Meals on Wheels sees donation surge after Trump proposes funding cuts

Far West

Far West

Pursuit Driver
So I thought of posting this in general discussion, or maybe religious....

When it was reported yesterday (or I heard it yesterday,) it sounded heartless... I believe they said about 1/3 of the funding was from the federal Govt. But then the media wants it to sound heartless, and the truth is that:
The proposed elimination of the $3 billion block grant program would mostly affect housing programs — not food services.

I am happy to see that the people are doing what we should do as a member of society. Without the government putting a boot on our neck to take our money to support a program, people showed this is something they believe in with their personal funds.

I think if we as Americans have more of our own money, we support our churches and local programs like meals on wheels. Reducing taxes requires cuts in other areas. Govt. is the wrong entity to provide social assistance.

I truly believe local programs keep scams and waste much lower. People who abuse the system will continue their hustle, but when it is local it is harder to do.

Local branches from Minneapolis to West Los Angeles saw surges of donations and other support. Volunteer sign-ups increased fivefold, a spokeswoman said.

“It’s reassuring that the public has stepped up,” the group’s executive director told CNN.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...proposes-funding-cuts/?utm_term=.2fc755e2af81
 
A lot of Democrats seem to think only the government can do good things, solve problems, help people.

The truth is...the government is usually the least efficient and most wasteful at doing so. And, politicians (from both sides) always find a way to use any and every program and bill to pander and buy votes.

The pathway to restoring America's greatness is to shrink the size and scope of the federal government to where it's functions are only those delegated to it by the constitution.
 
I have lived too long and seen so many disgusting ways that what was to be a safety net has made a whole culture of learned helplessness and entitlement... leaving the families without the drive to use it as a step to something better. Instead it has taught the art of the hustle and diminished who they could have been.

I also thought it was interesting/frustrating that within the last decade, I knew of people who really needed a safety net. They had never been given any governmental assistance, and they were denied. Probably because they did not know the hustle. Mostly because if it seems that it is not your way of life, you don't qualify for government assistance.

It was mostly the churches, home teams from churches, or friends of friends who heard of their plight and helped..as it should be.

I hope as there are more jobs, we as a nation, make it hard to live off the government, so that it becomes more attractive to support yourself. The last decade has been a mess.
 
Far West said:
I hope as there are more jobs, we as a nation, make it hard to live off the government, so that it becomes more attractive to support yourself. The last decade has been a mess.
Click to expand...
Jobs are what the country needs to make the people free of the government plantation.
 
MOW gets only about 3% from the program that was scuttled, and that goes to the national machine. Funding for meals come from the local governments, churches, volunteers, and even the elderly being served (most meals are not free).

It's a great program that works because government is largely out of it. It isn't going to go away.
 
lotstodo said:
MOW gets only about 3% from the program that was scuttled, and that goes to the national machine. Funding for meals come from the local governments, churches, volunteers, and even the elderly being served (most meals are not free).

It's a great program that works because government is largely out of it. It isn't going to go away.
Click to expand...
I kind of thought that might be the case.

It was great that it brought it to the news cycle and people are thinking about it... Again it reaffirms why I trust very little that is reported.

I thing NGO's do a much better job at implementing and running assistance programs.
 
Yes, the media very conveniently blurred the lines between what was cut and what "might be considered for cuts", concentrating on the later. In other words, business as usual.
 
Far West said:
I have lived too long and seen so many disgusting ways that what was to be a safety net has made a whole culture of learned helplessness and entitlement... leaving the families without the drive to use it as a step to something better. Instead it has taught the art of the hustle and diminished who they could have been.

I also thought it was interesting/frustrating that within the last decade, I knew of people who really needed a safety net. They had never been given any governmental assistance, and they were denied. Probably because they did not know the hustle. Mostly because if it seems that it is not your way of life, you don't qualify for government assistance.

It was mostly the churches, home teams from churches, or friends of friends who heard of their plight and helped..as it should be.

