Why Do Americans Care So Much About Freedom

[dt79]

Maybe I should put them on TRT.

[Alrightmiami19c]

@Aragorn

However I disagree that the safety net serves no purpose (a real purpose as opposed to a cynical, self serving political one). I also think that - regardless of what SHOULD happen - that charity is not currently capable of addressing all the problems we have purely on its own. It’s not reality.

Im not saying it serves no purpose, but its neither the moral or efficient way to help your fellow man.

Charity is not capable currently because it has been forced out of the “market” for the past century.

@Aragorn

You and I both agree that incentives for work should remain strong and we should work to eliminate all gaming of the system. We both agree that we don’t want any more people on welfare than necessary, and we don’t want them on welfare for any longer than is unavoidable.

Absolutely. Mine isn’t a “bootstraps argument” per se. If you incentive poor choices, you tend to get poor choices.

Obviously a fan of Friedman.

Milton Friedman & Thomas Sowell vs. A Welfare Administrator

Milton Friedman - Adequate Housing

[Alrightmiami19c]

@zecarlo

They died.

They dont die anymore?

[Californiagrown]

@Alrightmiami19c

Charity is not capable currently because it has been forced out of the “market” for the past century.

How so? I see plenty of people with excess money who are aware of problems in society that choose to spend the excess money on luxuries instead of donating to charities. Even the folks that donate to charities donate far less than what they could afford. If we returned tax money to these people, do you think its more likely they would donate that same or similar amount to charity, or would they likely spend the majority on luxuries or goods for themselves?

[dt79]

Is it a more of a cultural change where people just can’t be bothered because they assume these things are taken care of by the government? Kinda like it’s all just taken for granted? I honestly don’t know.

I do know that I was shocked when I heard they didn’t give anyone handouts in China during their lockdowns but people started donating money to the relevant government departments involved in fighting the virus without much prompting.

It wouldn’t happen where I live either.

[Alrightmiami19c]

@Californiagrown

I see plenty of people with excess money who are aware of problems in society that choose to spend the excess money on luxuries instead of donating to charities

It’s nice in a free market how building luxury items creates jobs for so many.

No one’s obligated to be charitable, that’s why its moral opposed to government compulsion.

@Californiagrown

Even the folks that donate to charities donate far less than what they could afford.

Leave the Biden’s out of this. They’ve donated an average of $369 a year toward the charities of their choosing.

@Californiagrown

If we returned tax money to these people

It’s not give back, it’s don’t take.

[NickViar]

@Alrightmiami19c

They’ve donated an average of $369 a year toward the charities of their choosing.

39 Cents - SNL

That’s almost three children a year.

[Californiagrown]

Im honestly trying to understand your reasoning. Are you saying that without the government forcing folks to pay taxes, people would voluntarily put the large majority of that money towards charitable causes? You dont see inflation issues, keeping up with the Jones’ psych issues, and the general shitty morals and behaviors of society as a whole?

I guess my question is similar to dt79’s: do you think the culture and peoples ethics would change toward the more selfless if they were suddenly given more money in their paychecks?

[Alrightmiami19c]

“In 2018, total private giving from individuals, foundations, and businesses totaled $427.71 billion.”

To put that in perspective, roughly the same as the entire 1980 us federal budget.

“Americans gave $449.64 billion in 2019.”

• In 2019, the largest source of charitable giving came from individuals at $309.66 billion, or 69% of total giving. In four of the last five years, charitable giving by individuals has grown.

• On average, high net worth donors gave $29,269 to charity in 2017. By comparison, general population households gave $2,514 on average.3

Charitable Giving Statistics | NPTrust

[Alrightmiami19c]

@Californiagrown

Are you saying that without the government forcing folks to pay taxes, people would voluntarily put the large majority of that money towards charitable causes?

They would donate more because they’d have more. Just as generally those who earn more donate more.

@Californiagrown

You dont see inflation issues

No. Im not even sure how you mean. Goverment printing cash and deficit spending has nothing to do with people keeping what they earn.

@Californiagrown

general shitty morals and behaviors of society

Because we’re angels now. No effect of awful people being awful. But good people can do more good.

@Californiagrown

do you think the culture and peoples ethics would change toward the more selfless if they were suddenly given more money in their paychecks?

No.

[twojarslave]

It’s almost as if there is a connection of some kind between serious addiction and frequent lose/lose outcomes for the children involved.

