The Gazette Opinion StaffOpinion Page Editor, The Gazette |
|
Email the author
Food banks should be funded by private money
It is indeed a common solution for liberal/progressive thought to make government funding a part of all social programs.
I have made it a habit to donate food items to our Benton County Food Bank. I know that 100 percent of my donation will go to worthy individuals. Funneling tax money to a government agency then to this food bank is the most inefficient use of funds I can imagine. If the Benton County Food Bank needs groceries all they have to do is let all the churches in our community know. It is the responsibility of Christian charity to take care of the unfortunate, not the responsibility of government.
The food bank run by volunteers and funded by private money is more efficient than any government agency! Gov. Terry Branstad was right to veto.
John Stiegelmeyer
Vinton
-u20042.png?1366232523)
Government should be running the food banks in place of subsidizing private business and giving varying breaks to the 00.006% that have hoarded the nation’s wealth at the expense of the 99.994% that makes up a declining middle class, working poor, totally destitute and younger generation that is trying to get a start from under a huge pile of personal educational debt. No one should have to count on the charity of the greedy that do not have any for anyone but themselves. Let the fat cats and their want-to-be apologists line up in the soup lines and tell everyone how self
That sums up the way I’ve always felt. $10 or $100 given to a local charity, whether a food bank or to help an individual battling cancer, does much more than the same amount in taxes.
One other thing is when school groups & others come around selling things, a straight up $10 donation does more for them than purchasing $15 worth of goods you may not really want.
And for those unfortunate areas of the country in which local folk are too poverty-stricken to fund relief for their neighbors… what?
I remember as an Iowa kid in the late 1950′s the horror stories about people living in desperate straits in Appalachia: they might as well have been in Somalia, for the inability of their fellow citizens to assist them at the time. I’m pretty sure that the publicity that the “deprived West Virginia Coal Country Hillbillies” received was one of the influences that swayed legislators into launching The Great Society/War on Poverty a few years later, under the Johnson administration.
There are private charities that do that too. From Salvation Army on.
Yes, then (as now) there were private organizations that attempted to help out. Their efforts were admirable but their resources were inadequate to make much of a dent in the problem, and it was a poorly-distributed dent at best. Had private relief worked well, there would have been no impetus to change through legislation what was widely seen at the time as a national shame and a hypocritical blight on the record of the principal capitalist power fighting the Cold War.
I suppose that if there were no Red Menace, there would have been no impetus for change and many of the features/excesses of the Great Society would have never seen the light of day.
The year was 1964. JFK was dead. The Vietnam war in full swing. Riots in several American Cities and Four Dead In Ohio. Lydon Johnson….fearing for his own re-election discoved the “holy grail” of modern day liberalism. He wanted votes soooo bad he decided to buy them. Thus the beginnings of our modern day welfare system. Johnson won that election with 61 percent of the vote and had the widest popular margin in American history.
The year 2012. Massive poverty across the nation. Numerous cities, or parts of cities, in complete ruin as in Chicago, L.A., Detroit, New York, and Newark…all products of the “Great Society”. Millions of families broken apart, 70% of mothers are unwed, public financed drugs and crime…all byproducts of the not so “Great Society”. Liberalism……coming to a city near YOU!
Mr Ahart,
You picked the wrong year.
In 1964, Vietnam was barely a blip. We were still in the war by proxy stage and our involvement was not an election year issue. The first anti-war demonstration, which was a modest picket line in front of the White House, would not occur until 1965; the first mass demonstration 1967.
The riots you refer to ran from the summer of 1965 (Watts in Los Angeles) to 1968 (nationwide following the murder of Martin Luther King).
Four dead in Ohio was 1970
Johnson had absolutely nothing to fear with regard to the 1964 election. He was running against Barry “In your guts you know he’s nuts” Goldwater.
Johnson didn’t buy the ’64 election with a promise of a “Great Society”. He, like Truman, like Kennedy, was running on the legacy of Franklin’s New Deal which was supported and maintained by both Eisenhower and Nixon, as well as Truman and Kennedy and Johnson right on into the disaster of Watergate and the stagflation of the 1970s.
