This kind of encouragement will take a lot of your personal time. My sister has had a couple of really tight months, but she's lost 8lbs for her commitment to pay her bills and eat less -- just one pb sandwich a day. She's called me about 3 days a week in the last two months, just struggling under the financial stress.

I think most middle class people don't even realize that is an option. As our economy changes, I think we need to encourage a lot of people we work with to make similar choices -- or many more will end up losing their houses, etc.

It is so worth it -- and we all need a leg up from time to time.

Posted by: frankie | July 24, 2008 12:12 PM

The problem with the poor in America is that they feel that they are entitled to incredible worth. Inner-city youth (especially poor black males) have the highest self-esteem of any people on the planet.

With all due respect, as a formerly-poor black male I can tell you that you have zero clue as to what you're talking about. The neighborhood I grew up in (though I don't live there now) began to suffer from street gang warfare when I moved back to it 20 years ago, and people join gangs to develop a sense of authority (because it's blocked elsewhere). My own church ministers extensively in another neighborhood and has personally seen lives turn around -- at our annual Thanksgiving service easily half the testimonies are about staying off drugs and alcohol. But to do that folks need hope.

The biggest problem with poverty, really, is all these folks who have never experienced certain situations pontificating on such things and cramming solutions down everyone's throat without any attempt to communicate with them. It's patronizing and arrogant, focusing on their "good deeds" rather than on the person needed to be helped. And as Jesus said, "They already have their reward."

Posted by: Rick | July 24, 2008 3:08 PM

For years I worked in Chicago's inner city with a welfare-to-work program based near a housing project. I beg to differ with one comment that the poor don't feel they deserve better. I talked to many who felt they deserved a $18+/hour job, a car, a house, designer clothes...but they had no concept of what it takes to have those things through legal activity. A high school drop out with no job skills, language and cultural barriers and a tight job market has little chance to get those things they believe they and all Americans "deserve" through legitimate work. All people need to understand the cause/effect relationship (not just those in poverty) in order to do well in life. For instand, if I finish school, I will be more likely to get a job. If I complete a training program for a job in demand, I will be more likely to find steady employment. If I get to work on time every day, I will more likely keep my job.
The major points in the article that the standards for measuring poverty are woefully inadequate, and that people who are doing reasonably need to walk alongside the poor in their journey to self-sufficiency are spot on. The journey can take years, we can't expect instant success.

Posted by: Linnea Berg | July 24, 2008 3:52 PM

For instance, if I finish school, I will be more likely to get a job. If I complete a training program for a job in demand, I will be more likely to find steady employment. If I get to work on time every day, I will more likely keep my job.

That, however, doesn't always compute. Some years ago I heard a story where a woman's college-educated boyfriend decided he would sell drugs for a living because he felt no assurances that, despite doing well in school, he would become financially secure by just hard work and keeping his nose clean. For some good historical reasons there's serious mistrust of the "system" on the part of black males, and that also has to be addressed at the same time we encourage them to be self-sufficient. After all, stereotypes die hard.

