Is there a real difference between private charity and government welfare from the receivers point-of-view?

I’d guess one big difference is you never know from one week to the next whether private charity is going to be there or come to an abrupt end.

As a child, I lived in a family that received (government-given) welfare and food stamps. We also, from time to time, received charity from private churches and such, in the form of holiday food boxes, envelopes of donated money to help with rent and clothes, etc.

Each kind has its own “feel” to it. The faceless money from the government is what got us by from day-to-day, and was a reliable source of funds (inasmuch as welfare was reliable in the Reagan era). There seemed to be less shame involved in receiving it, because it wasn’t from any one person, although the people in line behind you at the grocery store did make you feel ashamed of the food stamps.

The private charity from churches was, somehow, just too much of a charity vibe for Mom to handle. When they left after delivering the boxes of canned goods, for example, Mom would make a big show (for the neighbors) of taking the box to some other neighbor, so we wouldn’t have the shame of being “so poor we needed church help.” It was also sporadic, and occurred mostly during the Christmas/Thanksgiving season, because that’s when people were most generous. (Apparently they think it’s the only time people are hungry.)

So, in short, yes, it very much matters where the help comes from. It’s really really hard (at least for us) to look people in the eye as you accept their gifts, because it saps any dignity you might have left. You feel more obligated, as though you ought to go to their church or perhaps kiss their feet, because they’re so “kind and generous” to you, poor little poverty-stricken dirt trailer park family. It didn’t seem to make much difference as to whether or not Mom was productive, though.

@laureth Thank you for your answer. Very interesting how you describe how your mom would give away something to a neighbor to show you were not so poor you needed help from a church. I have been critical of people living in poverty giving to charity or their churches. Maybe they need to feel like they are not so poor they can’t give? I never looked at it like that. Also, I never would have guessed that getting from a church would be perceived as poorer than getting from the government.

Did your mom/parents work? Did she want you to grow up and not be dependent on charity? To make your own way?

I don’t know about in the larger sense that you’re really asking about, but from my personal perspective, I’d feel better about accepting government help. Purely because I’ve paid into that system. It’s available because we pay into it. Therefore, if we needed it, I wouldn’t feel like it was charity at all, really. More like an insurance program.

Mom has issues. She’s not much of a worker – in a way, she feels like the world owes her. When I grew up and moved out and the welfare stopped, she found other ways to mooch off of others. (I never had a dad. Just a single Mom who had some short term relationships with other women who didn’t stay around much.)

She stressed school and wanted me to go to community college, though, so I assume she wanted me to make my own money. It was never really stated out loud, though, and she didn’t seem to think much of universities. (She was a high school dropout with a GED.)

@augustlan I agree with what you said if I fell on hard times and needed some help to get back on my feet, which is what I think welfare was really created for, I would accept the money feeling as though I had paid in and would have full intentions of using it just as a bridge to help me through a bad time. I completely support this type of program.

But, from what I can tell some people are born into the system and work it through adulthood. I am not sure how that happens? How they can do it? I don’t understand how they continue to get money for what seems like years? I did not think our system was supposed to work that way? Maybe it doesn’t, but from the complaints I hear it seems it does? I confess I am fairly ignorant to how it all really works.

They can’t work it from birth through adulthood anymore. That’s what Welfare reform was all about in the 1990s. You can only be on it for a little while in your life.

@laureth From what you wrote it seems she just was never going to be very motivated to work. If not public assistance she was lucky enough to find a man or someone to support her. So, aside from your mom, do you think our government programs encourage people to not get jobs? I have a friend who says, “I always thought that if I did not work I would get skinny.” Meaning he would go hungry. That he never thought in terms of food stamps or public assistance, the option never occurred to him. He thinks the option being there is a demotivator.

@JLeslie, I read an interesting article about urban renewal and the interstate system in the 1960’s and how it decimated poor areas by physically cutting off contact with the city as a whole with the expressway going through the city area, removing people who were community role models (middle class small business owners, teachers, etc. who lived in the neighborhoods where their businesses were located) to the suburbs, and how taxing under-the-table earnings of household domestics and day workers, cut off that source of funds that enabled many families to “get out.”

I know in my family, my grandfather’s earnings on the loading dock fed the family and put the roof over their heads, but it was my grandmother’s income as a daily domestic that sent my uncle to college and paid for my mom to go to a convent school for high school.

If people only have what’s around them or what they see on television as role models, it’s very hard to advance. I read somewhere that it takes three generations for a family to advance financially, but only one generation to fall.