The very fact that you would dismiss the antipoverty and investment in America programs of .Roosevelt, Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, and Nixon as “buying the vote” blows your argument apart. This is a democracy. We elect people who will represent our interests. We, the American people, got what we voted for and got what we wanted. Which in 1964 was most definately not Goldwater style conservatism
You’re not supposed to know the *facts*, much less use them to refute David’s talking points. It’s not FAIR!
Joe- it may not be fair, but it IS hilarious.
Wingers and Baggers “know what they know”, and the knowledge need not correlate with the historical record if it helps reinforce their value system.
Of course Roberta….escalting the Vietnam war to 550, 000 troops and 50 k dead was just a teeny weeny “blip”. The “war on poverty” like the “war on drugs” a smashing American success. The Food Stamp President with 50 million strong! Liberal policy another outstanding American success story……but don’t worry. There is plentty of cash to pay for it. Your 401K!
Mr Ahart,
I do not have a 401K and even if I did, it is quite irrelevant to the discussion.
You picked the year 1964. I didn’t pick it for you.
Our ivolvement in South Vietanm as of 1964 was limited to a small number of advisors, embassy personnel and military aid. We did not have 550,000 troops stationed there nor 60,000 dead. That would come later. In the summer of 1964, voters were not paying attention to Vietnam. It was not an issue.
If you want to make an argument based on historical events, please make sure you have at least the time line correct. What you did was squash the events of a decade into a year when the events you list simply did not happen
Roberta: Probably not a good idea thumping the free liberal lifestyle at the next Veteran’s event. Maybe Acorn but not Vets. Please tell us how the Holocost didn’t happen and food was free and plentiful as well.
Mr Alpert,
I’m trying to figure out what possible connection there could be between advocating for government support for community food banks during hard times and denying the Holocaust.
I’m wondering why you want to give veterans a bad name by depicting them as peacenik bashing thugs.
I’m also wondering if you could possibly be more offensive
Anyone currently spewing the right-winger take on returning the nation to good-old-days that never were might look back on all they deplore that was accomplished via FDR’s New Deal, Harry Truman’s, and LBJ’s Great Society and tell everyone when the Great Republican Corrections (GRC) occurred that set the nation straight and delivered the highest standard of living shared by the post citizens of any nation in history?
When was the GRC and how could we have missed it, or has the nation been living in abject poverty since the 1929 Crash and FDR’s coming into office in 1932 when unemployment was left by Hoover at 24%.
If one wants to know how to get absolutely nothing of importance done, ask a conservative; they are the experts.
Will, it depends on the charity. It also depends on the particular part of government. The Linn County Department of Veterans Affairs brings *FAR* more money into the county than what their budget accounts for. It operates a food pantry, it provides services to veterans and their families, it works directly with not-for-profit organizations to leverage both public and private monies to better serve the community. It also helps vets receive the benefits they *EARNED*, bringing in many times the cost of the department, money which mostly is spent locally, rolling over several times (research the multiplier effect).
While contributing directly to a charity directly instead of buying stuff from a kid may give a few more bucks to the charity, it’s not always all about money. Kids selling stuff learn to interact with the public, learn sales skills, learn entrepreneurship,learn to work for what they get. Isn’t that what your side is always espousing? You want to deny kids the opportunities to become better citizens just to improve the financial efficiency of charitable giving?
There are government agencies that do get the job done, and do it well. I agree there. And I do think that the correct partnerships between government and private non-profits, if done right, would allow each to fully use its own strengths.
Regarding the kids selling things, they still have to come to the door and make their sales pitch and are learning all those same things. I just don’t want people to know there’s an option between buying something you don’t really want and not helping out, and it may even be more beneficial for both parties. That’s something those kids need to learn too -sometimes just following the script isn’t the best solution.
Fair enough, Will, fair enough.
Shall we stop the subsidies for all food producers as well or only individuals?
