Quit excusing us from our duty to help others. We give to show our gratitude
for all of our own undeserved blessings. I know full well from decades of
church talks against the evils of the dole that indiscriminate payments can
breed dependence, but that doesnt mean we dont give. It means we care enough to
give what is needed--money, at times, but also goods, training, emotional
support, or whatever.In the 1950s and 1960s my church and scout
leaders repeatedly taught us boys, Dont ever think the world owes you a living.
But their teachings included a parallel duty for us to help other people at all
times, and to love your neighbor as yourself.Whether we do our duty
privately, use private charities, or organize large scale services through our
government, it is not because anyone is entitled to it, it is because Our
Provider loved us first.Accept no excuses.
FDRfan,You said, "Have you "earned" your life?,
etc."Great point! It's a common one in the philosophical arena,
but it fails to understand 'claim'.We have rights, inherent to live,
etc. But we EARN wages, which is a trade.We inherit the right to
live, true- but you have no claim to MY possessions, unless I agree to trade,
like a wage. Without consenting agreement, freedom could not exist.-------Joe,"Social Security is an
investment..." - That actually hits it right on the head, but I think for
another reason. Say that SS gives 10 times more out... the point is that we
designed the system to be that way. Some don't like how much money someone gets
for their public service... BUT they technically are entitled to it, why?
Because the system agreed to pay it. While SS may not be perfect, and the ideal
system may be radically different (who knows?), the current system promises
payout... therefore, any other efficiency or systematic criticisms of SS are
relevant.The real issue would then be whether SS is designed well,
or necessary. As it stands, those who participated in SS are certainly entitled
to the payout promised.
@RoxyLynn. You say of the elderly receiving Social Security, "The reality
is that you take waaaay more out than you ever gave. The average ss recipient
recieves three times more money than they contributed." I suspect you may
not understand the concept. Social Security is an investment that a person makes
throughout a working life, feeling secure that the government will live up to
its obligations. When it's time to collect on this investment, the person is
entitled to the rather small monthly paybacks. One reason the payments are
possible is because a huge number of working people do not live long enough to
collect them even though they paid into the system. I have to wonder if you have
any hard-working elderly people in your family. Or maybe you're some rich person
gazing out from a penthouse, looking down on the less fortunate with a sneer.
Well, we less fortunate people of 65 and above have the determination and the
votes to collect what is legally and morally ours.
My opinion, you are only entitled to what you spent time and effort to earn.
Why should I who have put in the study time, the effort time and the experience
time and because of that earn a good life have to share that with someone with
their hand out. Well you say pity them they came from a "Poor"
background. So get off your laziness and get out and go to work."Well, I don't know what I want to do." While you are setting there
someone else has figured it out, you can to!
Let not your heart be troubled because soon all of our troubles will be over
since the government will provide free healthcare for everyone (illegals
included) once the single payer dream of Obama is realized and everyone will
make the same amount of money too (determined by the IRS's new wealth
redistribution policy). Yes come one and come all because entitlements are on
the house!!! We have money to burn in the US - just ask Standard and Poors!!
Debt - who cares? China will always be there to loan us some more. "What,
me worry?" (Alfred E Newman ).
I guess there is no thought that the money that we spend on defense is causing
some problems.Just goes to show. It is only the spending that YOU
dont like that causes the problems.Is it nice to live in such a
"a growing plague that eliminates responsibility, fosters laziness and
encourages the accumulation of insurmountable debt"Sounds like
the perfect motto for the Obama presidency!!
Bring this down to a family life style.. Do your children get a cell phone just
because they want one? Do they have to do anything to pay the bill? If not do
they help around the house so that they Earn their phone? My kids have to pay
us for them. Not much but they have to earn part of their living. Do I just
pay $80 bucks for piano lessons but my kid doesn't have to practice but I owe
them lessons? The reality is that kids think that just because they want
something parents are required to give it to them. Thats the entitlement
attitude we need to help children recognize and help the feel the self esteem of
working hard to have ownership in their "things" and their lives.
Bring this to a level of personal responsibility.
I also think that those criticizing this article need to realize the difference
between those that have chosen to do nothing and expect everything, and those
that can't and need help. That is the where the big problem is.
I'm sorry - but I have lived in the south and I have lived in Utah. Mormons are
more hard working than those in the south. Mormons also contribute millions per
year toward charities. Yes - I said it. So I'm not really sure why mormons were
even mentioned. Sounds like people are reaching.
I often talk with my wife about members of our extended family who have gotten
caught up in the entitlement (I deserve it) mentality. King Benjamin made it
clear that we don't even deserve even the air we breathe, its a gift from
God.I think deep down in each person responding to Eyers knows they are
right about taking personal responsibility for their own lives, about the virtue
of honest hard work to provide for yourself and your family, about the untenable
position we are all being put in because of an out of control government, a
government that spends way beyond its (our) ability to pay back.