I don’t think it’s a demotivator for anyone who isn’t fairly unmotivated in the first place. My husband spent most of his life as a Conservative who thought that welfare and unemployment made people lazy. That was, until his job was outsourced to Bangalore and he was spending 12+ hours a day looking for jobs, sending out applications and resumés to even far-fetched leads, and wondering if we could pay the mortgage. He was a perfectly capable person, willing to work, but there was no job for a while. That’s when he got much-needed unemployment that, while it paid a fraction of his old wage, got him through until he found another job. He now understands what is meant by the term “safety net,” and how much society needs one for perfectly good people who are in a time of need.

A thought-provoking question, indeed. I feel that people who are ashamed for receiving charity don’t differentiate between its sources. When my family came here, we used Medicaid and Food Stamps and returned to both when my husband got laid off and before I found work. I never thought it was problematic because I knew so many other immigrant families used these services too. My first husband, however, couldn’t even say he gets food stamps and I used to get really angry at him – I saw it as such a weakness on his part, especially considering the fact that he was doing nothing about getting off food stamps and finding work.

When I was young my dad called it being on the dowel. I think I spelled that word right. I personally think there are really some people who would be starving if it wasn’t for the help they get.
When my kids were little we didn’t always have food in the house but we made out. My husband was a police man, I wouldn’t have asked for help even if I had know I could.
IF you need help ask for it.I don’t think there is anything called pride pudding Yet.

@Simone_De_Beauvoir You should’ve said he’s lucky. I remember when they were actual, colorful physical pieces of paper and not the Benefit card they have now.

Monopoly money, as people in the neighborhood called it.

@PandoraBoxx You bring up an interesting point. Urban planning and transportation are pet interests of mine. The community I grew up in was very suburban, and overwhelmingly middle class, but did provide housing for various levels of income. I like this type of purposeful planning (what do you think @augustlan).? In cities there is even better opportunity for all walks of life to interact. it does seem that this is being lost in the US, we live more and more in our little pockets of demo and psychographics leaving us limited contact with people from different parts of the socio-economic strata.

I am very disturbed that in America living in poverty many times means living unsafely. How can a child or adult think straight if they are worried about bullets flying? It is like living in a war zone. If the classes were a little more mushed together I think this might be less likely to happen? But, I am kind of getting off on a different subject, although related.

@Grisaille nah, it was when it was paper…this was long ago

@Simone_De_Beauvoir So, you are saying that since so many people around you took assistance you had no shame associated with it?

@JLeslie that and because coming from a Communist lifestyle, asking government for help and expecting it was the norm

@JLeslie those types of programs are fantastic, and work well.

It’s a shame more towns don’t adopt such practice.

And again, we also have to realize that a majority of the lowest-income counties are urban areas (see: The Bronx) that have very few – if any – upper-lower class or middle neighborhoods. It sucks, really.

@Simone_De_Beauvoir Did you guys get the plastic change, too?

@Simone_De_Beauvoir I see. I did not know what country you came here from. People in my “class” (I would classify myself as upper-middle class) definitely differentiate between the different types of public assistance. They feel no shame taking unemployment, medicare, and social security, but might feel very awkward taking welfare, food stamps, or medicaid. Although, not awkward using state health insurance options for their children.

@Grisaille I can’t remember if I asked you this before…does the school system in The Bronx still have good options for students like SP programs and the opportunity to go to Music and Art, or Science if you qualify? Or, is the public school system a mess now?

@wildbird I think it is actually dole. I think it was a word that came over with the Irish, I still use the word.

@Grisaille yes, we did – but my current husband doesn’t care either way so it doesn’t matter…we live in Brooklyn, so many poor and immigrant families..it’s expected..

@Simone_De_Beauvoir If the money came from private organizations/people/churches would you feel differently taking it?

Considering I have no idea what an SP program is, probably not.

However, The Bronx often gets a bad rep with regards to how dangerous some neighborhoods are – granted, you have your Hunt’s Point, you have your Kingsbridge road and your Valentine Ave., but a majority of the rest of the neighborhoods are relatively safe and connected-feeling. I hopped all around the Bronx when I was growing up; there definitely are a whole bunch of areas that feel safe.

As for the education… well, if I’m not mistaken, the high school graduation rate is anywhere from 19% – 70%.

There are programs available for exceptionally gifted children to help take them out of poverty. There are numerous grants available for high school graduates simply for completing high school in a poor economic climate. Most of these are math and science based.

Unfortunately, the public school system is a goddamn mess. Underpaid, careless teachers, violence in high school, and just general apathy towards life. It’s really a sad, sad mindset.

