With Food Stamp Cuts, Adventist Community Services Preparing for More People in Need
by Monte Sahlin
By AT News Team, January 31, 2014
As the United States Congress votes to cut significant funding from the program that feeds the poor in America, Adventist community service ministries across the country were already seeing increases in need. Still popularly called "food stamps," the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program (SNAP) budget reductions will take about $90 a month away from each of nearly one million families, many of them employed full time at such low pay that they cannot adequately feed their children. "That is one meal per day off the table," an Adventist who works with poverty and nutrition told Adventist Today.
Community food pantries operated by Adventist churches have been reporting large increases in the numbers of families asking for help over the last year or more. For example, Good Neighbor House in Dayton, Ohio, was providing food for about 650 people each months in 2012 and that increased to 1,300 per month in the last half of 2013. Adventist community service centers in a number of other cities across the country gave Adventist Today similar reports.
"It's frustrating," said Sheila Hendricks, executive director of Adventist Community Services of Greater Washington. "People should not have to make a choice whether to pay the electric bill or feed their family; not in our country!" She stated that the food program was already hampered by many kinds of restrictions before the latest cuts were proposed. Poor families cannot use food stamps to get necessary staples like "laundry soap, dish soap, paper towels or toilet paper," and they can only get U.S. Department of Agriculture surplus items once a month no matter how small the amounts get.
Tom Randa, executive director of Good Neighbor Community Center sponsored by the Adventist churches in Lincoln, Nebraska, told Adventist Today that his volunteers have been providing food to more than 600 families each month through the fall, but "from the numbers, I can't really make a solid conclusion as to whether changes in government funding for SNAP benefits have affected our numbers" because "sources of our food in Lincoln are very low." The lack of supplies of donated food limits the number of families that can be assisted.
The Coalition for Human Need, a national, secular organization that includes all of the regional food banks in America, has reported that the food banks are having difficulty increasing the supply of groceries donated to them. The food banks get their donations from large grocery companies and as these corporations become more efficient at reducing waste in their operations, the amount of surplus inventory they can donate declines.
Marcia Ehlers, assistant director at Good Neighbor House in Dayton, said, "I can't depend totally on the food bank [so] we rely on individual donations through our churches, through the Golden Buckeyes seniors group" and other civic organizations." Several churches of other denominations also give Good Neighbor House regular donations in cash and food supplies, although it is an Adventist agency. She tries to get on the agenda at three or four groups each week to make a plea for their help. There are 70 to 80 other food pantries in the metropolitan area that also get supplies from the food bank.
An early indicator of the impact of the changes in the SNAP program, Ehlers reported, "We have seen an increase in our volunteers" because the law in Ohio now requires recipients to do 40 to 70 hours of volunteer work each month. Even though most are single parents and already have full-time jobs, they have to find a way to do this additional work "because they need the food. I know we are going to have a lot more people coming in."
More than one of the directors that Adventist Today interviewed mentioned another trend: The increase of senior citizens who come in for groceries because they have grandchildren living with them and their budget cannot cope with the additional food needed. And, "some people who were donors in the past are now in the line getting served."
Ehlers also believes in prayer to raise the resources her center must have to meet the needs of the poor in this Midwestern city hard hit by changes in the manufacturing sector. "If you pray with faith, God's going to come through," Ehlers told Adventist Today. She told two stories that are powerful examples for her.
"We ran out of tomato sauce," a staple in cooking family meals in this part of the country. "There was none in the food bank or at other pantries. I went in the office, shut the door and prayed." Moments later she received a phone call. "A friend said there is a wreck on the highway. There are 38,000 cans of tomato sauce. Can you use it?"
Another time the center was completely depleted of dishware to distribute. "I prayed again and within 45 minutes got a phone call from a country club. They said we are trying to give away our old china. Do you want it. It was six vans full."
"The Bible says a lot about the poor," said Hendricks. "God expects us to take care of the poor, but it is easy to forget that when we live in a country that is fairly affluent. We are going to be held accountable. It is very important that we take care of those who are less fortunate."
There are more than 400 cities that have an Adventist Community Services center, although most of these are entirely volunteer operations that open only one day a week. Fewer than 50 have employed a professional, full-time director and are open to the public several days a week. The smaller operations generally provide only a food pantry and clothing program or maybe a thrift store. The larger agencies often provide additional services such as medical and dental clinics, literacy and English-as-a-Second-Language classes, job-finding and health promotion activities.
This is wonderful! Our extremity is God's opportunity to show us His power. Maybe now we can start learning to practice charity according to the Biblical model and to be servants of God who are totally dependant on Him and ministering in His power instead of being agents of the government.
I'm wondering why the creators of this news item chose to omit a significant portion of the frame for this story. Need will always expand to consume the resources available to meet demand and sustain dependency. And encouraged, subsidized dependency will always create more "need" for limited resources.
The participation of able-bodied adults without dependents who are on food stamps increased from 1.7 million to 3.9 million (127%) between 2007 and 2010, while overall food stamp use grew from 26 million to nearly 40 million (43%) during that period. Food stamp spending is double today what it was in 2008. This explosion cannot be accounted for by an ailing economy that has been "on the rebound" since the immaculate recovery of Summer, 2009. In the area where I live, there are dozens of stores that advertise "CASH for EBT CARDS" and "CASH for FOOD COUPONS."
Precisely why Adventist food pantries are experiencing an upsurge in demand when food stamps are flowing at unprecedented levels needs to be explored. How do those food pantries work to transform lives and reduce dependency?
As you may not have very much interaction with very many food stamp recipients, let me provide some information about this (as there are likely few other ways you might find this out), Brother Nathan.
When stores advertise “CASH for EBT CARDS” this is for some welfare recipients who probably also get supplemental nutrition (food) benefits.
Cash is only available to those who qualify and is from the same cards and the same PIN that is used as a debit card for food purchases. This cash benefit is mainly in the form of what’s called Temporary Assistance to Needy Families, more commonly known as TANF. Non-food items cannot be purchased with SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or food stamp) benefits, but can be purchased with TANF.
Food benefits are not very much and therefore many who are recipients also utilize food pantries operated by charitable non-profit organizations. Our pantries are our Community Service Centers. (You wouldn’t be criticizing both the government’s efforts and the church’s efforts to provide food and other assistance to the poor?)
As difficult as this may be to believe, some recipients of food benefits and cash benefits actually work full time at low-wage jobs; and still require some assistance. The poor will always be with us. Yeah, I know it’s their fault and all that…and the fault of liberal bleeding hearts…but nevertheless they still have to eat.
To further (hopefully) clarify regarding those signs you see, ‘CASH’ is not available with SNAP benefits, but is available on the same EBT card through the TANF benefit.
Thank you, Stephen, for this information. However, I am not as oblivious to how government assistance works as your stereotype of me would have you believe. Two of my sons-in-law work closely with the populations that are served by food stamps and food coupons. And my wife has worked very hard on getting such assistance for the kids she works with.
Your observations don't really address my points or questions, which is certainly your prerogative. I have deep criticisms of governmental efforts to help the poor, because those programs subsidize and perpetuate poverty and dependency, which is primarily a problem of values, not resources. I am very glad for the church's efforts to provide food and other assistance to the needy, as long as the church is engaging with those it serves, as opposed to just handing out food indiscriminately. I happen to believe that the best way to meaningfully reduce dependency is to eliminate all cash benefits or benefits that can readily be converted to cash, and insist that those who are able-bodied provide labor in exchange for benefits.