I still don't like the idea of over reaching words like entitlement, and
morality. Very inprecise, and confusing. Secondly the comparison between the
functioning/governing of a family and the governing/functioning of a nation is
way off base and almost useless. That said, the teaching of
personal responsibility and personal ownership is still key to a happy
functioning, individual, and a civil functioning society. Despite
the Eyers messy nomenclature, and overreaching comparisons, their specific life
examples are probably quite timely.
I am so sick of the attitude of some of the elderly that they deserve or have
earned social security. I think it is perfectly fair if you get back everything
you have contributed into the system. The reality is that you take waaaay more
out than you ever gave. The average ss recipient recieves three times more
money than they contributed. The plan was a bad plan implemented by men who
were not farsighted enough to manage the money or foresee the future numbers.
Get a grip and plan for your own future instead of relying on future generations
to make up a standard of living for you. I neither want or need the government
to provide for me, and that requires living well within our means and
sacrificing some of the things society tells you you should have. I dont' care
what choices others make, just don't ask me and millions of others to nullify
the natural consequences for you. Totally an attitude of entitlement!
christoph @ 9:15 p.m. cites a line from a children's song about needs being
great.Though unwitting, he has provided us with an excellent
illustration of the nature of the entitlement mentality.Personally,
I hope I have grown some, not just in height, since the days of my childhood.
If parents could always find adequate jobs to provide enough food and shelter
for their family, or if charity were enough to cover that shortfall, then
government charity would have never been necessary.Given that it
history has shown there are hungry people, including children without government
government invervention, government charity ..IS... necessary.If you
think otherwise, have you ever been without a job, or unable to find one that is
adequate? If not your time is probably coming.The right likes to say
it is un American for government to involve itself. I think just the opposite.
It is un American for people to get rid of the only tool that can ensure that
all of us have the basics.
Are you teaching your children mercy or will they grow up with the attitude so
strongly condemned by King Benjamine? Have you "earned" your life? the
air you breathe? the earth on which you live? the freedoms you enjoy? Are we not
all beggars?This article should be classified as an advertisement. Are you
really on a crusade to save the Social Security recipients from their
"entitlement mentality"?Or are you taking advantage of a hot
topic to give light for hire? I'm sure Glen Beck will promote your book and so
will Rupert Murdoch and the Koch Brothers.
One thing true about human nature is that if you give someone an inch they will
take a mile. Testing boundaries doesn't end with childhood.
What are people "entitled" to in our society? Should some reasonable
restrictions be placed on "entitlements" that might make for less
waste and more personal responsibity? I know a woman who has been
handicapped since she was a child and is unable to earn a living because of her
handicap though she really would like to contribute and pay her own way. Social
Security and Medicaid are a godsend for her.I know another woman who
decided to become an alcoholic. She is quite incapicated by her self imposed
problem and she has received over the past couple of decades, taxpayer support
that reaches into the hundreds of thousands of dollars. Is she
"entitled" to this money; this support?Are people who get
Medicaid or Medicare assistance for drug or alcohol or tobacco or sexual
promisquity diseases "entitled" to this help? Perhaps they are.
Where do we draw the line?
I don't suppose what the Eyres think. Moving on..."You can't
claim people aren't entitled to their entitlements""Entitled" means you have claim to something. This is the textbook
meaning of the word. No one is really fighting that idea, just feeling entitled
to something FOR nothing.A man who works 40 hours a week is entitled
to a paycheck. A man who sat home, jobless, and didn't work at all is not
entitled to a paycheck. Do we have a right to unearned benefits?When
people take something they didn't earn, they borrow... thus the dept problem.Government debt to pay SS or wages is paying EARNED wages. But the
article doesn't even mention that. It does mention Credit-Card debt.Are we entitled to earned wages, SS, retirement? Absolutely!Are we
entitled to what we have yet to earn, like a T.V. or going in debt for luxuries,
etc? No.That's all I'm saying. I don't think you really disagree
with that. I think we simply found a language barrier. Am I wrong?My
concern was the parrot remark. I agree with the Eyre's, but also think for
myself. The author here did nothing unintelligent.
@the supposed "voice of reason": You don't think the Eyres are
disagreeing with Social Security? Then why does the article talk about the
national debt, which is attacked by the Eyres as an example of entitlement gone
wild? Why has Rick Perry advocated dismantling Social Security and Medicare as
an example of the evils of entitlement? Let's get real, here. The big national
debate over "entitlement" -- as exemplified by the comment concerning
national debt -- is all about destroying these essential lifelines that people
earned. Entitlement is a concept and not a right? Excuse me, but what does the
phrase "entitled to" mean? You're not going to win any arguments by
ripping up the dictionary and coming up with your own definitions. Words have
meaning. You can't claim people aren't entitled to their entitlements.