Posted by: Rick | July 24, 2008 4:37 PM

Rev. Tune is right in saying that most of our poverty programs seem to lack a necessary element. I live in rural appalachia. Through our local United Methodist Church we started a program to try and keep high school kids from ending up in poverty. Dropping out of high school and starting a family before age 20 are the 2 lifestyle choices that corrolates the most with poverty. Based on that we took a group of kids that the high school counselors felt were at high risk of dropping out. They skipped school a lot. They were suspended from school a lot for fighting and cursing out the teachers. None of the kids that we offered the program to, had been in serious trouble with the law. All were still on track to graduate on time. The kids and their parent(s) agreed to 1) stay in school until they graduated, 2)attend class, and 3)not have children until after they graduated. In return for that pledge, the church gave them an allowance of $25 per month. They were docked $5 for every day they missed school. They would lose the allowance if the girls became pregnant or the boys got anyone pregnant. The adults from the church in the program met with them twice a month, one time during school hours to give them their allowance and talk as a group. The second time was for an after school activity. We went to area businesses so they could see what different types of jobs looked like. We went to an amusement park. We went "tubing" at an area ski resort. After school attendance was poor.
The first class of kids graduated this past June. The results were dissappointing. Of the original 10 kids that signed up for the program midway through their sophmore year, only 2 graduated. One girl became pregnant. We kept meeting with her but she's fallen behind. She says she wants to come back next year and graduate. Hopefully she will. The other 7, plus 3 more that joined the program in their junior year have all dropped out. One said he was going to get his GED and go to the Vo-Tech to learn welding.
I worked with these kids for 2 1/2 years. They were great kids. They had spirit. They started out still hopeful. Yet most of them slowly, one by one dropped out. Some embraced the program. Some just came and got their allowance, reduced by continued truancy. They knew that we liked them and cared about them, but that wasn't enough. They really needed one on one time. The 2 that graduated had fairly intact families and parents and grandparents that did a good job of parenting. But some of the ones who dropped out did too.
We have a 2nd group of kids who we picked up in the 1st semester of their freshman year. They will be sophmores this fall. So far none have dropped out. We're going to start another group of freshman this fall as well.
It's painful to see kids you like and have come to care about fall away and quit. All the adults in this program are volunteers. Most of us work and have our own families. Yet clearly these kids need more than what we're doing so far. Dr Tune, thank you for your article. It encourages me to keep going with our program.

Posted by: Bruce | July 24, 2008 6:22 PM

As a committed Christian and a staunch Conservative, I commend you on this article. Too often, those of us on the right are accused of not caring about the poor because we don't support creating and expanding massive and inefficient beauracracies. In fact, the type of individual responsibility you discuss is exactly what we do support. The command to help the needy was given to US (Christians) and it is disgusting to me when Christians try to outsource their God-given responsibilities to the government.

Posted by: Bradley | July 24, 2008 11:22 PM

People who have suffered poverty, discrimination abuse, addiction - they do NOT have self esteem. Period.

They do not have PROPER self-esteem, which can only come from loving and being loved, achieving and having your accomplishments recognized by others. However, in its place, people do substitute EGO and PRIDE (individual or group-based) - but even though we call or confuse these things with "self-esteem," let's be clear they are NOT.

EGO and PRIDE can be gotten through rhetoric and self-deception; they are easy substitutes that trick us into comforting ourselves that we are worthy (when we have no REAL way of achieving that) - they are what economists would call an "inferior good." In today's mass-mediated consumer culture (which disgustingly emulates the rich even more than when I was a kid in the 1980s), it's true, many kids feel they "deserve" luxury goods. But who is responsible for letting our kids receive and believe this message?

This is why Rev. Tune talks about us building personal relationships with CHILDREN (especially!) who have suffered poverty, discrimination abuse, addiction - it is necessary for REAL self-esteem, self-love, self-respect, which in turn is the ONLY basis for having right relationships with other people. I have never been poor myself, but grew up blue-collar, interacted with many people who were poor and working poor, and worked with poor service workers as a union organizer. On the last point, people I worked with, they wanted RESPECT as much as better wages and health care. Most people were willing to help the campaign somehow, and of course there are some free riders.

But in addressing youth culture, let's not blame the youth who are still trying to find their place in the world when they have no control over the horror in their lives or the messages they receive.

The reason I respect the work of Sojourners is that it sees that the true solution to poverty comes from the best ideas of "Right" AND "Left" (and not from their worst ideas).

Posted by: alex | July 25, 2008 10:21 AM

On the last point, people I worked with, they wanted RESPECT as much as better wages and health care. Most people were willing to help the campaign somehow, and of course there are some free riders.

That's the key -- respect.

About four decades ago a member of upper management of a local steel company decided to check things out at its plant because of, among other things, constant conflicts with its workers. Once this man, a committed Christian, actually took a stab at the lowest-ranking job in the plant and said that the man who did that job earned every penny, he got everyone's attention. Gradually he won the trust of the workers, and within a few years absenteeism and grievances went to near zero and employment, quality and profits soared.

