Welfare verses Charity
“For even when we were with you, we commanded you this: If anyone will not work, neither shall he eat.” (2 Thessalonians 3:10)
From 1620 to 1933, all public welfare activity was at the state and local levels, primarily through churches, local charity groups, immigrant societies, and fraternal organizations like the Elks and Shriners. Those groups operated hospitals and schools for the disabled and the sick. For a few cents in weekly dues per household, they provided social insurance to support widows, orphans, elderly, and the disabled.
Beginning with the American Puritans in the early 17th century, it was religion that brought the weight of society and public opinion behind the traditional virtues of charity toward the less fortunate, and honesty, faithfulness, courage, loyalty, friendship, and fair-dealing with everyone.
Today, on average, Americans give 300 billion dollars a year to charitable organizations. 35% of that charity is from religious organizations. In the year 2011 the American government took by force over 800 billion dollars from the tax payers and distributed it to Americans with no income. Half of that money came from the top 1% of America's wealthiest people and the rest came from the upper 50% of America. The rest paid nothing in taxes.
One of the overlooked aspects of today's welfare program is it's original intent. When FDR first signed into law the first antipoverty act he made it clear that this would be a temporary provision to help pull the poor out of poverty.
“The Federal Government must get out of this business of relief... Continued dependence upon relief induces a spiritual and moral disintegration, fundamentally destructive to the national fiber.” -FDR
Politicians, today and throughout history, have time and again proven that they know how to mismanage money. From the state level to the federal level there should be little debate on the issue. And there is no doubt that the government welfare system is being horribly abused. Each year a state ran program gets a projected amount of money from the government. If those people do not spend the same amount of money that year or more they will expect to get less money the next year. This system prompts social workers to find more reasons to keep people on welfare so the program will maintain its funds and everyone gets to keep their jobs of handing out free money.
The long standing fact is when you give the government money, they will assuredly waste it to no end, but when money is given to a worthy charitable cause the outcome will be much different.
One of the fundamental tenets of the Christian church is that the human is a creature possessing free will. It is the concept of free will that is absent from all forms of government welfare.
A government, by its nature, can only act by means of force. The first act of a government is a legislative one — the passing of laws — followed by the carrying out of these rules of social behavior by the executive and judicial branches. The government possesses a legal monopoly in the use of force in executing its duty of seeing that citizens obey the law, and in punishing them if they do not. Thus, the essence of government is coercion.
Force and free will are opposites. Government welfare programs which are executed by means of law and the enforcement of this law (i.e., by the threat or application of force) are diametrically opposed to Christian acts of charity which must be performed by an act of the individual will.
The idea that government-sponsored welfare programs to assist the needy is compatible with Christian philosophy is probably the most widespread erroneous belief that permeates American society, and is hastening the destruction of freedom in the United States. This tragic flaw in the thinking of both well-educated and uneducated Christians has already brought misery to millions, and if this thinking persists in this country, it will result in economic chaos. America will fall off a "fiscal cliff" that will be real hard to climb back up from.
Welfare is defined as “relating to, or concerned with the welfare of disadvantaged social groups.” The welfare state (the result of never-ending welfare) is defined as “a social system based on the assumption that the government has responsibility for the individual and the social welfare of its citizens.”
Charity on the other hand is described as “a gift for public benefit purposes.” And “benevolent goodwill toward or love of humanity.”
Clearly, the words are not interchangeable unless someone is trying to cloud an issue to their advantage.
Welfare is a government program used and abused for political purposes. Charity is a private decision to do good. Welfare is a program that has run wild with no accountability. Charity can be directed as a charitable person deems correct and in keeping with their faith. Welfare is funded by taxes taken from people, mostly against their will. Charity is money freely given. Welfare is directed by Washington D.C. Charity is commanded by the Word of God. Welfare has at its core using other people’s money to buy votes for re-election of politicians. Charity has as its foundation helping those who need help with no thought of personal gain. Welfare administrations eats up a substantial percentage of the money in the system, thereby denying much of what could be offered to those truly in need. Charity can be as direct as buying groceries for your neighbor - there need not be the expensive middle-man welfare demands.