I hope as there are more jobs, we as a nation, make it hard to live off the government, so that it becomes more attractive to support yourself. The last decade has been a mess.
Click to expand...
if we wait on local churches to provide any assistance to local people in this state, its just not going to happen. Churches pride themselves in going to other countries to spend 3000.00 on a trip per person but right outside their doors in town are people struggling, not because they chose to live with assistance but because circumstances are unfortunate. There will be abuse in any program, local or federal. I worked in Publich Health for 11 years.
I saw people of many different needs. It really depends on the long term goal as well.
The federal government providing grants for funding for teen clinics did show a good decrease in the teen pregnancy rate.
That is just one example.
i do not know how to make any one thing perfect so that people misuse the system but there will always be people who really need healthcare and do not get it and this will not only effect that person or family but it will effect the whole community overall eventually.
Most churches I know pick and choose based on how much you tithe or not if you can even get a pastor to visit during a crisis. I can't imagine relying on them to volunteer consistently locally to support community needs.
Maybe in urban areas but not here in rural North GA.
 
Boss 302 said:
Jobs are what the country needs to make the people free of the government plantation.
Click to expand...
actually jobs that pay well because if its minimum wage and both are making minimum wage// or if the mother of children is making minimum wage, it would not be feasible for her to even go to work at a low salary or part time job in exchange to pay todays daycare costs.
So good paying jobs will help. But unanticipated crisis, illness, etc, will always exist and there are truly some people that need some help from that.
ex. a couple has a preterm baby and she cannot work, he works at a low salary. They qualify for WIC. If she waits on churches to provide during that year of need, she will be waiting forever.
another example, a man works all his life at a job 44 years in the same job. Commits to do his best. After retirement helps people out to stay busy. Then sudden catastrophic medical illness occurs or accident. You would think the community would respond but think again. If his family depends on community help only , it's not going to happen. People in this day and time usually don't take the time to help. They haven't been humbled and they think it's "personal business".
There is a sense of entitlement that not only people have that are on federal programs but in many professions as well. Nobody really talks about that.

There are no black and white answers.
 
Mrs. Foxmeister said:
actually jobs that pay well because if its minimum wage and both are making minimum wage// or if the mother of children is making minimum wage, it would not be feasible for her to even go to work at a low salary or part time job in exchange to pay todays daycare costs.
So good paying jobs will help. But unanticipated crisis, illness, etc, will always exist and there are truly some people that need some help from that.
ex. a couple has a preterm baby and she cannot work, he works at a low salary. They qualify for WIC. If she waits on churches to provide during that year of need, she will be waiting forever.
another example, a man works all his life at a job 44 years in the same job. Commits to do his best. After retirement helps people out to stay busy. Then sudden catastrophic medical illness occurs or accident. You would think the community would respond but think again. If his family depends on community help only , it's not going to happen. People in this day and time usually don't take the time to help. They haven't been humbled and they think it's "personal business".
There is a sense of entitlement that not only people have that are on federal programs but in many professions as well. Nobody really talks about that.

There are no black and white answers.
Click to expand...

Very true there are no black and white answers for everything. What is sad is the liberals in our government have created a mentality of entitlement among a very large percentage in this country. Most of us in our 50's and beyond can remember how proud our parents and grandparents were as they refused in many cases any assistance (welfare) from the government. They were independent and took care of their families themselves when times were difficult, but most people were conservative at that time, to include many who were among the Democratic Party.

JFK was a Democrat, but he was more conservative than he was a liberal by today's standards. Lyndon Johnson and his Democratic Party saw how they could make black people dependent upon the government and the Democratic Party and liberalism has grown more into socialism ever since, making more people dependent upon the government. Watch and listen to any liberal running for office or re-election and we see them call for more socialistic programs to entrap people into dependency upon the government. We see how Democratic presidents have used the EPA to enact regulations that does nothing at all to improve environmental quality, but makes the costs for manufacturing to comply with those regulations impossible to pay for. This in turn has caused many US manufacturers to relocate overseas.

We also hear Democrats say all the time that corporations and the rich are not paying their fair share, but yet they never tell us what that fair share should be. I had one liberal tell me once though the fair share of taxes should be what it was in the 40's and 50's - 90%. What that liberal failed to realize is that at that time, the deductions one could take really resulted in a 17% tax rate of income, much less than what most of the rich pay today. Our corporate tax rate is nearly 35%, but it is the consumers who really pay this tax as companies put it in the prices they charge consumers. Even this has forced many American corporations to relocate overseas to countries where the corporate tax rates are half of what ours are. This gives them the ability to lower the prices charged to consumers to increase their sales and profits.