Again, this is a generalization. For every Evander Childs H.S., you have a Bronx High School of Science.

@Simone_De_Beauvoir Yep! Best sense of community is on the first of the month and everyone you know is shopping at that corner supermarket… hahaha

i work for one of the wealthiest counties in the country, in the social services department, and in addition to the public assistance (also known as “welfare”) that our department authorizes, at various times during the year we get donations of things for the recipients. in the summer, they get paid camp. back to school time they get donations of backpacks and school supplies. holiday time, they get toys donated by Toys for Tots and various other charities, churches, fire departments, etc.

i would deliver toys to families at holiday time. Some families got toys from us, at the same time getting toys from Salvation Army, at the same time getting toys from their housing department or shelter, at the same time getting toys from another charity like a domestic violence association, at the same time getting toys from their local therapy provider. I had clients that had so many toys they did not let the kids open all the toys at once, because it would be too overwhelming. these people worked the system to the max. i had another client that was a domestic violence victim, was on public assistance and also got food from a food pantry to supplement the small amount of food stamps from the government. At Thanksgiving, the domestic violence place and the food pantries all gave her turkeys. she had so many turkeys they did not fit in her refrigerator, so she gave them to her neighbors.

i think some of the recipients were cognizant of the various donations coming from places other than the government, and some of the recipients were not that smart that they cared or it mattered to them. they just got and took.

@JLeslie not if I was eligible for it.

@jca It seems from your description it would be better if the donations came through one organizing system so it would be allocated better. Better to get two toys per child and money for other necessities than 10 toys.

@Simone_De_Beauvoir Interesting. Do you think having these programs available are demotivating?

@JLeslie not to the immigrant communities – I’m generalizing but because so many of our parents have instilled a crazy work ethic in us and the need for education and advancement, we never saw this help as permanent.

@Simone_De_Beauvoir So, it is not the programs itself, but rather the culture and expectations in the community? I have always thought that.

@JLeslie yes, I believe it’s up to the person/family…of course person/families are influenced by those that surround them…and that is influenced by many bigger historical factors…

@JLeslie (Regarding your aside about planned communities).

While our hometown had housing available for all income levels, it was still pretty separated by neighborhood. You probably lived in a nicer area… in a single family house, yes? I grew up in a pretty bad neighborhood. (Do you remember The Hamlet?) A low-income apartment complex full of drug dealers and domestic violence. The upside was the presence of undercover cops on the premises at all times. At least when there were problems, the response time was quick!

I was acutely aware that we lived in a poor neighborhood, but there were definite advantages to growing up in the general area. Number one was probably great public transportation. That enabled me to commute to my jobs without a car, even to other nearby cities. Not to mention the great diversity of the population. Meeting people from all over the world certainly helped me become a compassionate person. (That’s probably more about being so close to DC, than anything else.)

At that point in my life, we were still damn poor. We had moved up from welfare, but I still qualified for free lunches at school. I refused to take advantage of it, because they issued you bright orange lunch tickets… it was obvious to everyone, and not cool in high school. I got a job, instead, and paid my own way. From what I understand, these days no one can tell who’s using food stamps (debit cards) or free lunches (everyone has an account, with a number… whether your parents put the money in your account or the government does), which I think is a much better system.

My mother was eventually able to buy a condo in a nicer area, so at least I was aware that there was a way out. The fact that I started working at 14, and paying my mother rent (my choice, not hers) at 15, was a big help to boosting her out of the system altogether.

@augustlan Actually, I lived in a smallish townhouse in Maryland Place behind Whetstone Elementary it was a 3 bedroom 1.5 bath no garage with a basement. When we first moved there, I was going into 5th grade, we only had one car, so we walked or took the ride-on bus. I had a very modest household when I was younger, not much money, probably lower middle class based on income, although my family was very educated. Later my mother went to work (which meant my sister and I were alone after school from the time I was age ten on I think? My sister is two years younger than me. I don’t even think they let you do that anymore) and my dad began earning more, so we were more mainstream middle class by the time I was in Jr high, but still lived like we were lower-middle.

Hamlet was still the village though, wasn’t it? So you could go to the pools and use the tennis courts, right? I think that type of planning where we could be with our school friends in the summer at the pool, and it had nothing to do with what church or club you belonged to was a great thing.

In school did you feel like people treated you like you were poor, or that you felt poor compared to some of the other kids when you realized where they lived or clothes they were wearing? I agree that the diversity was another big positive; I know we have talked about that before. I vaguely remember that kids could tell who got free lunches now that you mention it, how awful that it was obvious.

