mass murder disguised as ~fiscal responsibility~ part 16,789,516
Can you please explain how this is murder? Does this mean the government was guilty of mass murder before 1965? Do you really think that it is murder when government ceases to be a charity? Do you not understand that there are other ways of doing thing besides government?
This is like accusing people of wanting famine if they want the government to let private farmers grow grain.
This is NOT a choice of private charities and individuals OR government support. It hasn't been for close to a century. More to the point, if you have ever spoken to a food pantry or other private/church charity organization they will tell you they desperately can't carry more of the burden and want government to help with the many many people they don't have resources to assist. Many of them in fact rely on government grants and other funding for their support, and thus will likewise get dinged hard by these cuts.
Oh, and don't delude yourself into the fantasy upper income tax cuts will somehow create more charitable giving. Every study ever done of the Reagan tax cuts shows charitable giving remained essentially flat. Furthermore, the rich give a disproportionatly small share of their income to charity compared to the poor and middle class (much of a "there but for the grace of God go I" syndrome). To top it off, the Rich's charitable giving tends to concentrate in areas the build prestige among their peers, such as art, the theatre, etc.. Thatch fine and important, but services for the poor, hungry, homeless, etc. tend to get short shrift.
And yes, malnourishment kills, even in 2017 America.
Poll