The same applies to relationships of any kind. As I mentioned in a post above, one man in my congregation was dissed simply because of where he lived and, by inference, the environment. That does no one any good, which is why I say that people should just "pull themselves up" truly don't understand the process of doing so because, in many cases, they already had or were aware of the tools required to do so.

Posted by: Rick | July 25, 2008 10:38 AM

Bradley,

Your mother is to be commended. My wife and I had our family in the 60’s and 70’s. The best we could do was $5.00 to $10.00 per week per person for groceries. My wife was a very careful shopper. She would only buy what was on sale. Your mother was able to feed her family on $3.00 a week. Do you have any brothers or sisters? Even if you do not your mother was a miracle worker. She was indeed favored by God!

I am pleased that you were able to work up from 50 to 60 hours a week and still keep up with your school work. I was working only 48 hours a week (8 hours a day six days a week) and it took me three years not to complete a two year school. My hat does go off to you. You were able to do what I could not do, and worked 12 hours a week more than I did. God as indeed blessed you!

Also I am more than pleased that you now have a business. I know that as a good Christian you are paying a living wage to all of your workers and that you will not be like that uncaring employer your father worked for. I know that you will never fire an employee because he or she get sick and is not able to work. I also know that you will give a new mother time off to take care of her new baby.

How do I know? Matthew 7:12 so in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets. Deuteronomy 5:20 you shall not bear false witness.

The people of a country – Government – have a duty to help those who cannot help themselves Leviticus 19:10 nor shall you glean your vineyard, nor shall you gather the fallen fruit of your vineyard; you shall leave them for the needy and for the stranger. I am the LORD your God

As an individual person I have a duty to help. Matthew 25:34 "Then the King will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.'

The only way I can do these things is through my Church and together with the rest of the people in the country which is the government. Is the government a good way? All I know is it is the only government we have and for most of my life – 65 years - it has been lead by Republicans.

You do not have to accept our help.

Posted by: Bob Klingle | July 25, 2008 11:56 AM

"What? I'm trying my best to understand your point. Additional (and proper) punctuation would help."

That's too bad, DITE. I could easily figure out what he said. I sometimes think you're being obstreperous just for the sake of getting a rise out of people. If that's the case, please stop.

Posted by: JEM | July 25, 2008 4:33 PM

"That's too bad, DITE. I could easily figure out what he said. I sometimes think you're being obstreperous just for the sake of getting a rise out of people."- Wow! I agree but I had to look it up.
Sorry. Wrong paste. :)

Pastor Jeff

Posted by: Pastor Jeff Staples | July 25, 2008 5:20 PM

Many of my childhood friends are still stuck in poverty in my liberal Democrat controlled hometown still looking for the government to be the answer.

That is in itself a prejudiced and arrogant statement, for no other reason that in the end you "look down" upon people who haven't "made it" the way you did. Truth be told, you probably had access to opportunities they didn't, through the grace of God. The key is to expand those opportunities to others and help them to get ready for them -- it's called "justice."

Posted by: Rick | July 25, 2008 5:43 PM

Rick,
Prejudiced statement? How? Arrogant? They chose one path, I chose another. We both had the same choices. The key is to help people to choose the right option. BTW, I've spent my entire adult life helping people make those right choices.

I don't look down upon them (as always you arrogantly assume you can assign motives and/or feelings to someone else).

Jeff

Posted by: Jeff | July 25, 2008 10:58 PM

Doug: Where in the Bible does God say to for doctors to heal the sick? It does not. Don't you think that God could heal sickness if He wanted to? He chooses not to. or Where in the Bible does God say to go to church to help overcome sin? It does not. Don't you think that God could eliminate sin if He wanted to? He chooses not to. Where in the Bible does God say to earn money so that we control it's distribution? Where in the Bible does it say for women to remain silent in church and that we should execute sabbath breakers? It does. Biblical exegesis becomes dicey for social policy when a static (literal) lens is applied.