You're right, Stephen. People do have to eat. If the government decided tomorrow that it will no longer give food stamps to roughly 4 million able-bodied Americans without dependents, do you think they would starve? Or do you think they might get a job that payed enough so that they could feed themselves? There is no better incentive to self-improvement and hard work than need and want. Why not argue for common sense reforms of government assistance programs instead of just de monizing those who seek reform, and assuming that throwing more money at the problem is the compassionate thing to do?
I do not dispute that there are needy people in America who need assistance. But too often those folks are used as mascots to continually expand a wasteful, corrupting, massive bureaucracy, with no empirical evidence that the good it does outweighs the harm resulting from the dependency, sense of entitlement, and non-productive values it creates.
I don't blame dependents for wanting to remain dependent, particularly if responsible behavior is not demanded in return. What I do get frustrated with is those who refuse to face the tough questions posed by the reality that more and more money spent on welfare programs seems to have made little to no postive impact on the problems of poverty.
Certainly we’ve been to this rodeo previously. Suffice it to say Nathan that we will never come close to an agreement on this—except that we won’t agree.
We should perhaps at least agree that we will always have poor people with us and that they must somehow eat. It’s hard not to stereotype your perspective when your solution sounds like ‘if they go hungry they will be motivated to no longer be poor and in need.’
It seems like you think that our system of economics and government would organically eliminate poverty if we reduced/halted government intervention; which I hope is a complete misreading/misunderstanding; but I am afraid may not be. (My stereotype of your position goes like this: we will always have poor people because we will always have lazy people; and we’ll always have lazy people as long as someone is enabling their sloth by giving them food and/or monetary assistance. We should make them work, but shouldn’t provide too many government jobs, of course; because government jobs are not real jobs—and such ‘jobs’ only expand the bureaucracy.) I should be grateful that we (now) agree that the poor will always be with us and that they must eat.
I also fully understand that some of ‘us’ think that it is solely the role of the church and/or God’s people to help those who are in need. All I can say is that I’m sure many poor/hungry Americans are gratified that there are godless atheists hanging around somewhere.
I understand, Stephen, how what I say can come across that way. I really don't feel that wayor think that way, and don't see things in such either/or terms as you might imagine. What I oppose is the tendency to see and treat the poor as a pre-defined static, identity group. That is a destructive cannard. Almost all poverty could be eliminated in America if people would finish high school, not have babies out of wedlock, and get married.
I grew up below the poverty line by current government standards, adjusted backward for inflation. But I was taught the values of hard work, personal responsibility, and delyaed gratification, values which handouts, mediated by government bureacrats, undermine.There is a place for governemtn safety nets. But I vigorously oppose the notion the the church should function as a government benefit extender or as a supplemental assistance program. The church should be at the forefront of fighting with love – not politically – against the corrosive, character destroying effects of well-intentioned, but highly impersonal and indiscriminate government assistance programs that subsidize personal irresponsibility and lack of accountability.
My family is very involved in charitable efforts to address the problems of poverty on a personal level. But as William noted above, it is a very sad day for the church when it sees government welfare policy as a factor in its witness for Christ.
Regardless of how we of the eldest alive generation view the responsibility of the individual in a fair equality society, we must deal with the reality of what we have.
Western societies have gravitated to political control of the peoples by buying them. The mighty (for whatever reasoning) have always determined what and how the ranks shall live. How many crumbs are allowed to drop from the table. Following WWII & the 1950's, Western governments formerly existing as isolated states, have organized into a global hierarchy of sorts, with the United Nations (UN) the vehicle to formulate policies of interest to its members. The UN taking its orders from Global Banking. The wealth of the Earth is many times the threshold required to feed, clothe, and house every human Earthly human in luxury. The 2% of Global enterprizes that contol 95% of global wealth have stored these resources in their storehouses, to play with in manipulating the masses with terror, strife, and wars of mass destruction. THE ULTIMATE POWER ON EARTH IS CONTROL OF ALL PEOPLES.
Rather than dream of how each individual should put their shoulder to the load, pull themselves up by their boot straps, has never been the norm, it AIN"T gonna happen. This is where we are at. This is what must be dealth with.
The powerful, the political forces on Earth, have utilized their craving selfish egos to enslave the masses. As Steven has stated, the challenged for what ever reason must eat, be clothed, be housed, or society has no reason to exist.
The babies, the children, the mentally and physically challenged, the poor, the poor in spirit, the disposessed, the uneducated, the backward, the needy, the indigent are not to be thrown under the train, thrown into the ovens. Those of priviledge are given the responsibility for caring and providing for them, These are those that modern day would be Samaritans must provide for. The millions of wandering souls from one war zone to another, interned in filthy camps, their fly infested emaciated babies crying for milk. These are the little ones that Christ made the object lesson for the mighty men, the Kings of the Earth, to provide for.
They have not accepted this essential assignment, and as a result their world will come crashing down on their shoulders, those who have fornicated with Earthly powers to fill their ships, their storehouses, their pantrys with goods, while remaining indifferent and cold, and turning their backs to the misery.
If the comment doesn't show posting, what is the solution?? This happens frequently, and we sit waiting??
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-11-13/how-mcdonald-s-and-wal-mart-became-welfare-queens.htmlWalmart and macDonalds are the biggest welfare queens. By paying an unlivable wage, their employees are forced to apply for food stamps, which in Walmarts case, are then spent at Walmart.
This is a large tax subsity to one of the wealthiest corporations in the world. The four Walton's each are worth $35billion. Both corporations teach their employees how to apply for food stamps, and we all pay for it,
It seems Stephen and Nathan express two extremes without trying to understand another or balanced approach. Both are right but like to twist the other's words. If two Christians can't debate the issue and compromise, why should we expect our Congress to? I don't recognize any solutions here.
The poor shouldn't be stereotyped for they vary. My husband did social dental work in this country for years (it is different in other places without alternatives) and found both situations. Some poor are not so poor and will take advantage of every freebie they can manipulate. The really poor are harder to find, as they often hide their circumstances. And others are in-between.
You both stereotype each other and the victims. I am sure that Nathan goes out of his way to help others as Stephen would as well. Let's not demonize other approaches.
The problems that cause most poverty must be addressed rather than throwing free money at individuals. Our schools need overhauling (unions make it hard), the unmarried-with-children culture (started and perpetuated by movies, TV, and mostly rich white celebrities), Infrastructures need changing. Those living in inner cities don't even have stores to walk to let alone jobs.
I am glad to see many businesses training and helping poverty youth. What can we do? Stand for what is right and promote common-sense solutions that respect all people and pull them out of poverty. Provide tax breaks for businesses who get in there and help. Stop putting down religions that help the poor. And persuade our media to be more responsible. Work through your church and legitimate helping organizations that seek solutions. The IRS should stop giving breaks to ALL political organizations and promote helping ones.
Ella,
I am thankful seeing your understanding of what it means to minister to those in need and the challenges facing our society.
God has been teaching me many things about what it means to minister in His name as I have become increasingly involved in the ministry the Holy Spirit has given me. One of the biggest lessons He has taught me is the dramatic differences between a ministry that He empowers and the actions of faith-based groups who are working in the name of God, but who lack any evidence of the power of God because they have simply become extensions of government. By doing this they have become partners with a government that is increasingly anti-spiritual and seeking to destroy all faith in God. So, when you read the words of someone vigorously defending government social policies but never sharing about any experience with the power of God it should be quite obvious that the speaker has a form of godliness but none of the power. Scripture directs us to stay away from such people. They may be convinced they are believers in God when they are unwitting servants of Satan.