Governmental aid seems to have an aura of entitlement about it. Private aid is coming from your neighbors and has a more judgemental quality.

The only things about ‘private’ aid is that they’re not always well organized, the help isn’t constant, there is a creepy “Oh you poor dear” aura about it and many religion-based charities force you to either be born again or attend their services as repayment.

Government aid isn’t easy to get. You have to be there for hours and deal with going and reapplying every so often. Plus, when you go grocery shopping you get a lot of attitude from other people. “Why are you buying that?” was a question I heard often once they saw my food stamps.

@JLeslie The Hamlet used to be part of the Village, but then they literally cut it out! We actually couldn’t use the pools at other places, but we had a great pool of our own, with liberal guest privileges. Then, there was always Lake Whetstone, and the mall! It was good to be able to hang out with school friends in lots of different, easily accessible places. Yay for Ride-On buses! They took you everywhere you needed to go.

At school, I did feel it was obvious that I was poor. I relied on hand-me down clothes, so was always a little off the fashion cycle. I also wore Gap jeans, or Levis at the most, and knock-off polos when everyone else was wearing Jordache and Izod. Looking back, it really wasn’t a big deal, but it sure seemed like it at the time. Eh, I’m over it. :D

@JLeslie, you asked the question in terms of how recipients felt about the aid they received, and though I haven’t read through the entire thread, it seems like you’ve gotten (mostly) answers from that point of view. I’m not here to put anyone down for aid they have received; I’ve been poor myself. Though I didn’t receive any aid directly, I did crash for several months with some friends at low-income housing that I later learned was subsidized. (In fact, I was sued by the administrators for the balance of the subsidy because several more people than had applied eventually lived there, and the original application may even have been fraudulent—I never learned those details. I won a summary judgment when I just explained my ignorance of these details, and that I was not party to the original application.)

I was trying not to digress, but to explain, “I’ve been there.” I’ve eaten mustard sandwiches and received “direct aid” from my own parents—and recognized it as charity.

When I was older I did volunteer work, and I have contributed—do contribute—to various charities, and fairly generously, but as the feeling strikes me. No, I’m not as regular as a paycheck (to respond to @ETpro‘s leadoff comment that “it’s not so predictable”—and if you think that government aid ‘will always be there’, then that’s one of the surest signs that it won’t be, one day). But when I give, I do it freely, and with love and an open heart, open arms, total friendship. If anyone has any reservations or qualms about accepting what I offer freely, then that’s on them; I can’t control others’ feelings.

On the other hand… I resent every nickel that is extorted from me by my government, no matter how it’s dressed up. “For the children” ... “for tomorrow” ... “for the downtrodden” ... “social justice” ... bah. It’s extortion, and (on bad days) I hate the ones taking, the ones distributing, the ones enforcing the taking .. and the recipients. (Seeing programs like Social Security, that make people poorer by design—and them often too badly educated to recognize that—in public schools!—really sets me off.) And when I hear (not necessarily here in this thread, but in news accounts, television interviews, demonstrations and the like) that the aid is “expected” simply because we live within the same political jurisdiction (town, state, country) then I just want to revolt against the entire system.

So I think it’s important to know what happens to the givers, too. A lot of us are just pissed off that there is so much waste by an endless government need (and consequent demand)—that doesn’t meet the actual need. And there’s only so much goodwill left for private and personal charity that we get burned out. So we end up routinely walking past starving panhandlers and the obviously homeless because of the burnout and resentment. I resent that I feel that way, too.

@CyanoticWasp You mention social security. I am assuming you are talking about SS at retirement. I am always curious why people are annoyed with that program? How does it make people poorer? We pay in and get it back later. It is like an insurance program more than anything. No one gets it if they have not paid into it. I understand being annoyed with medicaid and welfare, but I don’t understand the resentment against social security, maybe you can further explain it to me?

I found it interesting that @Simone_De_Beauvoir said she feels no guilt taking charity from a private person or organization if she is eligible. I wonder if it was literally one on one charity if she would feel differently? Meaning, I directly give money to a specific person in need. My hard earned money to support them. As long as it comes from an institution whether it be a church or the government I think people don’t REALLY think about where the money is coming from—other people.

