Pay Freeze

[Winchester]

[quote name='Sternhauser' timestamp='1291326310' post='2190453']
The only difference is the nature of the lie used to justify it, Winchester. With Socialist Security, the lie is that "these people can't get along without robbing other people now, because they were robbed of their own money for years." The reality is that working people are being robbed now, to cover for[i] [/i]the other generation's having been robbed [i]earlier. [/i]That's unjust.[i] [/i]With welfare, the lie is that "these people can't get along without robbing other people, because nobody else will help them if we don't rob working people." That is also unjust.

Apparently, you don't think it's stupid and wrong enough to imply that they have no right to take other people's forcibly-taken money: "[i]They[/i] paid in. The people who should be taking a cut are [i]the ones on[/i] [i]welfare[/i]." But apparently, the people on welfare don't have the right to get other people's forcibly taken money. They're both acts of robbery, Winchester. Robbery in order to buy a car, or robbery to buy a boat: they are both still acts of robbery.

They're simply justified with different twists on utilitarianism.

~Sternhauser
[/quote]
Okay.

[IgnatiusofLoyola]

[quote name='Sternhauser' timestamp='1291338271' post='2190496']
Ignatius,

......Still, your words do not change the nature or moral quality of the scheme. You admitted as much. So I don't know why you mentioned those things. The Church, large families and [url="http://www.heritage.org/research/lecture/from-mutual-aid-to-welfare-state"]mutual aid societies[/url] (how many people were taught about those in Stateschool?) were the original "social security." And still the best...... [/quote]

I mentioned the problems of Social Security because I was making the point that, despite flaws in the various programs, they do help some people, and not everyone getting government help is a "leech."

I do know something about the history of Social Security, not only from my job, but because I majored in American history at Berkeley, and I did learn quite a bit about the Depression along the way.

Whether or not the world would be better without Social Security is irrelvant to me, right now. I have to deal with the world as it is today. I'm not as sure as you are that the world would be a better place without it. And, now we will never know. All that can be done is to try to improve what we have now--we can't change history. I was also making the point that I get frustrated sometimes with "intellectual discussions" of government aid programs because the solutions proposed are too simplistic. From my experience, the issues are far more complex than the solutions proposed.

I wasn't addressing my points to you specificaly or anyone else in particular. If anything, you (and Winchester) are more intelligent and knowledgeable than most.

I certainly investigated lots of other possibilities for years before finally resorting to applying for government help. You'll just have to trust me on that. For example, families are a huge help to many people. But, in my case, I am going to get no support from my family--either emotional or monetary. That's just the way it is.

I didn't share my story to get sympathy or pity. I shared it as a reminder that there is a human side here. I was, for a moment, bringing the discussion down from "lofty intellectual heights" into the "mud" that is the reality of human life.

[CatherineM]

I'm also someone who had no family help to fall back on when I became disabled. Laying on my back, completely unable to move, homeless, with no one to call, is probably the lowest point in my life. Catholic Charities paid for two days in a prostitute/drug dealer hotel. I couldn't move for 7 weeks. Being unable to move is what kept me from being evicted. My family wanted nothing to do with me because I had broken the ultimate Okie law. I was no longer self-reliant. I had committed the unforgivable sin of becoming disabled. If anyone thinks that I wouldn't rather be a practicing attorney right now rather than on Social Security, they're nuts.

[Sternhauser]

[quote name='IgnatiusofLoyola' timestamp='1291346345' post='2190535']
I mentioned the problems of Social Security because I was making the point that, despite flaws in the various programs, they do help some people, and not everyone getting government help is a "leech."

I do know something about the history of Social Security, not only from my job, but because I majored in American history at Berkeley, and I did learn quite a bit about the Depression along the way.

Whether or not the world would be better without Social Security is irrelvant to me, right now. I have to deal with the world as it is today. I'm not as sure as you are that the world would be a better place without it. And, now we will never know. All that can be done is to try to improve what we have now--we can't change history. I was also making the point that I get frustrated sometimes with "intellectual discussions" of government aid programs because the solutions proposed are too simplistic. From my experience, the issues are far more complex than the solutions proposed.

I wasn't addressing my points to you specificaly or anyone else in particular. If anything, you (and Winchester) are more intelligent and knowledgeable than most.

I certainly investigated lots of other possibilities for years before finally resorting to applying for government help. You'll just have to trust me on that. For example, families are a huge help to many people. But, in my case, I am going to get no support from my family--either emotional or monetary. That's just the way it is.

I didn't share my story to get sympathy or pity. I shared it as a reminder that there is a human side here. I was, for a moment, bringing the discussion down from "lofty intellectual heights" into the "mud" that is the reality of human life.
[/quote]

Ignatius, nobody here is calling you a "leech." I have no doubt you agonized over the decision, and would [i]much[/i] rather be working. The issue I am addressing is the idea that someone "deserves" Social Security, as though they deserve their pay for working a job. The same deal goes with charity. No one has a "right" to any particular type of charity, either, though there is an obligation to be charitable, and certainly, efficacious programs (run voluntarily) should exist, and [i]would [/i]exist, if the State hadn't usurped their domains.

~Sternhauser