Why do leftists always invoke 'starving children' when talking about welfare?

It should still make a good and simple, market based metric for the electorate of the United States.

 

Because logic doesn't work in their favor on this issue, so they are stuck with emotional appeals.

I had an interesting argument with a friend of mine on this sort of subject regarding free lunch and breakfast programs in the Public schools. He told me that without those progams many of those kids would starve to death. When I asked him how many kids starved to dath every summer when school wasn't in session he got really really irritated. When I further asked how much damage he did to poor people by his insistance that theyw ere so pathetic that they couldn't even manage to take care of their own kids and how much drug abuse was driven by the pathos caused by such assumptions he got mad and left.

Most of the left is driven not by logic but by a need to do something even if it's wrong or worse merely aggravates an already deplorable situation.

 

Because appeal to morals rarely works on the Right.

 

You might be looking at it wrong. Starving children have parents...parents who vote. So when I am on behind the podium talking about children's stomachs in reality I am talking to my voting base.

Same is applied for gun control. Tactics that work.

 

Surely you jest.

 

Why do you say that? Have you not been following my arguments?

 

This has nothing that 30% of the boys growing up during the depression were rejected for military service due largely to malnutrition when they were growing up. Eisenhower instituted the School Lunch Program in order to help prevent a recurrence of such weakening of potential manpower resources.

 

We were struggling with our Faith in Capitalism and had a domino theory to disprove, back then.

 

Come on people, they use starving children just as they do the subject of racism, wealthy not paying their share of "ordinary income tax"; to attempt to make us all believe that only the Democrats care about children, individuals and families. All for show. All just talking points. Why, because when they held the Majority of both Houses and the Presidency they did nothing to divert monies from helping other Countries and their starving children in order to assure that our children and families were first helped. Nor did they do anything to help college students in the form of "free grants", or do away with sub-standard home loans or even do what they promised to help those facing foreclosures, or expand jobs through their non-existent "shovel-ready" projects, or drastically cut future spending increases or help taxpayers slammed by increasing credit card interest rates and lowered credit limits that destroyed their credit ratings(allowing the Credit Bureaus and FICO to continue to run amuck.


The only thing that works and has proven to work is a "free market" absent of too much Government Regulation, Regulations not proven to substantially help the majority and regulations that stifle competition.