I find it amusing that Mr Stiegelmeyer thinks that 100% of his donations to his local food bank will go to “worthy individuals”. Food banks do not do means testing or criminal backgroud checks. They don’t have the resources You show up, fill out the form, and you get your bag of mac&cheesetunafishjelloloafofbreadboxofcerealcannedveggiesrolloftoiletpaper no questions asked. I volunteered at my local food bank for four years. We gave food to women and children one step ahead of their abusive spouses and criminals one step ahead of the police. We gave to the truely needy, to the underemployed and unemployed, to old people, disabled people, people driving ‘cross country in a twenty year old wreck held together with bungee cords. We gave food to people who were scamming the system and people who would have living on popcorn if it weren’t for the food we gave them.
We didn’t care if these people were worthy, whatever that means, or not. If they walked in the door they got help.
That’s what we were there for.
Franklin Roosevelt, in his 1941 State of the Union speech, defined what he called the four essential Human Rights. These were the Four Freedoms
Freedom of Speech
Freedom of Worship
Freedom from Want
Freedom from Fear
I doubt that many of us would be willing to allow our freedom to speak, to worship and to be safe from harm be left to the kindness of strangers. We depend on laws and on government to enforce the laws that protect these freedoms.
So why do we allow that fourth Freedom to depend on not just the kindness but also the whims of strangers.
And not only that, but why do we forget that all our other freedoms depend on that one. If we are not free from want, in starkest terms from hinger, the freedom to speak means nothing, the freedom to worship means nothing, and we will be plunged into a world where the struggle for basic necessities will be constant and we will never be safe.
“So why do we allow the fourth Freedom to depend on not just the kindness but also the whims of strangers.” First of all, in keeping with this subject, I think you meant the third one “freedom from want.” Well Roberta it depends on what you want? Sounds like you want to sit around and complain about who is not giving enough. Or maybe you want too much. Wasn’t it Kennedy that said, “it is not what your country can do for you but what you can do for your country.”
Maybe Roberta wants what our Constitution discusses…that part about “:…provide for the common defence (sic), promote the general welfare, ensure the blessings of liberty…”. Go read the darned thing, Sue. You got your unfunded war, now pony up for the damage you did to the middle- and lower-socioeconomic class by your adventures. Oh yeah, by the way, how about you kick in on the roads and infrastructure while you’re at it. You derive the most benefit from that, seems only reasonable you pay your share.
Thank you Mr Stutler.
Odd isn’t it, how people like Sue Kettelson will haul in liberals like Kennedy when it suits them, and to misrepresent when it suits them
Sue Kettleson obviously hasn’t a clue what Kennedy’s oft quoted statement means.or she wouldn’t have quoted it.
Are there no prisons? Are there no workhouses? ~ Virtually every TEA party supporter.
Why do they hate America, and all we stand for?
History teaches us what happens when we abandon the poor and hungry to the charitable whims of the rich…” Let them eat cake”. One only has to watch any of the ubber-rich based cable shows to see where their money goes, and it is not to feed the starving children of American. Million dollar yachts, over-priced forein cars and that all so important “summer retreat in Italy” seem to take presidence over any form of compassion for their fellow man kind. It has been shown time and again that they only way the supper rich will share any of their wealth with the poor is through taxes.
Kathy, So you sit with envy and watch how the rich spend their money all the while assuming they don’t give to charity. Would it make you feel better if you could actually watch them write a check while sitting in that mega mansion, fancy car of europeon villa ?
“It has been shown time and again that they only way the super rich will share any of their wealth with the poor is through taxes.” Please show us. Provide proof.
The reason you don’t maybe see them is because they prefer not to brag about it. Go to almost any event and look at who the sponsor(s) are. The honor flights that take WWII vets to Washington are made possible by those wealthy people. In fact I believe one was sponsored soley by one couple. Wealthy give alot to charity but prefer to remain quiet.
Running the food bank with local donations will be a good way for those that can’t give alot, feel like they can make a difference. If we don’t try to make this work on our own, we will never know if you can. If it doesn’t, then you and your party can go back to blaming someone else.