I am continually amazed by the adventures on which God sends my ministry volunteers and by the ways we see Him working in power. For example, a few weeks ago our community was shocked by a horribly tragic murder-suicide involving a widowed mother and autistic child who lived around the corner from Oakwood University. The reactions among most Adventists in the area were shock and inaction. But my church was involved immediately. We started by providing meals to the widow's sister who had come to tend to the funeral and begin recovering things from the fire-damaged home. My team went in and helped her do that large and terrible job. When we started the day she looked as if she were carrying the weight of the world on her shoulders. But if you look at the group photos we took at the end of the work you would hardly believe the size of the smile on her face. God's love in action made the difference. I don't know how many volunteers I had working that day because more came after my last count when there were 15. That's from a church with about 130 members. I wish you could see the looks of utter amazement on the faces of people hearing about what a blessing-filled day we had! Some simply cannot believe we would have gone into such a situation. But God sent us there and we had the great blessing that comes from being His hands.
The ministry model Jesus gave us was demonstrating the love and power of God in ways that improved the lives of those He was helping. By doing that He drew them to Him and created a desire to know Him better. Whether it is a food pantry, an adult literacy center, or whatever ministry it should be demonstrating the love and power of God in ways that cultivate in the hearts of those helped a desire to know God better. If God provided food for millions of Israelites during their 40 years in the desert, He is entirely capable of providing what we need to demonstrate His love and power in our communities. We need to learn to depend completely on Him and guard against letting our concept of ministry become a powerless extension of the anti-spiritual policies of government.
The money for food stamps comes from the farm program. Most think farmers get this but a very high % of it all goes for feeding those who qualify for the benefit. We farmers don't mind feeding those in real need. As most of you do not like to be taken advantage of we do not like it as well. We all know there are those who know how to work the system. This seems to be passed on from generation to generation is what I see. Raising the minimum wage may help but it's not enough.
Why should people find low paying jobs when the system pays more in the long run with all the health benefits that go with it. Rent is paid, health care and perhaps even a car and all the costs assoited with it and food to feed them is all part of great packages.
All this is costly to our government that is trying to expand when there are fewer and fewer paying taxes as jobs are teken to China or else where and leaving more and more jobles people for us to take care of.
Steve,
I think you've hit on an important point: few of us would have any opposition to helping those who are genuinely in need.
You may enjoy reading an article about the minimum wage that was posted on the Forbes Magazine website on January 30: http://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffreydorfman/2014/01/30/almost-everything-you-have-been-told-about-the-minimum-wage-is-false/. The author shows with government statistics how most of the claims being made to justify raising the minimum wage are lies told to promote political objectives.
One thing I've noticed recently is how President Obama began talking a lot about "income inequality" but abandoned it for other descriptives to promote his economic agenda. He promotes the claims refuted in that article as essential to future national prosperity. Those claims overlook an inconvenient truth: low-wage jobs are essential to a healthy economy and prosperity because there is nothing like an inadequate income to motivate a person to improve their capacity to earn a higher income. Poverty motivated me to go to school at night for six years and earn a master's degree so I could get a better job with a paycheck big enough for me to live comfortably while helping others improve their lives.
(Regarding the minimum wage) “…low-wage jobs are essential to a healthy economy and prosperity because there is nothing like an inadequate income to motivate a person to improve their capacity to earn a higher income.”
It would be difficult to stereotype—and even more challenging to parody—a position that might sound more facetious than this; but at least this position is honest.
Most pundits and politicians would much rather disingenuously say that “now is the wrong time to raise the minimum wage, because it would rob the people it’s designed to help of entry level job opportunities,” or some other such similar complete nonsense; than simply admit that they are philosophically opposed to the government mandating employers to pay anyone any given amount of money (on ‘free market’ and ‘free enterprise’ grounds).
These very same ‘principles’ had, of course, historically fueled the opposition to reforms which mandated safe work places, outlawed child labor, and created the American 40-hour work week. A minimum wage, at minimum, reduces the opportunities for the exploitation of human capitol (which is an inevitable result of greed).
Thankfully we have actual, recent, documented American history whereby we can see what has and has not occurred as the minimum wage has been increased in the past.
Correction: “…reduces the opportunities for the exploitation of human capital (which is an inevitable…)”
It is amazing how closely your posts reflect the latest popular political rhetoric without the benefit of facts!
I should have said: It is amazing how closely your posts reflect the latest political rhetoric without the benefit of facts while avoiding all discussion of ministry according to scripture and in the power of God. Since our words reflect the priorities in our lives, it appears that your greater loyalty is to politics and your lesser loyalty is to God. I will be happy to read any personal testimony you may offer about the power of God working in you to minister His love to others as refutation of what is most apparent in your postings.
Dear Brother Noel,
We’ve been here before. We don’t agree on economics or politics (or much of anything else, including religion/Adventism/Christianity). Normally when someone disagrees with one politically (or otherwise), simply pointing out what is incorrect or inaccurate in what they have said—and understanding that mere disagreement on economics or politics (or anything else for that matter) is the other person’s prerogative—is a better course than judging the other person as less loyal to God.
I’ve already stipulated, for your benefit, that you are unquestionably holier than I am (and would reiterate that it is highly unlikely that I will ever be compelled to prove anything to you about anything other than the topic of my choosing).
Now, if you don’t mind, please let me know specifically what it is that I wrote that is devoid of fact. I understand that I haven’t (and won’t) tell you what you want to hear, but I do attempt to be factual.
Ella,
You’ve said that Nathan and I seemingly “express two extremes without trying to understand another or balanced approach.” Would you be kind enough to point out what each of us has said (written) here that represents “two extremes” in your view?
Stephen,
Here's the bottom line: you expect us to believe lies. You have faithfully echoed the claims of all the promoters of Obamacare about how you could keep your doctor, wouldn't lose your insurance, how much money a family would save, and on and on. All those things have been show as complete and total lies. Obamacare was promoted based on the same allegiance to lies that you have shown here. If past revelations were not ehnough, yesterday we had the veil ripped off yet another lie: the claim that Obamacare would create jobs; 400,000 of them immediately and 6 million of them over ten years. Now none other than the Congressional Budget Office (which has consistently underestimated the cost of Obamacare) released a report predicting it will cost Americans $1 trillion in lost income, increase the American national debt by another $1 trillion and cost 2.3 million jobs. So the volume of reasons to not believe your statements just grew more.
Stephen, the truth is judging you as you continue repeating and defending the growing volume of lies being told by your political masters. By repeating their lies you have made the statements your own and it is your reputation that is being defamed.
God expects us to tell the truth and will call us to account for our words, so you must answer to God in the Judgement for believing, repeating and defending lies. Yet because of His great mercy and love toward us, God is offering you again today the opportunity to repent of believing and repeating those lies, to turn your back on them and begin living truthfully. So I pray that you will let God do His marvelous work of transformation in you today so that we can again put trust in your words.
William,
As I’ve said, my brother, it would be difficult to parody your pronouncements. Are you seriously suggesting that (strenuous) disagreement with you William, about temporal political ideology, or economic philosophy, or public policy approaches, is tantamount to the road to perdition?
This thread had to with food stamps. The reality is that I have made no mention of ‘Obamacare;’ so why do you do so—and then proceed to cast judgment on me for doing so? Please tell me what I have written here that is in any way inaccurate.
I (sort of) hate to be the one who has to break this to, but you do not speak for God. Although this may be hard to believe, one can disagree with you about food stamps (or ‘Obamacare’) and be/remain a Christian. Bless your heart; you mean no harm.