Pastor Jeff

Posted by: Pastor Jeff Staples | July 25, 2008 11:38 PM

Wow. Did you take my post out of context. You sure seem angry as well. All I said was that yes as a christian you are supposed to help the poor. As a conservative I don't feel that it is the govt. job to take other peoples money and redistrubute it. That is called stealing. If God calls you to help the poor then by all means do it. As far conservatives falling out of Gods graces I don't understand. I doubt God is ok with killing babies or having people marry who are the same sex. Yeah poverty is inportant but it is not the only issue. There are also many to help the poor and we just disagree. I really do feel sorry for you Rick that you can be so decieved. I am sorry that conservatives have hurt you so much for there to be so much anger there. That is to be expected from liberals though.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 26, 2008 9:28 AM

Nice, like a pleasant message in a fortune cookie. But we can't ignore the fact that virtually every door out of poverty has been locked shut over the past 30 years by our social policies. We know all the cliches about "personal responsibility", i.e., pulling oneself up by his bootstraps, all of which seems trite to those too poor to have bootstraps in the first place.

Let's take a look at what worked in the past. When welfare benefits were at their highest, and programs at their most comprehensive, the length of time that people used aid dropped significantly. Before the march to "welfare reform" began, some 80% of recipients quit welfare in under 5 years. Nearly all of the remaining 20% had multiple barriers to employment. Sometimes via welfare education/skills training programs, most recipients worked their way into the middle class, becoming taxpayers, thereby repaying all the aid they had received. These programs played an important role in creating the world-class workforce that we once had.

Welfare provided the aid vital to stability, and the education/training vital to securing family-supporting jobs. Health care was made available so that people could return to work. Parents were able to provide the adequate diets so vital to child development, reducing the need for medical care. Millions were able to work their way out of poverty, and the nation benefited as a whole.

Post-World War II welfare programs were central to building the middle class that we once had. Our "reform" policies use the poor as a bottom wage/no rights workforce -- a Third World workforce, without the cost of moving jobs to Third World countries. These "reforms" effectively trap people into a spider's web of something like indentured servitude. Workfare has been a powerful tool for crushing unions and suppressing wages.

We all suffer because of the narrow focus on "personal responsibility to the exclusion of social responsibility. We've been conditioned by 30 years of propaganda to believe something that defies all logic: that we need to "get tough" on the poor and powerless, to convince them to give up the "pleasures" of hunger, illness, deprivation and hopelessness. America's survival will depend on our ability to re-learn the value of "the common good".

Posted by: DHFabian | July 26, 2008 10:08 AM

Wow. Did you take my post out of context. You sure seem angry as well. All I said was that yes as a christian you are supposed to help the poor. As a conservative I don't feel that it is the govt. job to take other peoples money and redistrubute it. That is called stealing.

I certainly did not take your words out of context. Rather, you take the Scriptures out of context to make sure you hold onto whatever you have and try to get more, never mind that it's a gift from God to be used for His purposes. But most conservatives (in my experience) forget that and maintain an "entitlement" mentality and then accuse everyone else of the same.

As as for my being angry -- you're right. Because I'm sick and tired of having my faith questioned by people more interested in being "right" than coming together to solve common problems. I'm sick and tired of being patronized and called derogatory names because I dare question the "received" doctrine of modern conservatism. I'm especially sick and tired of folks using the sacred Scriptures to justify a mere power trip that benefits no one but themselves.

As far conservatives falling out of Gods graces I don't understand.

Most conservative ideologues are not Christians. It also goes without saying that not all Christians are conservative ideologues.

I am sorry that conservatives have hurt you so much for there to be so much anger there. That is to be expected from liberals though.

You just proved my point -- it seems that everything boils down to a "conservative vs. liberal" issue with most conservatives I know. Truth be told, I'm not a liberal; in fact, many of my own views are perhaps more conservative than yours. But I don't just give to the poor; my interest is in changing the system so that the poor can make their own way and I don't see you doing that.

Posted by: Rick | July 26, 2008 1:02 PM

Just something to think about:
Conservatives are frequently berated by Liberals for trying to "impose their morality" on others. (This is usually used whenever they oppose abortion.)

