Thread: Ben Franklin - How to help the poor

One of the Founding Fathers, another example of his genius:

For my own part, I am not so well satisfied of the goodness of this thing. I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. — I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. In my youth I travelled much, and I observed in different countries, that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer. There is no country in the world where so many provisions are established for them; so many hospitals to receive them when they are sick or lame, founded and maintained by voluntary charities; so many alms-houses for the aged of both sexes, together with a solemn general law made by the rich to subject their estates to a heavy tax for the support of the poor. Under all these obligations, are our poor modest, humble, and thankful; and do they use their best endeavours to maintain themselves, and lighten our shoulders of this burthen? — On the contrary, I affirm that there is no country in the world in which the poor are more idle, dissolute, drunken, and insolent. The day you passed that act, you took away from before their eyes the greatest of all inducements to industry, frugality, and sobriety, by giving them a dependance on somewhat else than a careful accumulation during youth and health, for support in age or sickness. In short, you offered a premium for the encouragement of idleness, and you should not now wonder that it has had its effect in the increase of poverty. Repeal that law, and you will soon see a change in their manners. St. Monday, and St. Tuesday, will cease to be holidays. SIX days shalt thou labour, though one of the old commandments long treated as out of date, will again be looked upon as a respectable precept; industry will increase, and with it plenty among the lower people; their circumstances will mend, and more will be done for their happiness by inuring them to provide for themselves, than could be done by dividing all your estates among them.

The majority of the homeless in America are people with disabilities that can not work due to disabilities...or veterans (with or without disabilities).

The vast majority of homeless are mothers and children. the children can not work, and because the husbands have fled, the mothers must stay with them and take care of them and have no money to pay for childcare, etc.

this is a much larger discussion...but the homeless situation certainly isn't present merely because people are lazy.


as I've bee saying a lot recently:
Like every issue, there are multiple factors that cause the problems.

More common sense (genius today) from our forefathers.

Originally Posted by Snapple

The majority of the homeless in America are people with disabilities that can not work due to disabilities...or veterans (with or without disabilities).

The vast majority of homeless are mothers and children. the children can not work, and because the husbands have fled, the mothers must stay with them and take care of them and have no money to pay for childcare, etc.

this is a much larger discussion...but the homeless situation certainly isn't present merely because people are lazy.


as I've bee saying a lot recently:
Like every issue, there are multiple factors that cause the problems.

Yes. There are multiple factors that cause many problems. But to blanketly follow the Obama-Drone message of giving everything to everyone for free, is definitely not the answer. We have social programs for people that need it. However, what is being pushed via liberal policies, are more programs added on for people that need it, but will cover the people that don't.

Do you deny that this is NOT going on? Furthermore, if you accept that it is, then you are partially to blame for the socialism road we are embarking on at this time, under this administration.

My nephew is disabled and found work. And was he PROUD!

So Mr. Franklin here is saying that social security in the 18th century was so good that people would rather enjoy these massive benefits instead of working?

.......Yeah right.

Once again, there is such a thing as too much welfare, but modern America, let alone 18th century America, has never had it.


The founding fathers were slave owners who actively encouraged the genocide of native Americans. Yes their contributions in this world are overwhelmingly more positive than negative but they arent gods and they most certainly have absolutely nothing to offer in a debate about social security in the 21st century.

Originally Posted by Munqi

So Mr. Franklin here is saying that social security in the 18th century was so good that people would rather enjoy these massive benefits instead of working?

.......Yeah right.

Once again, there is such a thing as too much welfare, but modern America, let alone 18th century America, has never had it.


The founding fathers were slave owners who actively encouraged the genocide of native Americans. Yes their contributions in this world are overwhelmingly more positive than negative but they arent gods and they most certainly have absolutely nothing to offer in a debate about social security in the 21st century.

The Founding fathers were bright enough to wright documents that protected us against the tyranny they fled. And are so principled they stand today.

Some, most, principles transcend time. Mores and culture change over time.

The founding fathers also owned muskets, horses, quill pens, wore strange clothes, cooked over wood fires, had root cellars, killed British citizens, etc, etc, etc.

Originally Posted by Surveybob

The Founding fathers were bright enough to wright documents that protected us against the tyranny they fled. And are so principled they stand today.

Some, most, principles transcend time. Mores and culture change over time.

The founding fathers also owned muskets, horses, quill pens, wore strange clothes, cooked over wood fires, had root cellars, killed British citizens, etc, etc, etc.

funny, it was like they had a crystal ball.

It's good to know they also hated liberals...

Directing my response to the OP of "How to help the poor":

Let them be poor. Then, when they get tired of it, they will work to improve their lives and not be poor anymore.

I believe in providing shelters for the homeless where their basic necessities can be provided for--food, shelter, education, etc. We should never leave anyone to starve. But this shelter is not meant to be a substitute for earning your own way and making your own living. The goal would be to give people help while they get back on their feet so they can become contributing members of society.

I do not believe in giving people welfare so they can live on their own as a substitute for earning their own way. People psychologically need to work and take care of themselves in order to be healthy; you can't just give them freebies until they become happy.