, providing funding .. which will, without question, ultimately lead to gov control.

the “in my face” example of this in my state, was when quickly+deftly, Catholic Adoption services (with 100+ year history) was put out of operation, immediately following laws that allowed homosexuals to adopt, the Catholic organization would not do that. (Wayne shared on forum similar happened in Maine.)

it was all planned beforehand.
the secular service was in place/ready to simply take over the Catholic service, at the “flip of a courtroom switch.”

after, i read a short comment from the Catholic representative that this is what happened, they were taken to court unprepared, they were helpless to respond. IL Catholic Adoption Services disappeared as tho swallowed into a black hole. thus, i use the word, “sinister.” :-|

what i see on the gov level, and, frankly, among hep young employed college graduates in my real life is .. the vision of creating a Christian world - WITHOUT Christ. they love themselves so much. they are taught to love/worship themselves. “everyone’s doing it.”
they are so cool. they’re awesome. :roll:

However. This is nothing new. Wise ones have known all-along. :)
Why is history ignored? it’s all so predictable.
One example:
temporal1 wrote: QUOTES: WILLIAM BOOTH 1829-1916
“The chief danger that confronts the coming century will be

religion without the Holy Ghost,

Christianity without Christ,

forgiveness without repentance,

salvation without regeneration,

politics without God,

heaven without hell.”

Go straight for souls, and go for the worst."
afterthought. :)
i’m ok with having both. government can do some things pretty well.
but, when they get into the business of taking over/removing the private sector from what it is recognized to be doing well, that’s just all-wrong.
i pray there is some way found for these intolerant fools to accept people of faith as valuable and worth putting up with. ‘cause, they really do not have all the answers, they really are not “all that.”

maybe this is wrong. i pray not. but, today, these words came to me:
Be still. And, know that YOU are not God. :-|
Last edited by temporal1 on Fri Feb 16, 2018 5:23 pm, edited 4 times in total.
0 x
Most or all of this drama, humiliation, wasted taxpayer money could be spared -
with even modest attempt at presenting balanced facts from the start.


”We’re all just walking each other home.”
UNKNOWN
Hats Off
Posts: 2532
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 6:42 pm
Affiliation: Plain Menno OO

Re: How did government get involved in charity?

Post by Hats Off »

Currently we see a lot of job postings (something for almost everyone). Minimum wage is $14 but so many people are still more interested in social assistance. And so many of them have two or more pets. There are definitely worthy poor but I wish the unworthy poor would not be the only ones wanting to rent my empty house.

I think I agree with Appleman that it was the "right" thing for government to do.
0 x
temporal1
Posts: 16279
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2016 12:09 pm
Location: U.S. midwest and PNW
Affiliation: Christian other

Re: How did government get involved in charity?

Post by temporal1 »

Hats Off wrote:Currently we see a lot of job postings (something for almost everyone). Minimum wage is $14 but so many people are still more interested in social assistance. And so many of them have two or more pets. There are definitely worthy poor but I wish the unworthy poor would not be the only ones wanting to rent my empty house.

I think I agree with Appleman that it was the "right" thing for government to do.
if i could find a job at $14 i would feel guilty.
0 x
Most or all of this drama, humiliation, wasted taxpayer money could be spared -
with even modest attempt at presenting balanced facts from the start.


”We’re all just walking each other home.”
UNKNOWN
User avatar
Bootstrap
Posts: 14445
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2016 9:59 am
Affiliation: Mennonite

Re: How did government get involved in charity?

Post by Bootstrap »

temporal1 wrote:i’m ok with having both. government can do some things pretty well.
but, when they get into the business of taking over/removing the private sector from what it is recognized to be doing well, that’s just all-wrong.
I completely agree with you here.
0 x
Is it biblical? Is it Christlike? Is it loving? Is it true? How can I find out?
Post Reply