Is public funding of education evil entitlement?Is social security
likewise?I think its evil entitlement that multimillionares think
they should get away with paying the same tax rate as the poor and middle class.
Joe Bauman,Entitlement, when defined, is a concept... not a right.
The Social Security example is an institutionalized example. Social Security
doesn't technically even need to exist. You are entitled to the results of your
hard work and I agree with this. I don't think the Eyre's disagree with that
though.Consider,The point that they and others are
making is that people often believe they are entitled to things that they have
no claim to. Am I entitled to the benefits of your hard work? No, of course not.
Children see other kids with an x-box and feel that they should have one too.
Many parents simply buy the xbox to satisfy that mentality, rather than thinking
intellectually and rationally about whether there is a more effective way to
parent.Some parents may 'go against the grain' and some may simply
find alternative methods instead. Rather than 'give give give' to your children,
offer a way for them to earn it, and help them accomplish those goals in a
structured, not overly difficult, and timely manner.There is no need
to attack a couple with the single motivation to help others with parenting
advice, especially rational advice.
The hymn "I'm a child of God" says "and so my needs are
great" which sounds like entitlement is part of the gospel of faith.
The Eyres are on the right track and teaching the right lessons to people they
can reach, starting with their own family. Good for them!No, they
cannot change the entitlement mentality in everyone else that is so seriously
harming our culture, nation and economy.However, they are on the
right track and trying to make a difference. Too many critics are on the wrong
track and only seek to make sure they get everything they are "entitled
to" while begrudging any of the ill-advised efforts to spend money fixing
corporate problems.I do not support corporate welfare either, but I
won't blame Mr. & Mrs Eyre when corporations take money that politicians try
to shove into corporate management's pockets.I will, however,
condemn the politicians who feed the entitlement mindset, and try to defeat them
at the ballot box.
The entitlement mentality comes from mislead views of "equality",
"rights", and "fairness". Many cling to the paradigm of
entitlement because they feel that the hardships that humanity faces are not
justified. This is a trick and a flaw in reasoning.I posted a 4-part
post (long, I know) on the article, "An Awful Experiment", recently
published by the D.N. - In this post, I address the fundamental problems with
communism. One of the main problems surrounds the idea that we can have equality
in society.1- The idea that government should make us equal is false
and ultimately it's end is dangerous.2- The idea that we are equal
in our right to govern is democratic, free, and sound.3- Even if
equal distribution exists, equality in possession is still impossible.4- The idea that we are "entitled to" means that we "should
get". When a system is designed to "give out because it should",
then the system is a moral design to force equality. a) force is dangerous and
anti-freedom. b) it doesn't work in the end anyway.---If
anyone replies to these points, I suggest first reading my referenced post for
my full view.
How positively sickening! I'm an entitilement junkie because I want to have
medicare available for my wife?! This is in capsule form what is most sickening
and despicable about Mormon life. Truly, I wish I were not longer part of
Richard and Linda Eyre co-author a book capitalizing on the current unrest in
our society.Fair enough.I did not see a chapter
crusading against corporate entitlement.Simple oversight?Soon to be addressed in the 2nd edition of their tome?
And I'm sure that the Eyres' were just as concerned when Wall Street asked for
billions in taxpayer funds to cover up their own incompetence. Never mind that
Republicans took a budget surplus and a plan to pay down the debt in ten years
and turned it into the largest deficit in history. I'm guessing that this book
wouldn't have been written if John McCain were in the White House right now.
I realize that we all have a part to play in this and it isn't a bad
message by itself, but I fear that this is just another way to guilt-trip the
poor and middle class while the main culprits get off scott-free.
What a biased article. Take the second paragraph: "Their adversary is
entitlement, a growing plague that eliminates responsibility, fosters laziness
and encourages the accumulation of insurmountable debt." Sez who? Since
that description of entitlement is not attributed, the reporter is stating as
fact that entitlement causes all these evils. But what is an entitlement? For
those without a dictionary, entitlement means something to which one is entitled
-- that is, something that belongs to you. I receive an entitlement, monthly
Social Security payments. I earned them through a lifetime of working. I paid
into the Social Security fund nearly all my life. I am entitled to this
assistance now that I am retired. Many of us have pensions that were crafted
with the idea that pension plus Social Security could allow one's family to
live with dignity. I challenge anybody to tell me that Social Security
eliminated my sense of responsibility, fostered laziness or encouraged my
accumulation of an insurmountable debt. Quit parroting and think for yourself.
Editorializing in news articles is unworthy of a good newspaper. What makes it
worse is that the editorializing doesn't reflect reality.