Perhaps policies that allow for those outcomes out to be re imagined, like how some say we should do with policing. Nobody’s saying get rid of it, just shift funding back to more appropriate uses by not taking it from taxpayers in the first place.

These policies are intended to produce the same or better outcomes the previous policies aimed to achieve. Only racist scum disagree.

That’s how the argument goes, right?

[zecarlo]

@Alrightmiami19c

They dont die anymore?

They still die, just not soon enough.

[Aragorn]

@mnben87

don’t know here. Sometimes these efforts cost more than the benefit. I think there might be a sweet spot where allowing some gaming of the system is overall more efficient. Another downside of allowing no gaming of the system, is that in systems with less ability to game the system, the people that actually need the benefits are often unable to jump though all the hoops to get the benefits. I think it is a balance

Oh sure. In purely practical terms it’s the classic engineering problem of finding the optimally efficient system. I don’t think it’s possible or even financially responsible to completely eliminate all gaming of benefits, based on the amount of money it would likely cost to do so. I was really speaking in a general manner, since both he and I agree that it is waste and a drag on the system.

@twojarslave

What I do know is that inter generational state dependence has not produced a single happily ever after story among the addicts I’ve been acquainted with

100%. However practically speaking it might also be unsolvable. There will always be very poor people.

[Aragorn]

@Alrightmiami19c

Im not saying it serves no purpose, but its neither the moral or efficient way to help your fellow man

Well, I agree it’s not efficient. Unless you’re going to take the “redistribution is theft” stance I’m not sure I would say it is flatly immoral. Taxes are already redistributed, but I don’t believe tax is theft (please let’s not go to the anarcho-capitalist discussion area).

What if you help more total people with both charity AND benefits from government? Essentially I see this as an optimization problem - charity may be more efficient but may not have the reach, government may have the reach but not be more efficient. Similar to what mnben87 said about eliminating welfare gaming completely, I think it likely that the optimal solution here also lies somewhere in the middle. I am not smart enough to find it however.

@Alrightmiami19c

Charity is not capable currently because it has been forced out of the “market” for the past century

This I do not agree with. I think it possible that people give less than they used to (don’t know, haven’t checked into it), but “forced” from the arena is something else entirely.

We had pure charity systems throughout the 17 and 1800s in Britain, with no handouts, but I would say there is less total suffering now than then among the poor.

@Alrightmiami19c

Absolutely. Mine isn’t a “bootstraps argument” per se. If you incentive poor choices, you tend to get poor choices.

Obviously a fan of Friedman.

Sure, 100% agreed on both counts. Friedman and Sowell are fascinating. Again though, I think practically speaking this is an optimization problem. Philosophically speaking - and in a vacuum - Sowell and Friedman may be more correct. The difference between engineers and physicists is that engineers will settle for the best solution they can come to… typically approximate… while physicists and mathematicians search for the “true” and exact solution. They are obviously both important. I think a similar interplay is present here.

@Californiagrown

I see plenty of people with excess money who are aware of problems in society that choose to spend the excess money on luxuries instead of donating to charities. Even the folks that donate to charities donate far less than what they could afford

Yes.

@dt79

Is it a more of a cultural change where people just can’t be bothered because they assume these things are taken care of by the government? Kinda like it’s all just taken for granted? I honestly don’t know

This is just my personal opinion, but I believe that plays a significant role. I feel rather strongly that there has been a cultural change and that many people also think that the government will take care of it… that they bear no responsibility for their fellow man.

Both Alrightmiami19c and myself agree that this change is not good, and that this stance is fundamentally wrong.

[mnben87]

@Aragorn

charity may be more efficient but may not have the reach

On average, I don’t think it is very efficient, but much of that comes down to definitions. IIRC, the largest charitable contribution in the US at least is Tithes to churches. Almost all of the money on average goes to operating costs and salaries. Some churches do a lot of good charity work, no doubt, but those are the outliers, not the average.

[Aragorn]

I have complicated thoughts on that subject so probably not easy to post about it. But regardless I don’t think you can simply say the “good” ones are outliers.

I understand your point on efficiency though. According to charity watchdog sites though, the majority would seem to be significantly more efficient than government.

[mnben87]

@Aragorn

According to charity watchdog sites though, the majority would seem to be significantly more efficient than government.

I think defining our terms is really important here (I won’t go down a religion rabbit hole either). I would say a church on average spends more of it’s income on charity than the government, but taxes are not seen as a charitable donation, and only a portion goes towards social programs excluding entitlements because those are in large part a pay out that you paid in.