However, when those on the left advocate the use of government force (confiscation and redistribution of money) because it's the "moral" thing to do, are they not trying to impose their "economic morality" on everyone else?

Posted by: Bradley | July 26, 2008 5:52 PM

Bradley,

If I take your logic on and I will then that must mean that you don't want to pay taxes for bridges... or other services that don't have anything to do with you. Sorry but it seems clear to me that God requires governments secular or religious to look out for the least of these. If Jesus can tell his disciples to pay taxes to a corrupt Caesar even when they were in the middle of being oppressed I think we can do our civic duty and pay taxes to this corrupt government.

p

Posted by: Payshun | July 26, 2008 6:09 PM

Bradley: What Church? Wherein Scripture is this command given? Do you suppose that there is a dualism in God where only a select few righteous are to have God's commands applied to their lives?

Pastor Jeff

Posted by: Pastor Jeff Staples | July 26, 2008 8:25 PM

Does not the bible say that does that will not work will not eat. Exactly where am I taking the bible out of context Rick.

In the immediate context, Paul was addressing believers who were sitting around simply waiting for Jesus to return (conventional wisdom in that day held that He would do so in the next few years or decades).

All I said was that it is stealing when you take by force what is someone else and then give it to someone else. How do you justify voting for people who mock you and your faith. It sure seems to me you are putting money ahead of other issues.

If anything, you're doing that. And in fact, most people who mock the Christian faith (but more privately, generally out of earshot) are ideological conservatives who use us Christians only for the sake of electoral power -- do you think, for example, that they really care about abortion or gay marriage? The biggest conservative figure in my city and one of the biggest in the country is also one of the largest financial supporters of Planned Parenthood!

And as for "taxes" "to support the poor" -- please. If you lived and shopped in some of those neighborhoods, truth be told, there'd be a lot less poverty. Anyway, the idea is to give people a chance to make their own way -- but conservatives are so desperate to hold onto their power that they completely misrepresent the issue as merely financial. In other words, they're guilty of idolatry.

Posted by: Rick | July 26, 2008 9:54 PM

Sorry to go off an tangent there it just makes me mad sometimes to be thought of as someone who is uncaring. Thank you Bradley for stating my postion like I could not. have a blessed night.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 26, 2008 11:05 PM

"As to your comment that "God requires governments secular or religious to look out for the least of these" that may be your oppinion, and one that your are certainly entitled to hold, but scripture does not back that up. In fact, the command to care for the poor was not given to Caesar, or to the Roman Governor, or to any other government official or agency. It was given to the Church."

You might want to read the bible more. Because pagan governments were charged with looking out for immigrants and the poor starting with Pharaoh and Joseph and all the way through biblical history. God told Nebuchadnezzar to save food for his people too. It's also obvious that you have not read Amos or you would see that God requires all nations to seek justice and provide for the widow. You might want to read that. It will help with a more holistic understanding of scripture.

Actually I did take a macro-economics class. But that's beside the point. I don't think you have the wisdom to talk about the self esteem of black men, or the issues in the community because you don't know what they are.

1. Government programs work when conservatives don't sabotage them. But that's beside the point to. You are fine with actual injustice will do nothing to fix it. That's what Rick is saying and he's right. You don't deal with slum lords or drugs on the street or providing positive male role models. You do none of that.

2. The problems you speak of were there way before government got involved. Not only that but Conservatives always sabotage these programs or gut them entirely beginning with Reagan all the way down.

3. No one is stealing property. Jesus still requires you to pay taxes even when it was stealing so your point is mute. Jesus said pay taxes to Caesar. Rome was stealing Israel blind and yet Jesus still said pay taxes. So guess what? You still got to pay.

4. I will remember that the next time someone eats government cheese. All the poor that I have been around are grateful for whatever they can get. This issue is a lot more complicated than you are saying and for someone that is so aware of economics I would think you would have the intellectual integrity to do so.