Let me give you an example. If I see that my neighbor is hungry, I have two choices: I can help him or not. If I choose to help him, I engage in charity. What governs my choice? My estimate of his worth and the degree to which I feel his suffering is an injustice. If his house burnt down or someone robbed him, if he had some unfortunate illness, or if the factory that employed him was shut down -- if he was a victim of some circumstance not of his own making and was working to get out of it -- I am likely to choose to assist him gladly. "Therefore, as we have opportunity, let us do good to all people, especially to those who belong to the family of believers." (Gal. 6:10)
However, if I see that my neighbor drinks away his paycheck, destroys his property through indifference and negligence, can't hold down a job because he doesn't show up or is incompetent, or if he is just plain lazy -- if I see that he slept through school, never cracked a book and is generally no-good -- my choice is likely to let justice take its course and not to stand between him and the consequences of his own actions. "Be very careful, then, how you live—not as unwise but as wise...Therefore do not be foolish... Do not get drunk on wine, which leads to debauchery. (Ephesians 5:15-18). "If anyone will not work, neither shall he eat.” (2 Thessalonians 3:10).
In this way, voluntary individual charity reinforces virtue among citizens. Charity is and always will be preferable to welfare.
American politicians have implemented a system by which my neighbor demands charity as his right, as his due. He demands not only cash in an emergency but payments year round and lifelong -- from universal pre-K to "free" health care, housing, food stamps, cell phones and much more. And the tax laws instituted to help the American indigents also enable taxes to be collected for the unearned benefit of foreign indigents, also known as illegal immigrants, thus providing them with the same welfare benefits as an American citizen.
It's one thin for the government to step in with financial aid when, say, a housewife with five children loses her husband in a horrible accident, he wasn't insured, she has no job skills, and daycare would cost more than she could make anyway. She will need some very specific, possibly long-term help to keep her family fed, sheltered, and clothed. But an able-bodied person who can work but chooses not to should not be paid to be an unproductive member of society. Those who can work should work
If you look back across the years, you shall notice that instead of reducing the number of poor folks in this country, government subsidies have INCREASED them to the point of entire families never having had a job. And it's not hard to find three complete generations of a family living in a Section 8 housing for their entire lives with no one in the family ever having a job.
The “War on Poverty” that has spent trillions of dollars without any tangible results, and has basically ensured that generations of those in the welfare class will always be the welfare class (i.e., to ensure continuing checks one must make sure they don’t have income that would take them off the welfare rolls). So there is little incentive to work. In fact, just the opposite. Further, to increase one’s monthly welfare check, people are monetarily encouraged to, for example, have more children they cannot afford and/or raise as they should be raised. The Bible says in Luke 17:2, "It would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were thrown into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones.” Welfare harms children by forcing them to live in poverty and gives them little incentive to improve their lives when they're are old enough to.
So the issue is not whether a person is poor, but why they are poor. Welfare fails because it employs no such discernment.
Conversely, Christian charity offers help to those who are truly in need - and tough love to those who can and should be working. “And if anyone does not obey our word in this epistle, note that person and do not keep company with him, that he may be ashamed. Yet do not count him as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother.” (2 Thessalonians 3:14-15)
As government welfare activity continues to expand at a phenomenal rate of speed, greater sums of money are required to support this "charity-by-force" undertaking. Taxation thus remains at a high level, with more of the tax dollars diverted to welfare programs, leaving little money in private circulation which can be used for Christian charity.
Government "charity" goes over the heads of the individuals who earn and produce -- it invalidates their judgement about who is deserving and who is not. It FORCES some men and women to involuntarily sustain the lives of others. It is indifferent to my values and contemptuous of my consent. It takes my cash and I will never know if I am involuntarily supporting a potential friend or whether my money is being funneled to someone who is standing on street corners preaching the destruction of everything I value and love.
Welfare allows way too many lazy people to have their needs met without accepting responsibility for their own life. It's worse then outright theft; a burglar at least acknowledges that I own my property and that he is engaged in thieving -- he sneaks around, hopes I won't catch him, and grants that the police have the right to capture him, punish him, and return my property to me. But the welfare recipient claims his loot by right -- he's not stealing bread, assisted housing or health care from me directly and so does not acknowledge it as theft. He receives it safely laundered through the magic of having it extorted from me by a third party, the taxman.
“For even when we were with you, we commanded you this: If anyone will not work, neither shall he eat.” (2 Thessalonians 3:10)