Are public assistance programs (governmental, religious, etc.) good?

Question

Are public assistance programs (governmental, religious, etc.) good?

Answer 1

There is some evidence to suggest that giving people food (or whatever) discourages them from stealing it.  Likewise, there are few ethics that advocate letting people starve to death who are incapable of earning their own bread.

Kant's categorical imperative would argue that charitable efforts are good because it is possible you might need some help someday.  It's not good to abuse such systems, but by the same token it's not good to let a person who might potentially be very useful have their usefulness wasted through what could be an accidential circumstance.

And I think most people agree with this.  The problem arises when we are forced to balance costs and benefits.  It is difficult, if not impossible, to construct a system that completely avoids the attachment of leeches who do not really need such help.  And there are some who would argue that a small benefit to a demonstrably productive individual is far better than a large benefit to an only potentially productive one.

Ultimately, this is the same choice we make with children.  A child requires a lot of resources and time to become a productive adult.  If resources were very, very tight, it might be defensible to let children starve to productive parents could live to produce more children.  But if you have the resources to spare, most of us would consider letting children starve to be monstrous.  Why is it less monstrous to do the same to an adult who might be made productive with even less time and resources?

Answer 2

In my personal opinion, no. I don't think that people with money should be forced to give to the poor simply because they're poor. Money should be based on merit, not need, otherwise you're working against the entire foundation of the money system. Read Ayn Rand, she articulates this very well, especially in Atlas Shrugged.

Answer 3

In theory, it's a good thing.  The problem comes from the government running the programs, as they have proved they can not efficiently run a nation-wide program (too much waste, abuse, etc).  So while I don't mind them trying to help the less fortunate, I'm not OK with giving them more $ than what they already take from me until they can properly handle what they have now.

Answer 4

They could be, if the giving was VERY selective and strategic.  Unfortunately, it becomes a giveaway program for the most effective at receiving the largess.

Answer 5

no it is to easy to be lazy anymore. my brother could be the model for this , he does nothing for no one all say everyday He is 300+ pounds and is a waste and he get things because NOW he cant work  . shocking huh