Bradley,

Conservatives don't want any of that for the people. Their goal is power and nothing more. Liberals want everyone fed you and other conservatives like you pretend the poor don't exist and believe that everyone has equal opportunity. I am one of those activist liberals and I know what I am talking about. So when you are able to be a little bit more honest about conservative motives then we will talk till then.

TTFN

p

Posted by: Payshun | July 27, 2008 1:06 AM

Instead of debating and determining whose idea is best, you choose to put your fingers in your ears, close your eyes and yell the mantra, "Conservatives hate the poor!"

The real issue is -- and I will continue to say this until you get it -- that the conservatives want to call the shots to benefit only themselves -- it's called envy. Changing the "system" to truly benefit the poor is a threat to their power, which is why they opposed the civil-rights and anti-apartheid movement, among others, by calling the "Marxist." Well, I've read Marx, and do you know what? He got some things right!

Posted by: Rick | July 27, 2008 1:50 PM

Now Rick you have really lost it. Marx got nothing right and he was Anti-God. You are making God a single issue God. Conservatives are trying to help by the changing the idea that the idea of redistrubting wealth does not work. All you have to do is look at history to know that is true.

My friend, in addition to prophesying falsely, you're in utter denial and captive to bad theology. But much of the country isn't anymore, which is why even many evangelical Christians are moving away from the right-wing ethos that has done nothing but concentrate power into fewer and fewer hands and using the excuses of abortion and gay rights to do it. Marx may have been anti-God, but the conservatives who criticize him merely use God -- which is even worse -- and He won't have that anymore.

Posted by: Rick | July 27, 2008 6:49 PM

Your examples are silly, I am not arguing for Communism. I am still a greedy capitalist just like you and for the record capitalism has killed off and enslaved it's share of people. just so we are clear no system is perfect. But it's clear you worship the free market and man's greed over the poor.

Without liberals we wouldn't have child safety laws, equal rights for blacks, gays or any other out group, the woman's right to vote or a host of other things. Without liberal policies you would not have any safety net for the poor whatsoever. Damage was done when unfettered capitalism decides the fate of humanity.

Just look at American slavery (unfettered uncontrolled capitalism), the Trail of Tears, the Opium Wars...when the free market system is deregulated bad things happen to the planet. Do you remember the great Depression? Do you remember what happened to the planet? Do you remember the graft of the free market system and the evil and deaths they caused? Do you remember it was liberals that got us out of it?

All I am arguing for is some regulation, an emphasis on justice and provisions to make sure the poor have some protections from people that exploit them. You are arguing for none of that. You keep saying over and over again that the poor are worse off because of liberal policies but when you look at history it would disagree with you.

History makes it clear that conservatives have not stepped to the plate and demanded justice for oppressed people until they were forced to. Whether that be civil rights all the way down the children's rights. Folks on your side of the fence have always denied the government's role in protecting it's citizens from the worst in corporate greed and decadence.

My hands are out of ears. I am listening to everything you are saying and my conclusion after hearing what you are saying is simply you don't care that much about the poor. I can say this in full confidence because you don't want the government feeding anyone (while history shows that people ate less when there was no protection, think 1860's 1890's but we can go earlier if you want) you don't want any safeguards to protect people in any industry and on top of that you want an anemic, lazy and weak American church to take charge of something it lacks the resources to do.

Right now the church just can't do what you are arguing it can. It just can't. So until you pull your fingers out of your ears and deal with the facts you will not be able to see how God wants to bring justice, love, food to people that are hurting. You will be blind to it, revealing your lack of caring for the poor.

p

Posted by: Payshun | July 27, 2008 9:22 PM

I am sorry that you are so angry. I wonder must have happened to you to be so bitter and hateful toward people you do not even know.

Angry? Yes. Bitter and hateful? Hardly. It's like someone said to Harry Truman, "Give 'em hell, Harry!" He said, "I'm telling the truth and they think it's hell." Conservatives began building their propaganda machine in the 1950s because they hoped that they would "baffle [everyone] with bull----," but Iraq, Katrina and the K Street scandal exposed modern conservative ideology for what it always was -- a form of class warfare exploiting God (in some cases) for the sake of power. And, as Payshun said above, it became idolatry that God Himself had to take down for His Name's sake.