Corporate taxes, unrealistic EPA regulations, and international trade agreements the US has entered has cost Americans millions of jobs they used to make a decent living with. During the eight years of the Obama administration, we experienced negative job growth and a significant decrease in median income. Median income today is still less than it was in 2008. The Democrats claim 14 million jobs were created during the Obama administration, but didn't make up the total job loss; and most of those jobs created were low-paying and part-time positions. In reality, most of those jobs were not of the caliber that people could live on.

What we need in this country is a government actually works to encourage real job growth. Most of us here have seen periods where real job growth led to higher incomes because the demand for labor far exceeded the available supply of labor. I recall during the technology boom how fast-food restaurants were hiring at $10 an hour, simply because they were having a difficult time recruiting new employees because there was so much employment opportunity. Employers were not only offering higher wages, but better benefit packages as well. Real economic and job growth gives the working people in this country more opportunities to become truly independent from the government.
 
Boss 302 said:
Very true there are no black and white answers for everything. What is sad is the liberals in our government have created a mentality of entitlement among a very large percentage in this country. Most of us in our 50's and beyond can remember how proud our parents and grandparents were as they refused in many cases any assistance (welfare) from the government. They were independent and took care of their families themselves when times were difficult, but most people were conservative at that time, to include many who were among the Democratic Party.

JFK was a Democrat, but he was more conservative than he was a liberal by today's standards. Lyndon Johnson and his Democratic Party saw how they could make black people dependent upon the government and the Democratic Party and liberalism has grown more into socialism ever since, making more people dependent upon the government. Watch and listen to any liberal running for office or re-election and we see them call for more socialistic programs to entrap people into dependency upon the government. We see how Democratic presidents have used the EPA to enact regulations that does nothing at all to improve environmental quality, but makes the costs for manufacturing to comply with those regulations impossible to pay for. This in turn has caused many US manufacturers to relocate overseas.

We also hear Democrats say all the time that corporations and the rich are not paying their fair share, but yet they never tell us what that fair share should be. I had one liberal tell me once though the fair share of taxes should be what it was in the 40's and 50's - 90%. What that liberal failed to realize is that at that time, the deductions one could take really resulted in a 17% tax rate of income, much less than what most of the rich pay today. Our corporate tax rate is nearly 35%, but it is the consumers who really pay this tax as companies put it in the prices they charge consumers. Even this has forced many American corporations to relocate overseas to countries where the corporate tax rates are half of what ours are. This gives them the ability to lower the prices charged to consumers to increase their sales and profits.

Corporate taxes, unrealistic EPA regulations, and international trade agreements the US has entered has cost Americans millions of jobs they used to make a decent living with. During the eight years of the Obama administration, we experienced negative job growth and a significant decrease in median income. Median income today is still less than it was in 2008. The Democrats claim 14 million jobs were created during the Obama administration, but didn't make up the total job loss; and most of those jobs created were low-paying and part-time positions. In reality, most of those jobs were not of the caliber that people could live on.

What we need in this country is a government actually works to encourage real job growth. Most of us here have seen periods where real job growth led to higher incomes because the demand for labor far exceeded the available supply of labor. I recall during the technology boom how fast-food restaurants were hiring at $10 an hour, simply because they were having a difficult time recruiting new employees because there was so much employment opportunity. Employers were not only offering higher wages, but better benefit packages as well. Real economic and job growth gives the working people in this country more opportunities to become truly independent from the government.
Click to expand...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...esidency-in-24-charts/?utm_term=.b9d9b33ebe3e
 
Mrs. Foxmeister said:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...esidency-in-24-charts/?utm_term=.b9d9b33ebe3e
Click to expand...
The Washington Post is a liberal leaning newspaper. I read the article and it has indeed spun "facts." It contributes blame for the burst of the housing bubble on Bush, but it was the liberals who fought reform to Fanny and Freddie, claiming nothing was wrong with how they were operating. It also claims the economic woes during the Obama administration are the blame of Bush policies. The list goes on. Was Bush perfect in what he did during his presidency? No, but he was by far more conservative with government spending than Obama was.
 
Boss 302 said:
The Washington Post is a liberal leaning newspaper. I read the article and it has indeed spun "facts." It contributes blame for the burst of the housing bubble on Bush, but it was the liberals who fought reform to Fanny and Freddie, claiming nothing was wrong with how they were operating. It also claims the economic woes during the Obama administration are the blame of Bush policies. The list goes on. Was Bush perfect in what he did during his presidency? No, but he was by far more conservative with government spending than Obama was.
Click to expand...
I think I need to take out the violen music now. LOL
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top