But, the intention of the receiver does matter to me. If they need help, but have a plan and want to work I want to help them. If they are happy to just sit back and take, not so much. I have heard poor people say things like, “well they are rich they don’t need all of that money,” but I think this is the minority, I don’t think most have this feeling of entitlement. I remember a thread on fluther where someone fairly young asked how do people get rich. I was stunned at how many people responded by sayng that rich people do dishonest horrible things to get their money. This atitude makes me wonder if people are happy to take money from the rich, because they feel it is ill gotten gain anyway?

Honestly, I think it is very complicated. The working poor is very upsetting to me. I think anyone who does an honest days work, just wants to do the right thing, has integrity, loves his family, I don’t care if it is sweeping floors, should be able to live with dignity and a roof over their heads in a safe neighborhood. But, I am judgmental if I see they have 5 children and have Ipods when they can barely eat. But the catch 22 for me is I want those children to have a chance at getting out of poverty.

@JLeslie, Social Security takes $1 from you now (when it’s actually worth “a dollar in present day” to you) and sends it to someone else. It might pay it back to you in some year to come when that dollar will be worth a fraction of what its worth is to you right now. If you had taken the dollar and invested it yourself, then at that future day it has / could have had the potential to be worth much, much more. And you wouldn’t have to “apply” for it, “qualify” for it, wait for it, or jump through any other hoops for it. In addition, since you would have had ownership of it, you could include it in your estate and designate it to whomever (or whatever) you wanted.

In addition, FICA (Social Security) is a flat rate tax… against those least able to pay it. Since there’s an annual ceiling on FICA “contributions”, most taxpayers pay the entire 15%+ of their wages in this tax every year. (Yes, there is an “employer match” ... which is essentially a hidden tax on YOU, since the employer only pays it on the wages that YOU earn. The employer considers it a cost of employing YOU.) The very wealthy max out on FICA “contributions” earlier in the year, so the take from them is less than 15% of their wages—often much less. So it’s the most regressive tax we have, aside from sales taxes, which are at least voluntary after a point, and lotteries, which are completely voluntary.

Aside from these points, intelligent people need to realize that the government never has ‘enough’ money. In fact, the more we’re taxed, the more indebted our government makes us all. Government always outspends its income, which is why its income needs to be more and more constrained in the first place. I trust you to spend your dollars to your best advantage, and more power to you. The money taken from you and me in the form of today’s FICA ‘contribution’ incurs a future debt of $1000s. And there is no money “set aside” to cover that; it’s just more and more debt.

If you’re concerned for the working poor, then you really should be on board to abolish these most regressive of taxes, and conversely to educate people to the need to save and invest a portion of their earnings for their own future. That’s the flip side of liberty: people need to be responsible for themselves, too.

@CyanoticWasp I am upset about regressive taxes, but I do not think social security is regressive. You get back what you qualify for by what you paid in. A wealthy person does not get back relative to his income, but relative to what he paid in. It is an insurance system, like paying for long term disability. However, I can see the argument for your way of thinking, I would not be upset if they made everyone pay a percentage of their entire salary, lowering the percentage for everyone. I tend to be in favor of flat taxes in general.

Also, SS is paid for the rest of your life. What if you actually do save and plan, but then live much longer than you anticipated? Company pensions are now not being offered in general anymore, it really is up to the individual to sock away money, most Americans are idiots when it comes to saving money and predicting what they will need for retirement so it probably costs us all less to kitty up money into a social security fund, because they are forced to pay some money in. I don’t think any of us want the elderly living on the street, having to lose their homes during the golden years. I am not saying SS is perfect, It is dependent on the population growing, which in many western countries is a problem, although not in America yet. I am also very pissed that from what I understand the governement borrows from this fund for other expenses, that is theft to me.

Where I live, TN it is VERY regressive. There is a 9.25% sales tax, no income tax, except on dividends and interest on savings. I guess they think that is taxing the rich, but if you are 75 living off of your investments you are paying state tax while the 30 year old guy isn’t. They tax supermarket food at that high sales tax also.

@JLeslie, it’s especially regressive when you consider that the “working poor” that you’re so worried about are the very ones who generally live the shortest post-retirement lives. I also bristle at the very notion of “qualifying” and “applying” for what is (supposedly, although we know it isn’t) my money.

@CyanoticWasp Do the poor actually pay? Or, do they make so little they barely pay taxes and SS? I don’t know the answers, just asking. I was self-employed for a while so I paid double into SS (or that is one way to look at it anyway). Doesn’t bother me in the least. Your talk about applying and qualifying. You are going to qualify, I don’t see why you are worried? As long as you worked 40 quarters I would assume they don’t deny you. At least I have never heard of that. Just curious, if you were not paying into SS would you be saving all of that money yourself?