Lies are lies and those who repeat the lies told by others wrap themselves in the coat of their falsehood. Since you repeated the past lies told by your political thought leaders about Obamacare and you are repeating their claims about food stamps, why should we not logically conclude that your current assertion is of the same character?
You chose to wear the coat of political falsehoods and let it become your reputation. God can cleanse you of it only after you realize how contrary lying is to His character and you gain greater allegiance to Him than to politics.
Some of the participants on this site have an excellent custom of copying and pasting statements/sentences to which they are responding. Since you are a brother, and have leveled an accusation of prevarication, it is only fair to ask you to identify the statements to which you've made reference.
Perhaps some statements are subject to correction; but they’d need to be specifically identified. So, for the third time, what did I write that is not accurate William? You have stated that I have “repeated the past lies told by [my] political thought leaders about Obamacare and [I] am repeating their claims about food stamps;” so please simply specify what it is that I've repeated.
I really do not like to be the one to tell you that you don’t speak for divinity William; but clearly no one has done so.
Finally, I would again ask you, dear brother, if you are seriously suggesting that (strenuous) disagreement with you about temporal political ideology, or economic philosophy, or public policy approaches, is remotely meaningful in some way, or is perhaps sinful in any way?
Apparently avoiding accountability is a skill at which you are well practiced. Maybe it'll work for you the Judgement Day, too.
My dear Brother Noel,
You have (repeatedly) accused me of repeating lies, my brother. Please identify what lie I have repeated. I would like to take responsibility; but I need to know for what statement. You might take responsibility for your accusation and identify what untrue statement I’ve repeated.
I would wager that my political persuasion is a minority one on these boards; but I’d imagine people of good will who are even your political allies would like you to specify the 'false' statement.
Since you've played the "Judgment Day" card, allow me to ask you again if disagreement with you about temporal political ideology, or economic philosophy, or public policy approaches, constitutes a ticket to eternal damnation; or is the same as disagreeing with God?
Are you actually being facetious and I’m just not appreciating your sense of humor? If so, the joke’s on me, huh?
Stephen,
Jesus told us to minister in the power of the Holy Spirit and to teach the eternal truths of scripture, yet the predominant focus of your postings is advocating for a human political philosophy that is founded on falsehoods. Yet you ask for proof of your statements. I submit simply this: the complete absence from your postings of any focus on God, His power or His teachings in scripture.
You claim to be a follower of Jesus, but instead of celebrating the great power of a loving and pure God, your focus is the sinful philosophy of fallen men. Instead of exploring the truths of scripture, you present the teachings of Marx, Alinsky and Davis. Had Jesus been of that same mind He would have been a servant of Herod instead of our loving savior. Even Matthew, a tax collector, left his position and loyalty to the government to become a follower of Jesus.
You cannot serve both God and popular politics because they are opposites. More than that, they are blood enemies with one seeking to destroy the other before the pre-existent One fulfills His promise to destroy the first. It is contrary to the character of the One who created this world and told us to not commit murder to legitimize the mass murder of the unborn. God promised to bless those who obey Him so prosperous that they would be the envy of the world, yet you advocate for a political philosophy that is reducing the prosperous to paupers through progressive taxation while enriching those who serve it.
Is God not more powerful than human governments? Are we not commanded to be ministering God's love to others using power that does not come from humans? Has not God promised to destroy all powers that are opposed to Him? So, how long will you keep advocating for human power and philosophy? How long must God wait before you will surrender your philosophy to His far greater reality? Will you ever let His power transform you and begin working through you according to His will instead of the will of man? Or, will you be eternally lost because of your greater loyalty to the philosophies of men?
Well, so much for your sense of humor.
I think most would agree that I have tried to discover what the lie that I have allegedly repeated was. William, the reality is that you subscribe to a different economic philosophy than I do in terms of temporal domestic politics/ideology. It really is that simple, my brother.
You appear not to be at all tolerant of any other ideology except yours. (You now must deny that you have one.) The fact that you oppose an ideology/philosophy indicates that you prefer another one. Clearly all economic philosophies are flawed because they are of and for fallen men. If you’d denounced all economic philosophy as “sinful [philosophies] of fallen men” you’d have deniability; but you have a strong preference for one over the others (which if fine). Your staunch opposition to Obamacare, or food stamps, or liberalism, or whatever, and your strong preference for the ‘Tea Party,’ is well within your rights; and even understandable. But it’s intolerant of you to have a definite personal preference and assign all who have another preference to hell.
You quite regularly and quite frequently comment on atoday.org news items that have political implications, which is certainly your prerogative William. But it is intolerant, among other things, to deny those of a differing perspective the right to do so—with condemnation.
If history has proven anything it is that you will not accept this perspective. Hopefully at some point, someone from whom you can accept information will have the courage to tell you this as well. I would advise you (for whatever it’s worth) that your credibility on any number of fronts is compromised when you level charges of lying (and/or repeating lies), but are unable—and therefore unwilling—to identify/back them with any specificity of any kind.
Be blessed anyway brother, no matter what.
Hey, at least I tried to inject a touch of humor.
You must have gotten good grades in your Liberal Debate classes because you've mastered the tactics taught by Saul Alinsky in "Rules For Radicals." I would quote directly from the book except I threw away my copy after God showed me the great evil in what he advocated and how deeply dedicated he was to the destruction of all faith in God.
Alinsky taught that there is no such thing as truth, that what people think of as "truth" is actually a transitory commodity that changes depending on your need to advocate for whatever you are trying to achieve and in your efforts to defame the character of anyone who disagrees with you. If someone measures your claims against some standard and questions your credibilty, change the subject and attack them from another direction. If they keep refuting your claims, accuse them of being intolerant, biased, bigoted, or some other socially repugnant behavior. (Or, as you have done, accuse me of being haughty, thinking I am holier or more pious, or just condemning). If your accuser persists and they won't let you change the subject, feign ignorance and ask them to prove where you said what they have caught you saying. Then, in the moment of quiet that follows as they begin looking to document your actions, seize upon the silence to attack and claim they can't prove anything because they didn't respond instantly. Then, above all, change the topic.
How I wish you were as energetic in advocating for God and ministering in the power of the Holy Spirit as you are in defending what is directly opposed to God and dedicated to the destruction of all faith in God.
Huh?! When did you (intentionally) inject humor? Then again, since you’ve never specified what “lies” I have allegedly repeated, never mind.
I had never heard of Saul Alinsky until Obama Derangement Syndrome spread across the land and have never read anything he has ever written; but William, if you think that the Saul Alinsky talking points talking points aren’t talking points of political rhetoric, then you should really think again.
Why is it that you feel entitled to engage in political and ideological rhetoric, and entitled to opine on economic philosophy, yet seek to (shall we say) discourage me—even with the threat of death and damnation—for daring to opine otherwise? From whence cometh this sense of entitlement and the audacity to deny me the same privileges that you so freely exercise?
I’ve been advised by multiple people whom I respect to leave you alone. I think it best to take their advice.
Stephen,
If you can't take the hits, what are you doing in the boxing ring?
Yes Government benefits from raising the wage as a percentage is also taxed.
If I were president..(not happening) I would try to get all to do something of those who can work.( I do understand there are those who can not.)Who says we all need to work for someone or get a job? Whats wrong with starting your own business? Perhaps it takes work? And who says you must have a college education to do it? All can do something even if it's crafts or something you can do to sell. Being involved in the local public school ( bus driver ) I have seen some great furniture from wood shops in schools money can't buy. Also some FFA programs produce some great things like teaching kids to weld and build things like some nice trailers and other fine products. I have seen even handicapped kids produce some very nice things.
