Mickey Walker

Before Social Security and Welfare Part II: Is Cradle-To-Grave Government Help Good or Bad?

By Mickey Walker - December 06, 2009

In Part I we saw the dirt-poor Pace family with no government financial help, struggling to survive.  If your kinfolk did not have food you were up sh-- creek without a paddle.  A couple of older Pace siblings, Dave and Buck, got jobs with the CCC and the WPA, and they sent money home every month as required by their terms of employment with Uncle Sam.  Every little bit helped.  But that was well into the Great Depression, after starvation and malnutrition had taken its toll across the land.

One would think that financial help for a torn nation and a destroyed economy would be welcomed by all Americans.  But FDR ruffled a lot of conservative feathers with his New Deal which created food programs, work programs, and welfare for the poor and starving masses during the Great Depression.  And many years later, the sneers and jeers of the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and Glen Beck, tell us even now that FDR’s seeds of socialism are the cause of all that is wrong with our country.  And the newest thorn in the sides of Neocons everywhere is Barack Obama.  He wants to pass a national healthcare plan so that all Americans might have basic medical care. 

This new plan is objectionable to many Americans who demonstrate against such a plan at “Tea Bag” rallies all over America.  See, the Democrats (the Tea Baggers say) want to tax the working people (and the rich, too, so don’t forget that) to pay for what they call the riff raff, the ne’er-do-wells on the federal welfare teat.  Furthermore this less-fortunate group of Americans is demonized along with the “Limousine Liberals” who support them.  The later have been tagged as detrimental to democracy.  Among these are movie stars, bleeding-heart congressmen and social workers who think that all Americans deserve government help at some time.  Forget it, yell the Tea Baggers.  If those on welfare can’t work then why should the rest of us pay for them?

Indeed.  Why should we?  The conservatives do make a good case.  Why should honest working-people carry the no accounts, those who are not interested in working for a living and paying taxes?  It’s quite a smug country club set that can look down its uncaring nose at less fortunate Americans who might have lost their jobs.  It is a practice seen all too frequently these days.  It is based upon an assumption that all welfare is bad.  It requires that one condemn his neighbor, not help him.  And it comes from within a selfish and uncaring place.

Take the Tea Baggers.  Please.  This interesting little group seems to have missed the boat during the past 8 years of Bush/Cheney rule where borrowing and spending off budget on the Iraq War did not seem to rile the conservatives.  It was okay to do that, I would guess, because our war against Terrorists was okay, and borrowing and spending to add another 5 TRILLION DOLLARS to our already battered excuse for a Treasury, seemed more righteous and just.  Even Dick Cheney announced at a cabinet meeting:  “Ronald Reagan taught us that deficits don’t matter.”  Indeed.  I guess if Halliburton or Blackwater or Boeing got our tax dollar war bucks, borrowing and spending was A-Okay, and it did not matter that Iraq had no Weapons of Mass Destruction pointed at the USA as Bush had told a scared nation. 

But the Tea Baggers screamed in the streets to keep their tax dollars in their pockets.  They did not want to pay for all Americans to have a national healthcare plan.  And they blamed President Obama.  It doesn’t make sense.  Why was it okay for America to grow deeper in debt as a nation for the 8 years under Bush and his lap dog Neocon Congress?  Were those off-budget wars more important to Americans than a national healthcare plan that would serve 44 million Americans without healthcare who have nothing?  Did we really get more for our tax dollars spent?

Why would the Tea Baggers erupt into serious demonstrations all over America now when they could have protested our massive Trillion-dollar, borrow-and-spend policies of the past 8 years under Bush?  Why now?  Did we really benefit as a nation by buying all those $500 hammers from Halliburton and the likes?  Where were the Tea Baggers when America was paying Blackwater mercenary soldiers to kill innocent Iraqis during our ongoing occupation of the country?  A Blackwater soldier got paid 5 times the amount as was a uniformed GI.  Last year we paid Blackwater a Billion dollars.  But government dollars for healthcare given to a street person in LA was horrendous and like stealing, they called it, when the Tea Baggers and the clinch-fisted conservatives took to the streets with signs.

In the 21st Century heated arguments abound on whether American taxpayers should pay for the upkeep and care of other less-fortunate Americans.  Generally, the Conservatives ridicule social programs that help the needy as being socialistic and even communistic.  Roosevelt’s New Deal and LBJ’s Great Society and the notion of the government helping Americans in need has been successfully demonized here in America, a nation that boasts on taking care of those in need.  Yet many Americans scorn the idea of helping our own.  The 44 million Americans with no healthcare at this moment in time are proof enough of the stark reality of the truth.

The parable of the Good Samaritan is timeless.  If we help an unfortunate neighbor lying battered and wounded in a ditch, is that a bad thing?  To millions of Americans, it would seem to be so.  They would rather keep their tax dollars in their pockets than to distribute them to pay for a national healthcare plan or most any other type of government welfare program.  This kind of thinking would terminate all kinds of government tax dollars going to programs that help Americans.  Social Security and Medicare should be abandoned, they say.  The US Government cannot afford to keep paying for them, we are told, and it will be a miracle if anybody working today will receive any benefits from those programs when they retire.

But let’s do some simple numbers.  After spending ourselves into a corner of over 12 Trillion Dollars and counting, what would cutting off Social Security and Medicare really accomplish?  Would the excess dollars the government would suddenly not have to pay out be put to better use?  Would it allow us to ramp up our military might in the rest of the world?  Would we pay back the Trillions of Dollars we now owe the Chinese, Japan, and the Saudis?  Would the government be better able to bail out big businesses like AIG when they fall?  And would any of these possibilities better serve the American people?

Ron Paul is the poster child for stopping all government spending.  Dr. No as he is called in the House, votes ‘NO’ on most all bills, especially those which would require government spending.  I hope someone will correct me if I err, but Ron Paul thinks all government taxation is stealing from the people who earned the dollars.  He also thinks we should stop sending dollars overseas (some of his ideas aren’t so bad).  He objects to waging wars that spawn the $500 dollar hammers that Halliburton charges the government, too (good for him on that account).  But Paul is against minimum wage increases, healthcare and other forms of government help that would benefit and take care of Americans in a “Cradle-to-Grave” scenario, as he calls it.  Fine.  Only problem is, what do you do with the people who depend on these government programs like Social Security, Medicare, and funding for Education?  Where do we send these people once we kick them out on the street?   Ron Paul doesn’t say.

If the Good Samaritan were alive today, he would send them to the inn.  He would pay for their stay, their medical bills, their food, and he would give the innkeeper extra cash to give the poor unfortunates once they recovered.  It must be hard, sitting in the pew on Sunday, for those good Americans who oppose national healthcare and government tax dollars going to social programs like Social Security.  If the pastor really gets into the parable of the Good Samaritan and how we should help thy neighbor, freely and without hesitation, I would bet that many Neocons who call themselves Christians get their toes stepped on.  And most probably some will leave the church with torn socks.

Many nations of the world have national healthcare programs for all the people.  It’s based upon the graduated tax system (you make more money, you pay more in taxes).  Funding comes from taxing the “haves” in a country like Canada or Germany so that everyone, including the poor, will be served.  Such a system is not without its faults.  But it seems to be the only way to maintain order in a modern world.  We must accept this.  America is not such a nation.  Yet.  Unlike much of the world, we do not have a national healthcare plan.  And many of the older programs like Medicare and Social Security are suddenly under attack.  But there is still hope.  I think there is some Good Samaritan in us all.  Even Rush Limbaugh.  But probably not.  

print     email article