Would the church come out on top if we only compare the money that the government uses for social programs, and the infrastructure for those programs. Like for each dollar that is allocated to social programs vs each tithed dollar. Which dollar has the bigger impact?

I think this is a fair comparison, because in the US the whole tithe is considered a charitable contribution.

[Aragorn]

@mnben87

I think defining our terms is really important here (I won’t go down a religion rabbit hole either)

Agreed, and thanks lol. The only thing I will say on that topic is that a paid fully-time clergy is completely fine (salary within reason. My home church pastor makes a paltry 30k ish, it’s definitely a hard job)

@mnben87

but taxes are not seen as a charitable donation, and only a portion goes towards social programs excluding entitlements because those are in large part a pay out that you paid in.

Sure. On that note I’d like to clarify that I’m including Medicare and social security in the safety net I speak of, as that is basically their entire reason for existing.

@mnben87

Would the church come out on top if we only compare the money that the government uses for social programs, and the infrastructure for those programs. Like for each dollar that is allocated to social programs vs each tithed dollar. Which dollar has the bigger impact?

I think this is a fair comparison, because in the US the whole tithe is considered a charitable contribution

I think that’s probably more fair yes, and without checking I’m going to say I probably would bet on charity still being more efficient per dollar spent. I’m curious now.

[Beyond_Beyond]

You went full retard, everyone knows you never go full retard.

@H_factor

You can’t have it both ways. You can’t say diversity is awful…but as it’s gone up all these things have got amazingly better. That pretty much destroys your entire argument which wasn’t hard because it doesn’t follow what’s happened in the world.

What is your definition of “diversity” in regard to immigration? Multiculturalism? Is colonization diversity? How about genocide? Was it the greatest strength for the American Indians?
How much diversity is good? Can you ever have too much diversity? When are we diverse enough?
It seems to me it just means anything you want to claim. Its so wishy washy its not a definition by any terms of logic or reason. Its like arguing with a child, who knows there in the wrong but just keeps going la, la, la, I can’t hear you.

@H_factor

Of course it can collapse. Any country can. I’ve never said it couldn’t. And the chicken littles have been saying it since the country started.

You’d be hard pressed to find anyone with credibility internationally argue that America is anywhere near the high point of its former power, unity or stability. I bet you can’t find one?

@H_factor

@Beyond_Beyond

I’ll say it again, look at your country for the last year, its tearing itself apart.

Not really in the least bit. We were never supposed to make it through the civil war, the depression, the 60’s, etc. Hell you know people were saying we’d never survive one more year of GWB on this very forum. And then Obama. And then Trump. And now Biden. Spoiler alert they will be saying the exact same thing when the next President comes in.

" Not really in the least bit" Your disingenuous attitude is so transparent, it ignores the real events over the last year.
The Civil War like any genuine conflict had a decisive outcome, which led to unity for at the next 100 years. Depression was a tough time(except for the rich bastards that engineered the collapse), I don’t think anyone thought it would last indefinitely. Poor comparisons for you to make.

@H_factor

@Beyond_Beyond

Peace and harmony are relative, even a deaf dumb and blind man can tell things have not been like they are in America over the last year, since perhaps the civil war.

Your arguments are feeble and childish and only work on people with no idea of history or the memory of a goldfish.

This isn’t an argument. It’s more word vomit.

Once again no counter argument just an attempt to automatically dismiss what I say. Its very hard to take you seriously if you can’t offer a realistic, logical argument.

@H_factor

No one has ever made this argument in here. Utopia didn’t exist before diversity and it wouldn’t even if all the things you wanted to happen did. Humans have and always will be flawed.

Your probably unaware you are even making it by promoting “diversity” whilst your country riots,is divided and tries to dissolve, destroy all the institutions that made America what it is. Fractured along racial, and cultural lines, brought to you via diversity.
What they are offering instead is anarchy and insanity, that only a diseased mind would think is feasible.

@H_factor

You always start to bring up gays when you’re getting destroyed. I believe you did that last time as well. Doesn’t change anything, but you think about gays a lot for whatever reason.

Funny I don’t feel like I’m getting destroyed. You’re probably feeling personally insulted by the word gay, because of your own sexuality. Gay just means fun and joyful, what’s your problem?

[quote=“H_factor, post:608, topic:273536”]

@Beyond_Beyond

Your population is so high because you’ve been importing so many people into your country in recent decades, especially since the 1965 immigration act.

