>>15
Oh, I agree with many of your points. What I meant by 'not watching any news media' is the news media presented in newspapers, radio and television. I should have been more detailed in that context.
There's no doubt that there's poor people that need help. I'm not saying they shouldn't be helped; not at all. But we seem to have different philosophical differences in how this should be achieved. You seem to prefer that the government can do this, where I believe that missions, charities, churches and whatnot can do this just fine. What I'm arguing is that when government is doling out these services, they are cheating the people (especially Social Security recipients), from getting the assistance that they were promised. I was pointing out government can screw up this process as I provided the two links in my previous post to how over the decades the methodology of how CPI prices are calculated and the Social Security and Welfare trust funds are depleted by politicians using the money for all these wars instead of going out to senior citizens that were promised this to.
In fact, Social Security checks from the government should be nearly double than what they are now. It's corrupt, it's immoral, and it's utterly destroying the lives of people. So what can we do? My argument is there needs to be more charities and missions helping these people on a local level. There are, but what is there is not enough. And you're right, if we weren't in all these endless wars, instead of helping our own, things would be much better. War is a goddamn corporatist racket, and it's disgusting and immoral. If there were any justice in this world, all presidents who advocated interventionism overseas would be tried by the Supreme Court.
So yes, I largely agree with you, with the exception of how a solution should be accomplished.