Many can do things if they were just motivated to do so. It would help our country a lot and we would see some very nice things for sale if this would happen.
Some of the most wealthy people in this country started from scratch and some only had an 8th grade education..J.A. Baldwin who started Baldwin filters ( Kearney, Ne ) had an 8th grade education. Today those filters are sold all over the country and maybe even the world. At one time I worked there and ran the .machine to cut large rolls of paper to what ever size needed for a particular filter. I came up with a mechanmical way to improve the way lifting was done to stack those rolls of paper to save our backs.
Now I farm, drive for the school and started a water well service business..Yes it's work but it has paid off.
I would encourage all to be creative and start something if jobless.
Steve,
You're absolutely right. If you want people to be employed, allow them to enjoy the fruits of their labors. Let them be successful, make a profit and even get rich. That's what make America the economic powerhouse of the world for so long. But the government is preventing that by imposing ever-more draconian barriers at every turn. As a farmer, I'm sure you could cite plenty of examples about what you are required to do and not allowed to do because of environmental regulations and just to meet the requirements of government bureaucracy.
Wake up people!!! What made the USA great economically is PASSE… Its GONE. It's not coming back. It was a once in a lifetime opportunity that has run its course. Perhaps a 100 or 200 years happening. There are events that shatter the status quo of Global existence, such as World Wars with weapons of mass destruction, and or plagues and natural disasters that wipe out billions of lives, we will not recreate the conditions of man on Earth, as it was in the 1900's. The absolute must to survive created a desire in the gut of common men and men with fertile creative minds to excel at any cost. It was contagious, and a new nation spawned of European seed, that moved to an unknown land in the 1600's, to stake out a claim for independence, rid it self of serfdom, freedom of religion or none, and an opportunity for self achievement unavailable anywhere else.
That was the cause of the AMERICAN DREAM, the MIRACLE happening ofopportunity, that's what made AMERICA GREAT.
In the 1900's there were menial jobs that the undereducated masses could perform by using their hands. Common Labor. These jobs are long gone. Exported to Asia. Technology has created a way for mankind to live other than
the "sweat of his brow". In another ten years, man will not be required to assemble almost every item of mass production, as robotic technology has arrived, and other than a few specialists, production will be by robots. Have you noted the advancement of "AI" (artificial intelligence)?? NANO and GRAPHENE?? Have you noted the production of multifaceted solid MEDproducts by 3D printing?? Also other 3D printing of GUNS, and of most any type of solid product imaginable from any type of materials?? Robots will begin to be seen as front line, in war. Unmanned aircraft fighters.
Open your eyes, we are on the cusp of rapid, almost instant innovation of tools that severely remove s the needs of the masses to perform. NO JOBS, NO JOBS FOR MUCH OF THE WORLDS PEOPLES. We are already well into the BELL CURVE and climbing fast. The unemployed, the unemployable are with us now. They will increase rapidly globalwide. What problems will this present to societies all around the world, as it impacts each area where there are at the present moment?? And what changes must the Churches make in order to survive?? What changes must each of us as individuals make, what contingency plans for survival and protective existence??
i submit to you, brothers and sisters, "IT IS LATER THAN WE THINK". Something very dramatic is sure to happen soon to get the WORLD"S ATTENTION. It is indeed imminent. Are we prepared? Are YOU prepared?
Think about it.
Now to the topic "PREPARING FOR EVEN MORE PEOPLE IN NEED".
Unless the governments provide food, clothing , and shelter, and meaningful activity for the unemployed masses, all hell will breakout worldwide.
You can talk until the cows come home about the need for individuals to lift theirshare of the load, but the load is being withdrawn as progress marches on without them. This bodes darkly for American cities, as municipal goverments become totally inadequate to handle the demands for services, especially the law and order requirements. Living in small burgs and towns and outlying communities with organized protective aids will soon be the norm.
Income equality, redistribution of wealth, is a must demand for governments, if they will escape the past destruction as Detroit, and Los Angeles has suffered in the past, multiplied by a high power. Its at our doors. Don't stick your head in thesand, it isn't going to pass us by.
Earl,
I have posited elsewhere that certain well-intentioned politicians have concluded that, in reality, America’s best days are indeed gone forever, because our manufacturing base is gone as American workers cannot/won’t compete with the practically slave wages paid to workers in the so-called Third World; and that our manufacturers cannot compete with those in industrialized democracies because the governments in those nations largely pay for their citizens’/workers’ health care costs; whereas our manufacturers largely foot those costs. (Take the American auto industry versus the German or Japanese auto industries for example.)
These realities, along with the technological advances that you have identified, are ominous signs.
This being so, certain individuals have made it their mission to look out for the indigent, the elderly, the children, and women; to put them all in life preservers as the ship is apparently sinking.
They conclude, as you do, that it’s later than we think; albeit somewhat differently.
Stephen,
You are partly correct. But I'll not blame that on you because virtually all political leaders on both sides of the aisle have been talking-up what you described for so long that few people even question the view. Please remember that I have a Master's Degree in Business Management that is focused on the management of technology so I am intimately familiar and professionally expert on the topic.
Businesses go where they can enjoy lower operating costs. The absolute, far and away #1 reason American manufacturing has gone overseas and the American economy is weak is the tax and regulatory burdens imposed by government that are either some of the highest in the world and growing faster than anywhere else on the planet. The #2 reason has been the relaxation of trade tariffs through things like "most-favored nation" status that allows for tariff-free imports from nations that actively engage in technology theft, copyright violation and currency manipulation. The other factors are far less significant contributors which American industries learned long ago to manage and even overcome.
Believe it or not, some industries fled almost completely to other countries 20 or so years ago to take advantage of low labor costs are now moving back because those countries have developed and their labor costs have risen to the point where it is cheaper to hire American workers to make those items here! A good example of that is Volkswagen, which looked at building a major factory in India but decided instead to build it in Chattanooga, TN because their costs would be lower. A number of other industries such as electronics manufacturing are also returning.
You are correct that the American economy is not as strong as it was and that is why many feel America's best days are behind it. If you want to lure industries back and stimulate new businesses, cut taxes and regulation. The economy would stablize and strengthen if they were held steady and everyone could adapt to a new status quo. But they are growing, so business leaders are having to hedge against what new cost bomb is going to hit them next. The American economy would begin moving like it was on fire and return to a vigor not seen in 20+ years if they were relaxed instead of raised.
Cutting taxes and regulation represent aspects or fundamentals of an economic philosophy, of course. The devil is always in the details—and in circumstances that happen to prevail. Sometimes cutting taxes and regulation are advisable. Sometimes increasing taxes and writing regulations are.
I’m sure that you’re proud of your masters degree, but I would think you are well aware that there’s a Nobel Prize recipient in Economics (Paul Krugman) who disagrees with your assessment of what would fix the American economy; and an (MIT) Ph.D. in Economics, and first female Dean of the London Business School (Laura D’Andrea Tyson), who might likewise disagree with you. There are super educated people on both sides of the economic philosophical divide William.
Nobel Prize winner Milton Friedman and John Maynard Keynes (or John Kenneth Galbraith) were icons of two opposing approaches to macroeconomics.
I listed my degree to remind you that others know a lot more about economics and business management than you. All you have to offer is political rhetoric infused with misinformation.
