jump to navigation

Do Liberals Help the Needy? June 10, 2008

Posted by Daniel Downs in Barak Obama, charity, conservative, Constitution, George W. Bush, giving, liberals, news, No Child Left Behind (NCLB), political economy, politics, poverty, Ron Paul, socialism, taxes, wealth, welfare.
add a comment

In a June 6 column published by The Economist, Peter Schweizer indicated that the richer and more powerful liberals are the harder it is for the needy to get any donations.

Many modern liberals like to openly discuss their altruism. Garrison Keillor explains that “I am liberal and liberalism is the politics of kindness.” But it rarely seems to turn into acts of kindness, especially when it comes to making charitable donations, wrote Schweizer.

To back his claim, Schweizer presents a who’s who of liberal stars including New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, Al Gore, Senator Barack Obama, Senator John Kerry, Senator Ted Kennedy, Robert Reich, and Jesse Jackson. None of these champions of the poor and oppressed has given much if anything at all to any charitable organization. Schweizer looked at their income tax returns and financial statements.

Kennedy has been in Congress since the 1960s. He is the most experienced champions of passing federal law to help the poor, which in turn has helped the federal government to expand it powers. The long debated No child Left Behind version of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act apparently never helped to close any gap between the poor and the other students. The rhetoric about underachieving urban poor, dropouts, and our kids uncompetitive underachieving compared to the rest of the world is the same old song and dance liberals and opportunists have repeatedly said needs fixing since the 1960s. What it actually means is give government’s public schools more money and more control over public education to the federal government.

This is nothing new. According to Schweizer,

The greatest liberal icon of the 20th Century is Franklin Delano Roosevelt. He is regarded by many on the left as the personification of charity and compassion, but FDR actually has a slim record when it comes to giving to charity.

Compared to liberals today, FDR was very generous. He actually gave 2-3% of his income compared to 0-1% given by the above-mentioned liberals.

The point is liberals are all talk. They don’t really care much about the poor. If they actually did, they not only would give generously to those in need but would also have changed the political economy making it difficult for poverty to exist. Of course, they would want to do that for several reasons: One, they don’t care about people they neither know nor want to know. Two, their power, prestige, and wealth is engendered at the expense of the poor. Three, actually changing the political economy would screw up the entire agenda of the Left.

Okay, liberals are no more generous are caring than many other Americans. So are we to believe the compassionate conservatives are any different? Schweizer’s answer is a resounding yes.

President Ronald Reagan … was often called heartless and callous by liberals. Unlike Roosevelt or JFK, Reagan was not a wealthy man when he became president. He had no family trust or investment portfolio to fall back on. And yet, according to his tax returns, Reagan donated … four times more to charity — both in terms of actual money and on a percentage basis — than Senator Ted Kennedy. And, he gave more to charities with less income than FDR did. In 1985, for example, he gave away 6 percent of his income.

George W. Bush and Dick Cheney have continued this Reagan record. During the early 1990s, George W. Bush regularly gave away more than 10 percent of his income. In 2005, Vice President Dick Cheney gave away 77 percent of his income to charity. He was actually criticized by some liberal bloggers for this, who claimed he was getting too much of a tax deduction.

I suspect many of the reviled Right give considerable amounts of money to all sorts of charitable organizations, and not just to their churches. Referring to a Hudson Institute article, Ron Paul said,

American citizens voluntarily contributed three times more to help people overseas than did the United States government. This should not surprise us at all, as Americans are generous to those in need, whether here or abroad. There are so many moral, religious, and human reasons to help our fellow men and women in need. It is only when government gets in the way and tries to crowd out private charity that problems arise. (emphasis added.)

There are good reasons why the US Constitution does not allow our government to send taxpayer money overseas as foreign aid. One of the best is that coerced “charity” is not charity at all, but rather it is theft. If someone picks your pocket and donates the money to a good cause it does not negate the original act of theft.

Besides sound research showing the 16th amendment to the Constitution was not legally ratified, our tax dollars should not be used to enlarge and empower the federal government at the expense of the poor or the rest of us. The federal government taking power not conferred upon them by the American people is not for our benefit. Robert Reich claims American major corporations are the real culprits impoverishing Americans. These economic leeches robbing Americans economic well-being make welfare programs necessary. In his book Liberal Fascism, Jonah Goldberg says the situation was planned by New Deal liberals.

Advertisements

Gee, National Education Association Donates Millions to Left-Leaning Political Groups April 13, 2008

Posted by Daniel Downs in education, giving, news, politics, public schools, socialism.
Tags: , , ,
add a comment

Who would have guessed that the NEA would support leftist political groups. The birth of NEA took place in the camp of communism, the originally meaning of the Left. Comrades do tend to stick together in the proletarian struggle to achieve the goal of Marxist-Lennon type world. The original revolutionaries were too radical to deceive the masses drugged on the opium of religious morality and thousands of years of human history and tradition. But, what value is history, tradition, and morality anyway? The slow process of change, re-education, and transition through legal manipulations, economic necessities, and unions made the creation of a socialist state doable.

So the report by the Family News in Focus that the NEA gave $12 million to political groups in 2007, and almost all of them lean liberal comes as no big surprise.

One of the problems with unions like the NEA is coercision. In the past, teachers had to pay dues if they wanted to teach. It didn’t matter if you liked or agreed with the NEA. That is still true today as discussed in the brief report. (more…)

IRS Tax Return Statistics for 2007-2008 March 27, 2008

Posted by Daniel Downs in giving, materialism, news, political economy, taxes.
Tags: , , , , ,
5 comments

Today, the IRS published individual income tax return statistics for 2007 and 2008. The table below covers total number of returns, total number processed, number of return filed on-line both by tax tax professionals and individuals, how web page hits, total number, total amount, and average individual refund, and the same figures for direct deposits. (more…)

Fun Family Christmas ‘the best gift’ December 19, 2007

Posted by Daniel Downs in children, Christmas, faith, family, giving, God, news, relationships, religion, research.
add a comment

A December 17 report by BBC News revealed two-thirds of UK citizens looked forward to spending time with family this Christmas. In the same poll conducted for the Children’s Society, 40% of respondents said they had already gone over budget on presents.

Do you remember the song Money can’t buy me love? Giving great Christmas presents can’t buy love or happiness either. (more…)

How War Affects Americans? Stories from America Supports You April 11, 2007

Posted by Daniel Downs in children, economics, education, family, giving, news, politics, war, work.
1 comment so far

“And a young child shall lead them” is an old prediction originating in the Middle East. The saying may have referred to a prophecy of an expected Messiah, but in this story it refers to two children not just one. Rachel and Kelsi Okun are not out to save the world, but they are attempting to make it a better one, especially for other families—families of men and women fighting for liberty in Iraq and Afghanistan.

One could imagine teenagers creating their own organization. However, ThanksUSA is a non-profit launched by 11 year old Rachael and 8 year old Kelsi, With the help of mom and dad, who now run the organization. What began as a school and family event has grown into a national scholarship fund for military children and spouses. (more…)