Revolutions track with the price of bread. That’s why those who rule, if they are smart, if they wish to maintain themselves in power, will make sure that the people they rule are fed.
And Sue Kettleson, you accuse people of envy–”So you sit with envy and watch how the rich spend their money”. If you want to know the truth, my response, which I doubt is unique to me, to people like Donald Trump, Paris Hilton, Kim Kardashian and others of their ilk is not envy but disgust.
Steven has it all wrong. We need a “Food Stamp President” with exceptional Acorn experience.
http://www.news-journalonline.com/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/2012/06/23/obamas-term-a-disaster.html
Chicago – Barack Obama often cites his time as a community organizer here in Chicago as one of the experiences that qualify him to hold the nation’s highest office. “I can bring this country together,” he said in a debate last February. “I have a track record, starting from the days I moved to Chicago as a community organizer.”
Mr Ahart,
Do you understand what “cite a source” means? you have linked us to a letter to the editor written by a nobody from Deland, Florida.
In John’s world, the sewers don’t need repairs or even inspections, it all just flows to where its supposed to go without a second thought.
Roberta, I hate to disappoint you, but any article written any the tea bagger is a credible source if the main thrust is bashing the POTUS. Therefore the rest of us who have the ability to think for ourselves, rather than having our positions spelled out by some website or blow hard radio talk show host, are simply unenlightened. Therefore, we should be dismissed because we are not part of the flock of sheep being herded around, called the Tea Party. But hey, eventually the Tea Party might come around and show us they have more than their own greed and selfish interests in mind for this country. I’ll hold my breathe.
Russ, oh enlightened one, how is the tea party being herded like a flock of sheep? Is it because they want a govt. to spend our money more wisely or within our means? You say libs think for themselves?? How is that even possible with all your welfare programs? Your socialist party even run ads glorifying the cradle to grave welfare programs. No need to think for yourselves, we will do it for you. Need a cell phone, no problem, need 99 weeks of unemployment because we don’t have a clue how to get the economy going, no problem. Just sit around until we run out of money and we’ll just blame congress… until eternity. I’ll await your excuses, I mean answer but won’t hold my breathe.
Of course I could go on and on but I’m really curious
Sue,
Just curious. Do you know what a non sequitor is
“need 99 weeks of unemployment because we don’t have a clue how to get the economy going”
It was Bush and the republicans that stated, “The fundamentals of our economy are strong.” To this day, the conservatives maintain that the free economy will “heal itself.” Yet, taxes are lower than they’ve been in a lifetime, corporations are pulling in near record profits, the rich are sitting on trillions of $$$ AND they’re continuing to gain more wealth while the poor and middle class suffer from unemployment and underemployment.
Sue, we don’t get 99 weeks of unemployment *insurance* (it’s not a hand-out, it’s a purchased benefit, but you knew that) in Iowa. Kraig Paulsen and his cronies failed to pass the appropriate legislation to take advantage of the extension passed by the federal government, thus cutting off many Iowans from benefits they bought into…benefits that could have gone a long way to helping folks in need during these troubled economic times. Don’t forget the multiplier effect – those dollars the *insurance* would have provided would have rolled though the community several times. So, thanks to Kraig and Co, lots of local businesses and families lost out on opportunities. Folks would have purchased groceries, paid landlords, had their RV’s maintained, taken their kids out for an ice cream maybe. Yep, thanks to the radical regressives, we all lost out.
Now, what was it your were saying?
So Sue, in your view the poor should take care of the poor and feel darn proud of it while the rich continue to squander fortunes on monuments to themselves. The amount of money spent on frivouls luxuries in this country could feed whole nations. It is a sad legacey for a nation that ignores it’s poor and applauds a hedonistic doctrine.
I’ve read everyones comments, mostly with amusement . As to the original intent of the letter, I will simply say, now is the time you can put your money where your mouths are. Give to the charities of your choice and stop whining about who you think should give more.
Thing is, Sue, many of us already do. Funny how that works.