The Mythical Private Charity Safety Net

[Deacon923]

I thought this was a good article which addresses many of the private charity safety net myths that are put forward from time to time. I wish it had some internal links or footnotes to its assertions regarding historical fact, but nonetheless a decent summary.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/03/the-conservative-myth-of-a-social-safety-net-built-on-charity/284552/

Take a 1934 treatise by Linton Swift, a leader of the Family Welfare Association of America (FWAA), an umbrella group for hundreds of voluntary social service agencies. The FWAA was also a vehicle for resisting public efforts to deal with poverty and relief before the Great Depression. The FWAA and other community groups opposed public relief for the poor out of worries that political patronage machines might be built out of it. They were also concerned they’d lose their ability to stigmatize—or to protect—various populations; by playing a role in determining who wasn’t deserving of assistance, they could shield those they felt worthy of their support. Public assistance, they worried, would stigmatize everyone.

But its outlook had changed dramatically by 1934. As Swift wrote in the beginning of his book, “there is now a general recognition of the primary responsibility of local, state, and national government for the relief of unemployment and similar types of need.”

 

[WakeandBake]

no way man, everyone knows that the constitution and the church had everything under control and humming along before the godless liberal socialists came in and began stealing hard-earned money to subsidize laziness and promiscuity. It's science

 

[PhDeac]

They just don't want the poor to be dependent on the government for handouts.

They want the poor to be dependent on the church for handouts.