Our population was high before that. And I believe you kept going on and on about a different act in the last immigration debate you got schooled in so glad you moved to a different one. But this doesn’t really matter. If America was as bad as you think why do so many people live here? It’s not like the only place to live.

Once again you ignore the role of demographics. Before the 1965 Act both immigrants and population was from less diverse countries, and cultures, ie European and Christian.

Are you saying otherwise? If so provide stat’s or just shut the fuck up.

@H_factor

You don’t know much about America though. That’s what makes arguing with you about it difficult.

There’s a big difference between not living in the US and not knowing much about America. That WWW you mentioned gives me access to all the same information, history and news and statistics you have, as well as views personal opinions from every range of political, racial, religious and ideological backgrounds.
You could live in an isolated area of the country, and not consume any media and for as much as you cared you could feel like you’re living a perfect life, whilst your country turns to shit without you knowing. I’m sure there are plenty of people in America who think just like that.

@H_factor

Ok so just to be clear you can’t find that post because it doesn’t exist. In your head I must be anti white because I don’t hate people who aren’t white. I love white people I just don’t feel that I’m superior in any way because I’m white. That’s the difference. You’re very caught up in race and I’m not. Which is weird because your ilk always says stuff like all they do is talk about race. Not really in the least bit. You’re the one who constantly is on here hand wringing over a country far away from you having a declining white majority. Your thoughts and posts are far more race based than mine will ever be. I don’t spend much time thinking about it. Had a great lifting session with people today who were white, black, Hispanic. We made it out fine.

Funnily enough I don’t hate people because they are not white. I was brought up with the same MLK arguments on juding someone on the content of their character as everyone else in in the western world.On average some races are objectively superior in certain things to others on average. Asians are supposed to have an average IQ higher than whites. Its also argued from say Olympic records, muscle biopsies, that Africans from certain regional backgrounds can be on better at long distance athletics, and from other regions better on average than other races at explosive athletic events.

@H_factor

Had a great lifting session with people today who were white, black, Hispanic. We made it out fine.

Good to know. You don’t post much if anything about your lifting on a website primarily about lifting, it is good to hear mention it. It looks like lifting is about the only thing we have in common, but I do repesct that. No doubt your friends of all all races are good guys.

@H_factor

Oddly enough we used to have more white supremacists types posting here than we do now. Some of them left and some got banned. They weren’t missed. But we always have some. And you’re making the exact same arguments they were. Oddly enough most of them were foreigners like you. Desperate to tell us how minorities were destroying everything.

I really wish you were right, then there wouldn’t be any issues. Your country(and mine to a lesser extent) would be happier places for all to live in. It just hasn’t played out like that and I can’t pretend otherwise.

Here’s some videos that you probably won’t even bother to watch “Diversity is Our Strength” - YouTube

MY CITY PROVES THAT DIVERSITY IS OUR GREATEST STRENGTH. WEST COVINA CALIFORNIA. (bitchute.com)

Diversity is our greatest strength! (bitchute.com)

Diversity is Our Strength - YouTube

One thing I did realise on my holiday is I devote too much time to being online, on frivolous topics. As much as I enjoy it, I don’t really have the time. So feel free to respond, or not, it really doesn’t matter. You can have the last word if you want., I probably won’t bother responding, or reading it unless I get very bored and have a lot of spare time.

[unreal24278]

@Beyond_Beyond

How about genocide

I don’t understand? Genocide is the antithesis of promoting diversity.

@Beyond_Beyond

high point of its former power, unity or stability

I’d argue America peaked during the 1950’s, though said times certainly weren’t great for women, minorities, homosexuals etc. Remove those elements of 1950’s America and life looked pretty good. A steady factory job could give one a steady paycheck good enough to string them along, pay the bills, purchase a house etc.

@Beyond_Beyond

destroy all the institutions that made America what it i

To note, times change, societal constructs and accepted normalities change. This doesn’t necessarily equate to the disintegration of our moral fabric as we know it.

@Beyond_Beyond

Gay just means fun and joyful, what’s your problem?

Gay also means homosexual. A homophobic slur can also be used to describe a tobacco cigarette!

@Beyond_Beyond

that Africans from certain regional backgrounds can be on better at long distance athletics,

African Americans from certain regions/tribes also have a predisposition for fast twitch dominance. Some of these guys look jacked before they ever set foot in a gym. My envy knows no bounds

You guys need to stop arguing, the discourse isn’t civil in nature and neither of you are getting anywhere. This repeated back and fourth is only serving to frustrate both of you @H_factor. Why not agree to disagree and call it quits?