Yes, Krugman and others have degrees and honors that I do not have. They also have extensive track records making it easy for us to apply a biblical principe: by their fruits you will know them. Observing the results from implementing Krugman's advice should be quite obvious whether you should put any faith in him in the future. Those results are an ugly collection of inaccuracies, failed predictions and economic weakness. Government leaders who have followed his advice and those of numerous other economists have been utter failures at producing economic strength or fulfilling their promises of restoring the weak American economy. For example, believing the advice of Krugman and others would actually work, President Obama promised to cut the national debt in half by the end of his second year in office. Instead by that time he'd grown it by more than 50%. He's gone on to raise it to a level exceeding the total debet accumulated by all prior presidents combined. If he continues on his present track by the time he leaves office the national debt will exceed the combined national debts of all nations in history. The American economy is growing too slowly to keep up with population growth, household incomes are falling, we have the lowest workforce participation rate on record, etc.
You and others of your political persuasion attribute Krugman and other economists credibility approaching that prophets from God. You know the scriptural warnings about the dangers of obeying false prophets. You would do well to heed that warning when you are tempted to attribute credibility to Krugman, Keynes or those other economists.
But of course your disagreements with Krugman, et al makes my point perfectly William! They quite obviously have more formal education and credentials in macroeconomics than you do; yet you believe them to be off their rockers (possibly in need of medication?). The operative sentence in that post was: “There are super educated people on both sides of the economic philosophical divide William.”
For the record (to keep it straight), Krugman has been severely critical of Obama for agreeing to implement what he considered an inadequate, insufficiently sized stimulus in 2009. Laura D’Andrea Tyson was of course among the most effective economic advisors in American history, and certainly of the 20th century; and her approach is different than yours.
Something (your writing) leads me to believe that you equate your (temporal) ideological approach to economics as having come from divinity; and anyone who espouses or agrees with another approach is an emissary of evil.
This shouldn’t be confused with intolerance though. (Sorry folks, how could anyone possibly resist?)
(By the way, are you still in search of the “lies” that have been repeated concerning Obamacare and food stamps?)
“You and others of your political persuasion attribute Krugman and other economists credibility approaching that prophets from God.”
Of course, the simple reality is that I have not actually written anything about Krugman previously; especially in relationship to his predictive accuracy or credibility. In fact, I do not recall citing any economist or group of economists here previously. (I’ve mentioned them here to demonstrate a point about formal educational achievement and credentials; and I’ve noted that you’ve ignored my mention of Milton Friedman’s Nobel Prize.)
Let me add to your assignment, brother. Once you’ve identified the falsehood(s) you’ve accused me of repeating with regard to Obamacare, etc.; and once you’ve explained how you it is that you feel entitled to opine with regard to economic, social, and political philosophy, while yet threatening with eternal damnation one who disagrees with your views; then please remind me of when/where I have “[attributed] Krugman and other economists [with] credibility approaching that [of] prophets from God.”
In some circles this is called accountability (a very worthwhile though seemingly novel concept). If you say something is so, it should generally be able to withstand scrutiny.
Stephen,
By their fruits you shall know them. You must like eating rotten fruit because the teachings of Krugman, Keynes, et al are not producing the positive results they promised. In other words, they're in the same class as false prophets and if you truly believed the teachings of scripture you would be regarding them in the way scripture counsels by fleeing from their teachings and not associating with their followers.
The Clinton Administration (uh, with Robert Reich as Labor Secretary and Presidential Medal of Freedom recipient Donna Shalala as its only Secretary of HHS) presided over the most successful/prosperous economy in the history of mankind (or at least since King Solomon’s reign); and actually concluded with a budget surplus.
Should we now consider Clinton’s economic advisors to have been synonymous with Biblical prophets? Of course not; so then why should ineffective economists be compared to false prophets?
Dude, economists are universally (invariably?) false prognosticators; but don’t purport to speak for God. False prophets, of course, want people to think that they are speaking for divinity.
Stephen,
You keep claiming that everything good comes from the political philosophy to which you are allegiant while all the problems come from any other. Never mind that your support for wealth redistribution puts you solidly in conceptual alignment with the Pope. Add that you keep reminding us how the Pope is working under the control of Satan and seeking to unite church and state in his battle against God. So that means you, despite your claims to the contrary, are in conceptual alignment with Satan. So, why should we trust anything you say until we know you are no longer advocating for Satan.
William, my brother, it makes no difference to me what you think I’m doing.
But you haven’t completed your accountability assignment brother; so now I must add to it. Once you’ve identified the falsehood(s) you’ve accused me of repeating with regard to Obamacare, etc.; and once you’ve explained how it is that you feel entitled to opine with regard to economic, social, and political philosophy, while simultaneously threatening with eternal damnation—for continuing to work for Satan—one who dares to disagree with your views (or to perhaps even have views of their own and express them); and once you’ve found when/where I have “[attributed] Krugman and other economists [with] credibility approaching that [of] prophets from God,” then you’re being held accountable to identify what I might have said about the period of the Clinton Administration that is somehow inaccurate (candidly, that should be the easy assignment).
Since you are likely the only individual on these boards to ever (and certainly repeatedly) accuse anyone of “advocating for Satan;” we will permit those accusations to speak for themselves in terms of Christian brotherhood.
“It's not differences that divide us. It's our judgments about each other that do.”
We come from different backgrounds and different cultures, and have differing perspectives on a number of different things; and should perhaps accept that for what it is, brother. But meanwhile, work on your accountability assignments. I’d hope that accountability for what you say about others is something you would welcome. Specific accusations should be factually corroborated. (And blaming everything on Alinsky isn’t accountability/responsibility.)
Stephen,
Argue whatever you wish, you've still been caught endorsing the same thing the Pope advocates as an extension of the ministry of the church and a way of uniting church and state. You're still trying to make Satan's deception look like the truth of God.
Complicating this is how deeply the teachings of liberal-socialism have been embraced by the American black community. So recognizing the falsehoods upon which it has been built and the purposes Satan is trying to achieve by using it is particularly difficult for you. But that is no different than any other decision to repent from sin. All repentance is enabled by recognizing the error of our past ways and accepting God's offer of His power to teach us how He wants us to live. God did it for me, so I know He is both willing and able to do it for you. The question is how long you will resist before allowing Him to fulfill His promise to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
Am I asking too much or somehow being unfair to hold you accountable for your accusations, statements, and sense of entitlement? Why do you feel free to level accusations and bear witness to things for which you cannot provide any evidence whatsoever?
You’ve now mentioned race William, and quite simply your classification of me being among the duped by Satan “American black community” (because many blacks dare see things differently than you do) takes the cake. So tell us, how would it feel for me to declare that your sense of entitlement to say anything—to claim that someone who disagrees with your ideology is an emissary of Satan, for example—comes from your being white while talking to a black who dares disagree with you?
“The truth of God” has absolutely nothing to do with laissez faire capitalism William. Since you think otherwise, who’s been deceived? This thread is about food stamps anyway; the pope is currently being discussed elsewhere. But since you mentioned the papacy, tell us if agreeing with any given pope—like say John Paul I in his opposition to communism—or any pope with regard to the life of the unborn, mean that you are working for Satan? Or would this apply differently for you?
Of course, you probably will not answer. If you did not already exist, someone might have eventually had to invent you. The sad thing however for me is that your entire testimony of good works (for me) is rendered null and void. It’s really very sad William; all around.
If you can't deal with powerful arguments contrary to your view or that your views might not be accurate, why do you wave such a large target to be shot at?
Ad hominem attacks are not reasoned arguments. Anger, personalized vitriol, name-calling, stereotypes, prejudged generalizations, undocumented and unfounded accusations are not arguments. In fact they represent the surest signs of the lack of a coherent argument.
Sadly, regretfully, your posts to me are replete with such invective. That’s too bad. It’s also really rather astonishing that you have confused vituperative calumniation with strong argumentation.