Posted by: Rick | July 27, 2008 9:58 PM

The govt. job is to defend us not to take care of the poor. That is how conservatives can justify paying for wars. Know your constitution. New Orleans is as I recall was and still is run by liberals. It is not the federal govt.s job to bail out states in a disaster. again you need to know the constitution. It is the states job to see that its own citizens are protected. As I recall Mississippi was hit just as hard as New Orleans from Katrina and has just as many black citixens there as well and yet they manged just fine. that state is not run by liberals. If you want a snap shot of what our country would look like if run by ligberals you need look no farther then New Orleans or Michigan.

Posted by: Anonymous | July 27, 2008 11:21 PM

Bradley,

I do know my Constitution and it is a flawed document. The Constitution was designed to protect the land owning rights of rich white men. That was it's goal and you are continuing that. That's why they had to keep amending it. Not only that but the Iraq war did not protect us, has not protected us and really has very little do to with us.

p

Posted by: Payshun | July 28, 2008 12:11 AM

Ms. Cynthia,
I submit to you that the scanario you suggest happens on a routine basis. Lotto winners are given millions and are dead broke if not indebted within a few short years.

Meanwhile, markets change, business go under and the owner starts over from scratch and regains wealth.

The key is in the fact that the wealthy typically do not have "jobs." They create them for others by starting a business. Very very few climb the corporate ladder and achieve executive status and become wealthy that way and even fewer inherit their wealth.

Almost all of the wealthy became wealthy by providing a good or service that benefits people and for which people are willing to pay. They found a way to provide a better product or a less expensive product to help others. Then, as their product began selling, they provided jobs for other people. The more generous one is, the more wealthy he or she becomes.

No one will get wealthy flipping burgers. But if they find a way to provide good burgers to lots of people at a cheap price and then offer their system for sale so that more people can get wealthy from it and that more jobs will be created, you have Ray Crock

Similarly, if a man wants only to help himself, he takes a job on a garbage truck. If a man wants to help others, he saves his money and buys his own garbage truck and serves others by picking up their garbage. He then provides jobs for others as his business grows and he buys more trucks and hires more people. Eventually, a garbage man becomes wealthy, not because he had an opportunity for a glamorous job, but because he set about his work with the idea to help as many other people as possible instead of trying to help only himself.

Posted by: Bradley | July 28, 2008 11:34 AM

To all the conservatives here who are whining about government "stealing" their money to help the poor: Who the hell pays for the roads you drive on? How do they pay for it? How SHOULD they pay for it?

Posted by: I and I | July 28, 2008 1:34 PM

ACTS is interesting in that regard. But Jesus is not ACTS and in every gospel ranging from Mathew to John, Jesus shows grace to the poor sometimes to the detriment of the surrounding regions like in the case of the demoniac. The good Samaritan is the best call for mankind, the church and governments to start from.

p

Posted by: Payshun | July 28, 2008 3:37 PM

If you changed your identity and tried to start all over again with out any of your previous relationships or resources could you do it?

Easily.

Posted by: aaron | July 28, 2008 5:11 PM

Wolverine states that govrernments may take our tax dollars for "national defense" because they are more competent in that than in charity work. That might be true of such defense were defined differently from what we are doing which is seeing "national defense"as maintaining our dominance (and privileged position) in the world. That's why we spend more for armaments than the rest of the world combined, including re-doing our nuclear arsenal while we rail at other nations attempting to go nuclear. Is there no arrrogance in that?

Posted by: George, Jr. | July 28, 2008 5:53 PM

Thanks for the clarification.

p

Posted by: Payshun | July 28, 2008 6:33 PM

It seems to me that the left tends to collapse American society down to government. That is, in my humble opinion, a very limited view of things.

