One of the things that you said in a previous post was (and I'm paraphrasing here) basically that giving food, resources, and money to the poor keeps them dependent and poor. It felt a bit like a philosophical argument- a strongly held belief about what happens when we invest more or less into social safety net programs. But here's the thing- there's absolutely no need to sit around and wax philosophical or speculate about this. It's like sitting around and arguing over what 2+2 equals when we have a math book in the room.
We already have the answers to these questions.
They are objective facts that have been studied and documented for decades. I promise you that these programs were not created for no reason, and that there are good reasons why countries with stronger investment in social safety net programs have lower rates of poverty. As in, social safety net programs
reduce the poverty gap worldwide by 45%. And social safety net interventions in childhood poverty
have long-term benefits that help lift those children out of poverty later in life. In 2005 in the US, our social safety net
reduced the poverty rate by 50%, and historical analysis consistently paints a clear causal relationship between reduction in social safety net funding and increase in poverty. As we have reduced the amount of support the safety net provides, we've seen the effectiveness of programs go down- sometimes sharply.
In fact, as far as I'm aware, there are no non-partisan, peer-reviewed studies that show that strengthening the social safety net increases poverty- short term or long term. But there is plenty of evidence that weakening the social safety net does both of those things.
Go do some research on this. The information exists, and the research is not ambiguous as to the overarching question at hand. Plus when the World Bank of all organizations is promoting social safety net programs, you know it's time to listen. We
have to get beyond these "Beliefs" about how these programs impact poverty levels (and general economic growth for everyone else, btw). We already
know they work, and that they're vital tools for ending poverty. If we can start from a space of facts, then we can move forward and actually solve problems.
As far as the scripture piece goes, your response seems like it contradicts the scripture in really blatant ways:
Jesus was not remotely apolitical, for one. I'm not sure where you're getting that from. Render to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's? He was answering a tax question, by the way. Paul was also explicit about the need for government and to pay taxes (Yes Neveragain, Jesus had more to say about the importance of paying taxes than he did about homosexuality and abortion) And Jesus had a special ire for corrupt Kings and leaders who failed to serve their poor, as you well know. He was anything but apolitical, and He showed real concern about the need to balance religious practice with the practicalities of the need for governance.
As for progressive taxes- Jesus was really clear that the more you have, the more you are expected to give. A progressive tax code is all but Biblical. A regressive or flat tax would be in violation of God's law- I'm not aware of a single verse that suggests that the rich should be giving the same amount- or less- than the poor, but there are a good dozen instances where we're told the exact opposite of that.
You're also well aware that invading armies are not immigrants. As you are likewise aware that the undocumented immigrants who come to our country are not invading armies. They are the poor coming to us in need. We were commanded not to oppress the immigrant and to treat them like citizens and as we would treat Jesus Himself. When you knowingly misrepresent those people by likening them to barbaric hoards coming to raze our cities and rape our women, you are doing something that is offensive to God.
Now that's between you and Him, but don't pretend like the scripture isn't abundantly clear about God's expectations here. And certainly don't pretend like you aren't willfully failing to meet them.
Originally Posted by Suppressed Poet
Reply With Quote