Stephen,
Please forgive my failure to list the source for my "racist" remark: Rev. Jesse Jackson in an interview with CNN.
(How sad is this, my dear brother?!) Since no one has used the word you’ve ‘quoted,’ I have no idea as to what Jackson remark you might possibly have reference. So (and I’m almost afraid to ask), what are you talking about?! What did Jesse Jackson say; and what did whatever he said have to do with food stamps (or working for Satan)? And please provide the exact Jackson quote and its context in relationship to bigotry (not to mention this ‘discussion’ of ours).
In other words, did Jackson say anything that you have said (as you’ve indicated); and if so, what was it, brother?
Are you in agreement with my point about confusing vituperative calumniation with strong argumentation? Do you agree with Margaret Wheatley that our judgments of one another separate us more than do the differences we have?
Why do you argue the ways of men instead of the ways of God? Why do your postings always avoid any mention about experience with God? Is it because you have never met the power of God?
I see God working all the time. Let me tell you about a couple recent things I've seen Him do. The first happened back on Friday, Dec. 27. At 2:30 p.m. I got a phone call asking me to check on a situation. At 3:10 it was obvious that help was needed and I offered to put out a call for volunteers to help on Sunday morning. Then I realized we were going to need a 15 cubic-yard dumpster. Where was I to get one for us to use on Sunday morning when the suppliers normally need at least 24 hours advance notice and don't work weekends? God put the name of a company in my mind and I called. They could get us one on Monday. I explained that I had a special need, that my team would be working on Sunday morning and we needed it then. She put me on hold and came back a minute later with news that they would deliver one within the hour. Where did I want it placed? On Sunday morning I had more than 15 volunteers come to help. I say "more than 15" because that's how many were there when I counted and more came soon after.
The second happened this afternoon on my way home. My wife was recently disabled for eight weeks as she recovered from a hip fracture and we had to rely on another family in the church to get my non-driver daughter to her part-time job. We've wanted to do something special to express our thanks. Since they are preparing to move, I suggested we buy them some moving boxes. The mother asked instead that we help them get produce boxes from supermarkets. I remembered the request on my way home this afternoon and stopped at Publix. The manager said he didn't think they had any boxes because they hadn't had a delivery truck in two days. Still, he called to the back of the store and learned they had "a few" boxes. When the employee came out of the stock room he had a cart with a dozen boxes on it. He even offered to taken them out to my truck. Just outside the door we met the second daughter from the family coming in. I told her I was getting the boxes for her family and she took us to the van. After they were unloaded, the employee asked if I wanted the rest of the boxes. The rest? I thought that first dozen were all they had. No. A few minutes later were were making a second trip to the van with another nine boxes.
God provides when we depend entirely on Him. I see Him working too often to imagine thinking otherwise. My challenge is not knowing if, how or where He is leading, but trying to keep up with Him.
William, Brother, we are living in an unprecedented era where global governments are allied with a general game plan. Knowing the corruption that exists in all hierarchies (except God's) there will be no good to the resulting fallout. The ball is in their court to field the world's needs, and God will hold guilty those who are personally involved and those who give lip service, who neglect the commandant "LOVE THY NEIGHBOR".
When the high powers control 95% of the global resources, theymust, they must distribute it to the masses. They live high & mighty on the fat of the land and arrogantly ignore the voices crying for deliverance from the boots that depress them. Why should they build even more storehouses to contain their ill gotten treasure that is intended for all people?? It is a diabolical acceptance by the hierarchy; "we deserve this treasure", why should we share it with weak minds, and those lacking get up and go? why share it with those always with their hands out?? WE'VE EARNED IT. Cold, heartless thieves denying the hungry, the sick, the disavantaged, while they wax richly with ill gotten gains of an unlevel battleground of acquisition of world resources.
We do not have the power to read the heart of man. We see the exterior. As individual's we must not judge other individual's lack, or consign them to hell. Caveat.
Earl, I know it feels really good to pontificate. And I certainly cannot offer a blanket affirmation of those who own the overwhelming majority of the wealth they have produced. The percentage of wealth owned by a very few hasn't changed very much throughout history. That's not too surprising, especially since, in free market societies, relatively few people produce most of the wealth. Is Warren Buffet cold and heartless? Is Bill Gates cold and heartless? Was Steve Jobs cold and heartless? What about Sam Walton? What about the Koch brothers? These folks have contributed mightily to improved standards of living for all Americans. Slow as you are to judge other's lack of wealth and consign them to hell, you seem more than eager to consign the wealthy to hell. I've got news for you, Earl. I suspect that you are among the wealthiest 1% of the world's population. Do you really want to live like the other 99%? If so, the best way to do that is to distribute the wealth of those who use their wealth to produce jobs and wealth for other Americans.
Nathan, very interesting rebuttal. i've never responded to suppositions before, from others, as to my private history, however i will now. i receive no pleasure from finding fault with groups, systems, finding fault of high powers, as a fact i am saddened by what is happening in the world, by powers in high places. i beg to differ with you about the wealth of the few in the world as a % not changing much. It was in the past controlled by crowned heads (and still is). It was amassed by the colonial powers. What changes the formula is the wealth isnot only (trillions)in the hands of private world bankers, but the private world bankers are also the managers of the Crowned heads, as well. Through the world Central Banks of all the National governments, they have formed an alliance. They meet to form global policy, united in carrying out the control of all global financial assets. This has never happened before. The preamble to this coalition was originally the master plan of theRothchild family, enscounced in the tax free haven of the City of London, in the 1800's. Their offer which couldn't be refusedby Royalty, and heads of state was "we will not intrude on your governing, we will just be the world money lenders on demand, and as last resort. We will supply the funds to all nations". As a result we have the Federal Reserve Bank, and Central Banks in all major economies. And it's the Allied banking dynasty Banking family the Rothchilds who gives theintelligence to the lower ring of nations and banks. These are the hierarchies i was referring to. Not to wealthy individuals you have named. I know of Andrew Carnegie's gift to the world of much of his wealth by building thousands of librarys in the USA and other countries. And am certain there are many others who have given largely, anonamously.
Nathan, i consign no single person to hell, and would not if i had the authority. i wish every single soul comes to repentance.i submit that the lower masses on the totem pole today are notgenerally at fault for their current status, they are the result of global forces in high places with policies to consign the masses to control of the few. Sure, there have always been scoundrels, users, manipulators,crooks,criminals, deadbeats, who will never perform responsibly, and be a good neighbor. And these fill up our prisons, which we provide approx $40,000. per each one incarcerated, for free food, medical, dental etc. But we have a responsibility to provide for all the world's needy. All needy, whereever they live, Africa, Asia, all.
As to my "personal wealth", 35 years ago i was in the top 10%of US earners. In providing education in private schools for my children, cash gifts to family and grandchildren, for a home or support for family's needs as they were getting established, and today they are all established and successful. Being in retirement now for 26 years without pension. i live on $2500. monthly. i buy my clothing at Deseret, i buy most of my food at Grocery Outlet. i live in a senior community of manufactured homes. i have all the comfort i need or want. i am not proud. i offer no pretences. Yet, i am wealthy. i have the promises of Jesus to keep me. i have the Holy Spirit living in me.
I'm not much into conspiracy theories, Earl. You could be right. I do agree that there are many forces coalescing in the world to bring about the fulfillment of prophecy. But I don't know that they are all in cahoots.
The bankers don't really own that much wealth – or at least they shouldn't. Ideally, they are merely custodians and brokers for large tranches of wealth that are managed by a few, but owned by millions. The problem is that the government pumps money that does not exist into banks, which dilutes true wealth. And it borrows money that can never be repaid to fund welfare states which are increasingly unproductive, and which fuel rising expectations that can never be met.
