“Sure that's in the Bible”---just like social welfare is in the Constitution.
Liberals generally take a very loose reading of anything as their view of what was really meant. You know, like when God gave Moses the Ten Suggestions.
The nation didn't get into this mess during the past week or two. It's taken us about seventy-five years to get here, and about the last thirty-five for the worst of it.
I have never called for the immediate termination of all social welfare programs, or even for the immediate termination of any of the other unconstitutional actions by which the federal government has accumulated its power. They must be ended, but they, for the most part, must be ended by being phased out, and not by being terminated. Chaos and semi-anarchy are not high on my list of desired social conditions.
As a nation we need to immediately begin the downsizing of all (and I mean all) federal vote purchase programs. Social security must be ended, but its end must be far down the road--too many people have invested far too much money in it, on the promise of a return. Medicare and Medicaid must be ended but not without available private programs--probably the best alternative would be marrying them to social security and phasing them all out together. The corporate welfare programs should be gone within five to ten years. The social welfare at a slightly slower but just as definite rate.
I'd like to say that tomorrow morning all such programs could be immediately cancelled, but it can't be done. Too much of society is built around them. We need to turn around and walk out the way we came in, one step at a time.
People would need to be taught responsibility instead of dependence. Individuality would have to be rewarded rather than punished. Bush's "(however many) points of light" was a start toward the right idea.
Now on the government's part, internally and in law, the change could start right now, today. It could take the form of repeal of unconstitutional laws and realignment of federal agencies which enforce them--it could involve returning vast amounts of power, money, and property to the states; where it rightfully belongs. If Alabama wants to restrict the availability of currently restricted drugs, it can do so. If Wyoming wants to allow people to decide for themselves, it can do so. If Kansas wants to retain and fund the current social welfare system; it has both the right and the power. If California wants to give tax breaks to business it knows how. If I choose to live in New York have socialism and pay for it, fine--If I'd rather live in Montana and not have it and not pay for it, that's my business.
Too many people (myself included) don't like what's happening--there have to be choices available other than pay or go to prison. When there are more people in those prisons than out of them, because people were fed up, what happens next? Who's going to finance it all when there is no point in working, no reason to own anything? Oh yes, the compassionate government will take care of all of us, won't it?