Better Than Charity

What's the best way to help the world? Government programs? Charity? There's something better than both.

----
----

Government tried to "help the poor" by spending $27 Trillion on a "war on poverty". Shortly after its "war" began, the poverty rate STOPPED falling. Why?

Government handouts teach dependence.

Yaron Brook of the Ayn Rand Institute explains: "The government creates dependence by the very fact that it sends you a check, a welfare check or food stamps... and when you get a job, you lose that status. So your checks gets smaller and smaller."

That changes behavior. One woman noted, "As soon as you start doing good, they take everything [government assistance] away from you."

Many charities are better. Groups like "WorkFaith" and the "DOE Fund" help ex-convicts get back on their feet through work.

"Every time I get my paycheck, I know that I earned that. And for the first time in my life I can say that,” said one man helped by WorkFaith.

The DOE Fund helped John Buster, who pointed out: "They don't allow you to get food stamps ... They want you to be independent."

I donate to DOE. It changes lives.

But there's an even better way to help the world.

"250 years ago, almost all of us ... were earning what the UN today defines as extreme poverty," Yaron Brook points out.

"Today only about 8%... are that poor... Why? Not because of charity, not because of foreign aid."

Millions lifted themselves out of poverty thanks to private-sector, often "greedy", innovators. Because of entrepreneurial capitalism, we now take running water, medicines, cars, telecommunication, and longer lives for granted.

Those innovators are the real heroes of the modern era. Their work is more helpful to the world than charity.

[jimdavis]

Man, it costs a lot of money to keep people poor.

[richardjohnson]

Sure, government handles funds very efficiently, just look at San Francisco.

[jimmalachowsky]

"The worst thing you can do for the poor is to make them comfortable in their poverty". -Ben Franklin

[istp]

"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is a government big enough to take away everything you have" --- Jefferson.

[johnspinelli]

"Government is the problem, not the solution" -Ronald Reagan

[ruaridh]

it's a shame that none of this will change because people keep voting for whoever gives them the most free stuff :/

[Kennedyop]

Stossel is the best thing on YouTube!!

[tai]

The best social program is a job. ---Ronald Reagan

[scottw]

"The goal of welfare programs should be their own demise " Ronald Reagan

[NVArt]

If you pay people to do nothing, that's exactly what they'll do.

[TedSchoenling]

Everytime the US goes to war on an idea, the idea gets stronger....

[butteryfriedwizard]

Teachers union sucked it up and donated to the democratic party.

[benamini]

"I believe the best social program is a job."
Ronald Reagan

[networth]

CA has the largest economy and the highest poverty rate at over 18%.

[rogueviper]

It's the old saying..Give a man a fish and he is fed for the day, teach a man to fish and he will eat for life.

[pauperslament]

People dont have vested interest in things that are free.

[matt]

The government doesn’t want to end poverty. They need it to maintain control. The same goes with “racism”...

[soklyvann]

"When government says something is free, hold on tight to your wallets."

[chrisjackson]

When i graduated Highschool i lived in LIHTC housing, with my disabled mother; i, myself was disabled since 13 and on SSI for a head injury. We initially went to SSI to approve testing. They refused to cover testing to fix my issues and instead stuck me on disability. So, i wanted to go to College with what time i could manage to stay out of pain and awake during the day to become self reliant. College being the only place with limited days and working at home where a few possible careers would make me functional; after all i was a great student.

Unfortunately 3 things were made abundantly clear : One, if i moved out then my mother would lose her home because there is a 2 person minimum to be able to live in subsidized housing. Which *would* make her financially reliant on me or dead.

Two: i couldn't live in Government subsidized housing and go to school full time. Or my AND subsequently my mother's home would be taken away.

Three: If i got a part time job and i went to school part time i would lose my disability and medical that enabled me to even slightly function. But i would get to keep my home - not that it matters as i couldn't have sustained this with no medical coverage to cope with my head injury.

I'm telling this persinal story not for pity but to help everyone understand that the system is rigged. It is designed to keep people that are in the position i was poor and disabled. God forbid you were permitted to try and do something right without being punished for it. No one is going to work; even part time at a fast food place when you tell them they will almost certainly lose thier home, medical coverage and foodstamps.

Most people in the system don't like living that way, it's a worse hell than abject poverty could ever be. To be forced to twiddle your thumbs all day contemplating the choice of dying on the streets with a miniscule impact on society at best. Or living as a slave but safe and not allowed to lift a finger... That isn't a good situation for anyone; taxpayers suffer, the Government suffers, the people essnetialky being farmed as Democratic voters suffer (I use to be a firm Socialist in my early teen years, before better educating myself as it seemed the only recourse i had. I have been a moderate since i turned 15), but most of all the people being kept as cattle suffer. As someone who has been stuck in this cycle i can attest this is inhumane treatment. There is no greater hell.

[theevilone]

"Why should I be forced to pay someone else to have a better life than me" - Me