I read somewhere that the top 1% of income earners in America pay close to 40% of the income taxes. How much should they pay? If you took all the wealth in the world, and spread it evenly among all the world's inhabitants, what impact do you think that would have on standards of living? If your not sure what happens to people who suddenly come into unearned wealth, read up on lottery winners. How long do you think a utopian state of equality would last? And at what price? Equality of outcomes and freedom of opportunity cannot coexist. Free markets create unequal wealth; command and control economies create equal poverty.
I didn't mean to suggest that you are wealthy by American standards, Earl. Your reference point was the world. My point was that even those in the bottom quintile of earners in America (poverty) are probably in the top 2% of the world when it comes to their standard of living. So when you are tempted to moral outrage by the gap between the top 5% in the world and the other 95%, it is important to remember that you are probably in that top 5%.
Earl,
Please don't paint everyone with the same broad brush. Being rich is not a sin and becoming wealthy is not proof you've gotten that way by robbing the poor.
It is easy to criticize the "one percenters" and there certainly are plenty of examples to find of people who have enriched themselves through greed. I recently read Charles Gasparino's book "Sellout" where he describes the lives of a number of the leading players at Wall Street financial houses that were involved in the 2008 crash. One man was profiting more than a million dollars a day and commuted to work from a very rich part of eastern Long Island via helicopter! But when the crash came his fortune approaching $1 billion was reduced to barely more than $10 million before he lost the rest defending against criminal charges.
Such people as that man make it easy to throw rocks at the mega-rich, such as the Rothschilds, if you ignore their immense charity. Yes, they were rich. They got that way through careful management of their money and seizing many opportunities for profit. They were also magnificently generous. They were the singe largest donors to charities in England for two centuries and in some years have given away sums larger than the gross national product of some third-world countries. After World War I they were the primary funding source in England for medical research into reconstructive surgery and prosthetics to help wounded and disabled soldiers when the British government was so broke parliament couldn't put a pound into it. Plus, they employed tens of thousands in jobs that provided training enabling them to earn higher incomes. This training actually created the knowledge base for many of those employees to leave and go into business for themselves in competition with the Rothschild-owned companies and become rich themselves.
Let's not overlook how the rich have benefitted America. For example, the John D. Rockefeller invested large sums of his personal fortune in buying scenic lands around America which were then donated to become national parks. His children and grandchildren have continued that tradition of generosity. America's system of free lending libraries, the first such nationwide system in the world, was personally funded by Andrew Carnegie, the owner of US Steel. Sam Walton was famous for helping employees get the professional training they needed to become business managers even if they left and went to work for competitors and the company continues that tradition. A considerable number of Walmart's top managers today started stocking shelves and running cash registers. His children are some of the largest private donors in America to things like cancer research and college scholarships.
Free nations today would not be as great as they have become without their richest people. Criticizing them and taxing-away their wealth is not a path to national greatness, but to widespread poverty.
I read somewhere recently that the inequality in the US is becoming so great that it is soon approaching the demographic spreads of Brazil and Russia. It seems the lifeblood of democracy is a strong middle class, which is too weak to be wholly corrupted but strong enough to hold the powerful to account. I also believe the US middle class is now in decline in real terms, spite decades of economic growth.
As for government handouts, I have also read somewhere that Tea-Party types are also strong supporters of government handouts, like Medicare. It is just that they don't want government handouts for those less likely to be white and more likely to be a new immigrant, like Medicare. And let's not get started on Corporate Welfare.
Not sure if any of that is true or not?
So that last reference should be Medicaid.
Stephen,
Let me clarify something: the "Tea Party types" are NOT in favor of expanding government welfare in any way, shape or form because it is part of a system of ever-increasing taxation that is forcing increasing numbers of people into poverty. America was once the most prosperous nation on the planet. Then government started taxing away that prosperity and creating proverty. The TEA (Taxed Enough Already) Party promotes reducing government regulation and taxation so that people can again become prosperous and live independent of government largesse.
Steve Ferguson,
You are, of course, correct in that Tea Party types who happen to receive Medicare and/or Social Security generally want to continue to receive these benefits. They claim entitlement to them because they have paid into ‘the system’ for them (or at least that’s the common rationale). The same goes for many ('Partiers') who are on the verge of receiving same.
But William, there has been an almost impossible change in the National & Global economical spheres of modus operandi!!!! The old/new paradigm of agreement by the world's lucre lords in a singular program of control of the masses is finally bearing fruit. The NET is fast closing. Europe, with Germany in the leading role, already is far ahead, with almost complete ensnarement of all of Europe, from Ireland to the Bosphorus (except Russia). The USA, Japan, and China, their allies and or sphere of influence, are all on the same program economically. China must bring it's masses to accepting the status quo, or risk it all to chaos of rebellion, anarchy, and military containment. The forces arrayed against the Middle East (ME),and radical ISLAM are formidible.
IRAN, mastermind and paymaster for most of the terrorism and interference with other ME countries, especially SYRIA, with the main target SAUDI ARABIA, are hopeful of bringing all the ME under control of IRAN's Ayatollahs
Shiite arm of ISLAM,with it's rigid form of containment law.
With their nucleur weapons development soon to produce nucleur warheads for their missiles that can deliver to targets within 2000 miles, they will threaten their enemies the Sunnis with death and destruction if they refuse to accept surrender.
IRAN is on the cusp of domination of the ME, to offer the West opposition to any influence to the ME. They idealogically believe that God is on their side and will return them to the greatness of past history, and their path is divine and cannot be changed.
Unfortunately, for IRAN, ISRAEL will remove their stinger, with wholesale attack on every militant and nucleur facility, devastation of most of the country,within the next few months. The awe of WAR is soon upon us.
Earl,
Yes, troubled times are upon us with the prospect for things to get much more complicated and dangerous. Hopefully this time the conclusion will be the Second Coming of Christ.
AMEN, William, AMEN.
i envision no lake of fire. i see no devils dancing with pitchforks. i hear no eternal cries for water on the tongue. i disbelieve that this mortal life is all there is. i do believe fallen man, in all pursuits under the sun, who have macho egos, narcisism, arrogance, man made philosophies, suspicion, hate, will be challenged by God the Holy Spirit. God says to deny the Holy Spirit is to forfeit the grace that God extends to every man. Judge not. Condemn not.
in re: to "EXPERTS" who are trotted out to offer support for peoples viewpoints.
There are of course some in specialized disciplines who should be honored and held in high esteem, by their fruits ye know them. But when it comes to political "experts", spare me. In my 80 year observation of and study of economics, the socalled American landscape of economists has been a total failure. Keynes & Krugmann's textbook theory, and the FED chairmen as practioners, have been total failures in providing policies that result in balanced budgets. Yet economies have always been subject to corruptable influences and greed. Even in slave economies such as Russia had for 100 years, they were never able to achieve a single 5 year economic plan, again because of corruption and greed.
There's nothing more simple than two part bookkeeping, Debits/Credits, and the resultant balance sheet. This every household knows. But not governments who through disinformation, changable paramaters, lobbying, patronage, and buying off segments of voters, doesn't know where base 1 is, and totally ignores sound economic policy, without demand for thorough audits according to acceptable accounting principles. In addition, of course, Presidental policy of ignoring the National Constitution, usurping the balance of power of the three branches of government, for checks and balances, by issuing policies bypassing Congress. The emasculated current "sitting on their hands" Republicans, are letting Obama get away with it.