“Give a man to fish, he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish and he will eat for a lifetime.” Author Unknown
I believe that people who work hard should be rewarded. Sometimes we all need a little help and I am not against situational charity. I am, however, against enabling people to adopt charity as a lifestyle. I myself have been the recipient of governmental charity. I wanted to attend college and even though I had no financial assets, I was able to apply for financial aid. Through a combination of work study, grants, and student loans I was able to attend a state supported university. My father passed away while I was in college and I received survivor benefits from Social Security until I graduated. I am very grateful for this assistance; however, once I graduated, my future was up to me.
All of us should be appalled at the idea to “share the wealth”. I am a responsible citizen and I understand the need to pay taxes in order to support my community, state, and nation. Certain financial needs of our nation must be met by our tax dollars; however, in my opinion, that does not include supporting citizens who will not work. In order to “share the wealth”, a disproportionate amount of people are forced to “share the load”. My standard of living is compromised because of people who don’t contribute. Let’s just say that I can be a little selfish about sharing, but that is my right. When I participate in charities, they should be the ones of my choosing, not those the government dictates. I believe if you don’t work, you don’t eat. While I acknowledge that some people are sick or disabled, far too many people employ a myriad of excuses to remain at the mercy of government assistance or charity handouts.
One idea that contributes to this problem is the “I want ________” syndrome. The chasm between needs and wants spans a distance the width of the Grand Canyon. Popular culture and the celebrity loving generations seduce people into coveting a lifestyle far beyond the reality of their financial balance sheets. I love to read the Sunday paper. The colorful ads are quite breathtaking. Many times I have found myself out shopping with the goal to purchase something I saw on Sunday. For several months I was housebound and unable to shop. I discovered that I didn’t usually need the items featured in those ads. I consider myself to be of above average intelligence and yet, I have easily fallen for these marketing ploys. What manner of defense does someone who is uneducated and easily manipulated have? Surely, they have been forced into foreclosure and credit card default because they were unable to resist the song of the material girl siren. Should I pay the penalties for those people? The socialist mindset says “yes”. The answer lies perhaps in tighter regulations on credit cards policies, lenders, banks, but not a higher tax rate for those of us who have not defaulted on our obligations.
The adage, “live within your means” sounds trite and old fashioned, but truly offers the best advice for our country today.
I believe that people who work hard should be rewarded. Sometimes we all need a little help and I am not against situational charity. I am, however, against enabling people to adopt charity as a lifestyle. I myself have been the recipient of governmental charity. I wanted to attend college and even though I had no financial assets, I was able to apply for financial aid. Through a combination of work study, grants, and student loans I was able to attend a state supported university. My father passed away while I was in college and I received survivor benefits from Social Security until I graduated. I am very grateful for this assistance; however, once I graduated, my future was up to me.
All of us should be appalled at the idea to “share the wealth”. I am a responsible citizen and I understand the need to pay taxes in order to support my community, state, and nation. Certain financial needs of our nation must be met by our tax dollars; however, in my opinion, that does not include supporting citizens who will not work. In order to “share the wealth”, a disproportionate amount of people are forced to “share the load”. My standard of living is compromised because of people who don’t contribute. Let’s just say that I can be a little selfish about sharing, but that is my right. When I participate in charities, they should be the ones of my choosing, not those the government dictates. I believe if you don’t work, you don’t eat. While I acknowledge that some people are sick or disabled, far too many people employ a myriad of excuses to remain at the mercy of government assistance or charity handouts.
One idea that contributes to this problem is the “I want ________” syndrome. The chasm between needs and wants spans a distance the width of the Grand Canyon. Popular culture and the celebrity loving generations seduce people into coveting a lifestyle far beyond the reality of their financial balance sheets. I love to read the Sunday paper. The colorful ads are quite breathtaking. Many times I have found myself out shopping with the goal to purchase something I saw on Sunday. For several months I was housebound and unable to shop. I discovered that I didn’t usually need the items featured in those ads. I consider myself to be of above average intelligence and yet, I have easily fallen for these marketing ploys. What manner of defense does someone who is uneducated and easily manipulated have? Surely, they have been forced into foreclosure and credit card default because they were unable to resist the song of the material girl siren. Should I pay the penalties for those people? The socialist mindset says “yes”. The answer lies perhaps in tighter regulations on credit cards policies, lenders, banks, but not a higher tax rate for those of us who have not defaulted on our obligations.
The adage, “live within your means” sounds trite and old fashioned, but truly offers the best advice for our country today.


