The church I belong to has an excellent program for caring for the poor. It would be even better if the government stayed out of trying to control it. In this program the poor are given basic needs and given counselling to help them manage their resources better and they are taught employment and job skills. The most important thing they are given is an opportunity to maintain their dignity by giving them an opportunity to do something in return for what they are given.
Us members who, for whatever reason, have all our needs met and have a surplus are given the opportunity to help and serve those who are less fortunate. At least once a month we fast for two consecutive meals and donate the value of those meals (typically much more than the value of those meals) to help those who are in need. We are also given the opportunity to serve them.
A few weeks ago I worked in the storehouse stocking store shelves. Those in need are referred to this store by their local minister to get needed food and supplies. So here I was, a retired professional with an MBA running around a warehouse pulling stock to replenish store shelves...and enjoying every minute of it!
That's the way it should work and the government needs to get back to it's constitutionally mandated job.

"The government should read the Constitution."
What a radical idea!

Great answer.

Bravo, Ben!

Carson just reiterates what we have known all along. If one looks closely at every government enterprise beyond those specified in the Constitution, you will find a record of failure. It's just that some failures take longer to manifest than others. It is good to hear someone in the spotlight speak the familiar lesson and be brave enough to own it. Kudos, Doctor!

Good answer, Ben. But he really weakened his message right at the end when he said that government has a big role in facilitating help for the poor. The government's definition of facilitating is running the whole show.

Excellent answer. Not what the left wants to hear.

Edited from
http://cnnpressroom.blogs.cnn.com/201...

CARSON:
My stance is that, we the people have the responsibility to take care of the indigent in our society. You can read the constitution all you want, it never says that it is the government's job and I think where we've gotten confused.

In the old days of America when communities were separated by hundreds of miles, why were they able to thrive? Because if it was harvest time and the farmer was up in the tree picking apples and fell down and broke his leg, everybody pitched in and harvested his crops for him. If somebody got killed by a bear, everybody took care of their family.

So we have a history a taking care of each other. Now, for some strange reason starting sort of in the twenties with Woodrow Wilson, the government started getting involved in everything. It kept growing. By the time we got to the sixties, LBJ was saying, we, the government, are going to eliminate poverty.

How did that work out? $19 trillion later, 10 times more people on food stamps, more poverty, more welfare, broken homes, out-of-wedlock births, crime, incarceration. Not only worse, much worse.

And that's because it's not their job. It's our job. I wish the government would read the Constitution. Maybe they did read it and maybe they got confused when they read the preamble which says one of the duties is to promote the general welfare.

They probably thought that meant putting everybody on welfare.

Escept for his religious zealotry, he isnt bad. BUT, I dont vote for religious zealots to be in positions of power in the government. They always seem to drift into making me subject to their religion.

The only decent person in the race...

"If all you hear is his faith...." then that is what you are looking for! He really didn't actually mention his faith at all. It is interesting how certain candidates like Ben Carson cause certain people to hear certain things every time they talk even when they didn't say them.

He has a great sense of humor and his timing is perfect.

I don't think that our society functions any longer like it did at the beginning BECAUSE of government taking over the role of community.
It will be a long hard road back to the kind of cohesiveness that Ben alludes to.

I think that we have some of it in the Gulch...and that is good.

I posted it too:::

https://www.galtsgulchonline.com/post...

-- j

Excellent answer!

It's nice he answered without getting into his religious beliefs. I agree with some of what he's saying, but I don't agree with the focus on gov't spending directed to a "war on poverty". I agree with gov't efforts to eliminate poverty, the same way I agree with gov't efforts to protect the borders. We all benefit from it, and using tax dollars is a way to keep people from getting the benefit without paying. I completely support radical experiments in getting these things done voluntarily without forced taxation. I think the military should be drastically reduced in size and replaced with a militia of armed citizens protecting their homes. I think social programs should be fixed, reduced in size, partially replaced by tax credits, and focus entirely on the poor.