Social Welfare - What is it? - Why and When Did it Become a Bad Thing?

Social welfare. What is it? When did it become such a bad thing?

Social welfare is an instinctively noble human characteristic, that is intrinsically valuable to our society and to all of humanity. It defines who we are as a people; compassionate, caring, unselfish and willing to reach out to others in their times of need. Always with the perceptive gratitude of the concept of: "There, but for the grace of God, go I". A very basic concept of what one would like to believe is actually a part of 'Christianity' (or Humanity) at its best. [I would like to interject here, that when i use the word christian, it in no way endorses or supports any type of religion - it is simply to suggest a state of mind, that envelops the concept of good].

The simple definition of social welfare acceptance, as defined in 1917 as; organized public or private social services for the assistance of disadvantaged groups of people.

Today the "needy" numbers have escalated and therefore the concept of the 'disadvantaged' has been disenfranchised, and viewed as some privilege invoked by lazy people who simply do not want to work for a living. {Although, this is a fact in a small percentage of people taking advantage of the system - much like the wealthy do on a continuously accepted basis}. This is truly absurd and seems to be the new concept adopted by callous politicians, the wealthy, and today's modern conservative 'Christians'.

The only people opposed to social welfare are those whose desire it is, to exploit others for profit, and/or those whose own needs come before all others.

In any society there will always be "shirkers" who think they deserve something for nothing. And this unfortunately includes some politicians, the wealthy and some christians; who think they are exempt from taking part in anything of value simply because they were born into their particular status in life.

The far radical right wing calls them a burden on an already over taxed government system.

The far radical left think they should be handed welfare without any reciprocation.

The wealthy see them as potential barriers, in the way, to their accumulating more wealth.

Social welfare was never designed with any of these radical views in mind. The intent was to "assist" the disadvantaged and help them regain their own independence in our society; and not to simply become a way of life and a continuous source of income.

But, let's define "disadvantaged" before continuing this discussion. The dictionary defines it as: 1.) Loss or damage to reputation, credit or finances. 2.) lacking in the basic resources or conditions (as standard housing, medical and educational facilities, and civil rights) believed to be necessary for an equal position in society.

Also included in this description are the handicapped, both mentally and physically, either by birth defect, or accidental mishap.

Then, somehow, everything got twisted out of proportion, as it always does, when there are too many "questionably intentioned" individuals trying to change the rules to 'fit' to their own personal agendas.

Years ago, there were 'state institutions' that provided housing for people with such severe 'handicaps' that they were unable (incapable) of caring for themselves. Then the greed started setting into our society and governmental corruption (at all levels) was becoming an acceptable way of life. These "cuts' on the budgets, needed to be made to accommodate the 'corruption expense' so those institutions were closed, one at a time. The unfortunate residents of those institutions paid the ultimate price.

They were discarded by the public, and the system, like some useless garbage. Many of them ended up in prisons, dead, or simply homeless scavengers, still living innocuously (not liked by the public and provoking strong feelings of hostility) in plain sight, in every city of this shameless nation we have become. After all, no-one is really being harmed by their presence, except the victims themselves, or those politicians, and good citizens, that would like to see their shame hidden from the general view of the public.

So, as typical governmental policy - let us just leave things the way they are.

The political left faction will continue to champion the cause of the plight of the disadvantaged.

The political right faction will continue to ignore the problem. After all, it has no perceived threat to the wealthy, and it is good for political pandering to be able to vilify the left with such terms as 'socialists' and communists' or 'entitlement programs'.

And to re-assure the wealthy that these 'disadvantaged' people are no threat to their net profits.

Politicians from both sides of the aisle justify their inaction's by voicing their disdain at those people who 'simply refuse to help themselves' and are there, by their own fault.

So, lets just leave the disadvantaged alone. They are, after all, serving a purpose; exploited by politics, ignored by humanity, saving the government precious corporate dollars, and simply ignored by all others, (with the exception of a very few humanitarians that do what they can to alleviate their plight).

And nothing ever changes. Life is good.

d.william 10/27/11