It's not so much that -- the "left" understands the reality that, sometimes, structural issues need to be addressed and tinkering around the edges doesn't do any good. Slavery and Jim Crow laws, to give two examples, needed to be abolished, not simply adjusted. Such is often the same with fighting poverty, which is different than two generations ago in that the "rich" for the most part no longer live in poorer neighborhoods and thus don't always understand the specific problems that require solutions -- they need to give of their own resources (not just $$$) to solve the problem, which they're loathe to do because the idea of sacrifice is foreign to many Americans of means.

Posted by: Rick | July 29, 2008 7:52 AM

Pastor Jeff,
If you read my comment original comment near the top of this post, I only commented to commend the author on encouraging individuals to take personal responsibility for helping the poor. Somehow, this statement has earned me reprimands and accusations stating that I "don't care about the poor," that I want the rich to "get rich on the backs of the poor." All of this because I suggested that we actually have a personal responsibility to help the poor. Apparently, a lot of reader don't want to help. They want to push the responsibility off on the rich, the middle class, the white, the politicians, anyone but themselves.

What did Christ tell the rich young ruler. (The gospel writer used his red quill for this) Did he tell him to go get his friends together and convince them to give more money to Ceasar for the care of the poor? No, he told him to sell everything he had and give it to the poor and follow Him.

Was the good Samaritan a government agent?

What does Christ say to do if a man asks for your cloak? Oh, that's right, send him down to the Welfare office and let them take care of him. Or better yet, go find a "rich" person (defined as anyone who looks like they might have more money than you) and tell HIM to give the guy a cloak, right? After all, surely Christ couldn't expect YOU to give YOUR cloak, right? You LOVE that cloak! It has a special pocket for iPod and the Apple logo on the back! But that rich guy, he will never miss it. I'm sure God meant to send him to ask the rich guy for help to begin with! Why would God expect you to do it? He knows how you've been saving for a new Macbook! Nah, not your job. Just send him over to those "rich" guys. They probably stole their money from poor people anyway. (Not sure how you get rich by stealing from poor people, though, but still...)

My beef is with "christians" who believe that it is a command of Christ for us to vote for politicians who will "take care of things" for us. I will answer your challenge by pointing out the absurdity of your line of thinking:

IF you say that we government should "take care of the poor" because Jesus told his followers to take care of the poor:

THEN, do you also believe that government should fund the Baptist missionaries, because Jesus told his followers to go into all the world and preach the gospel?

If you are consistent, you will say yes, but I think we both know the answer to that question.

Posted by: Bradley | July 29, 2008 11:11 AM

Bradley,

I am so glad you brought up the good Samaritan. The whole point of that groundbreaking story was to illustrate the fact that all humanity is responsible for it's neighbor. Considering you had a rabbi (who was part of a theocratic government) pass him by Jesus makes it clear that what the rabbi did was wrong.

It's not just individuals as the old and new testaments make clear. Revelation, Amos, Ezekiel, Isaiah, Jeremiah makes clear what God will judge and what he will not and nations will be judged for how they treated the poor. That means the principle of the good Samaritan can and should be added to all things human beings are part of whether they be governmental or not.

p

Posted by: Payshun | July 29, 2008 1:58 PM

Wolvie: Thank you for the opportunity to further explain my point. You are right, we both know the answer to your argument. Being a Baptist means opposing any government interference, including support, for commandments Christ gave the church. My point is that the Great Commission was given to the church but the commandment to care for the poor is a "brother's keeper" universal command. Rick has it right when he explains that the church is to be counter-cultural and, therefore does have a specific need to be distinct from the state. You, nor Bradlee still have not answered the initial problem I raised for "the church should run Social Services" crowd. By way of reminder it was this: If the church were to run Social Services biblically wouldn't there be a whole other set of qualifications for administrators and recipients? If you are consistent, you will say yes, but I think we both know the answer to that question.
Your allusion to the cloak falls short as that parable is highly symbolic (see Walter Wink) and laden with cultural nuance. Your literalism has painted yourself into the corner of being handless and eyeless.

Pastor Jeff

Posted by: Pastor Jeff Staples | July 29, 2008 5:25 PM