Software for the finest computer – The Mind


Posted by Tim Bryce on October 8, 2014


– The government or the individual?

To use this segment in a Radio broadcast or Podcast, send TIM a request.

I am concerned about our perspective on charity. President Obama seems to believe it is our duty to help others. His mantra is, “We are all in this together.” There is only one problem with this concept; some people are givers and some are takers. We are certainly not rowing on the same oar in unison. Consequently, I reject the president’s position. This certainly doesn’t make me a miser as I have made more than my fair share of volunteer donations over the years and helped many causes. If I believe the person or charity is worthy, and I can afford it, I will gladly help out. As a Mason I am admonished to help others in destitute circumstances if it is within my power. I am also reminded of the passage in Corinthians (13:13, King James), “And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity.”

There is nothing in this passage defining how charity is to be implemented. Most people see this as a voluntary act, from one person to another. Others see this as mandated by government and borders on Socialism. In this regard, there are two types of people; those such as myself who consider charity a voluntary act, and; those who believe government is more fit to determine the needs of the people and tax accordingly.

Historically, the moral fiber of the country called for people to work and not become a burden on society. Not surprisingly, concepts such as divorce, bankruptcy, and unemployment were considered a disgrace. Not anymore. Today, such things are considered commonplace, and are celebrated as opposed to bringing shame on the person. Today’s moral values are certainly not those of yesteryear, and this is particularly disturbing to those people working hard and being asked to support those who do not.

Over time, the government created safety nets to help people when they either failed or became disabled, such as unemployment and welfare. Some use it as it was intended, others as a loop hole for free money and services. We are all familiar with stories of people exploiting the system. Interestingly, we never seem to hear of violators who have been apprehended and penalized accordingly.

Whereas we used to believe everyone should lead a worthy and productive life, and there is dignity in all forms of legitimate work, today we prefer exploiting the system and becoming a freeloader as exemplified by the Aesop fable, “The Ant and the Grasshopper.” In many cases, exploiting the system is now cause for celebration and a sense of pride, just as any criminal who gets away with an illicit activity.

Instead of creating programs to encourage people to work, the government does the opposite. Compensating people for six months does not encourage them to seek employment any faster, nor does compensating people who do not genuinely seek employment. By taking this tact, the government is encouraging a slave mentality where people become wards of the state. Frankly, I deeply resent seeing our country turn into a welfare state. It is tearing apart the moral fabric of America.

Admittedly, the government is better equipped to deliver mass goods and equipment in times of emergency, such as those disasters caused by Mother Nature. These situations are essentially no different than defending our country through times of military conflict. Under these circumstances, I consider helping those injured by natural disasters no different than going to war.

So, who is more faithful to the concept of altruism, the person who helps when he can, or the government who does it for political purposes (e.g., promising “a chicken in every pot” or a free iPhone, liquor and lobster in every household). Coerced charity certainly does not promote brotherhood. It is simply a redistribution of the wealth.

Charity begins at home (1 Timothy 5:8), not in our government.

Keep the Faith!

Note: All trademarks both marked and unmarked belong to their respective companies.

Tim Bryce is a writer and the Managing Director of M&JB Investment Company (M&JB) of Palm Harbor, Florida and has over 30 years of experience in the management consulting field. He can be reached at

For Tim’s columns, see:

Like the article? TELL A FRIEND.

Copyright © 2014 by Tim Bryce. All rights reserved.


LAST TIME:  ADAPTING TO CHANGE  – Before we can adapt to it, we have to understand it.

Listen to Tim on WJTN-AM (News Talk 1240) “The Town Square” with host John Siggins (Mon, Wed, Fri, 12:30-3:00pm Eastern), and KIT-AM 1280 in Yakima, Washington “The Morning News” with hosts Dave Ettl & Lance Tormey (weekdays. 6:00-9:00am Pacific). Or tune-in to Tim’s channel on YouTube.



  1. Tim Bryce said

    A C.A. of New York City wrote…

    “Good one Mr. Bryce, I couldn’t agree with you more. It sickens me to see what has happened to our country, especially in the last 10 years. The feeding at the government trough has increased.”


  2. Tim Bryce said

    A K.S. of Albany, New York wrote…

    “Individuals should be responsible, not sugar daddy government.
    Churches can help too if only they did not take tax payer dollars to do so.
    Churches have become an arm of the DNC, aka socialist party.”


  3. Tim Bryce said

    A T.S. of Chicago, Illinois wrote…

    “You ask the wrong question. “WHO SHOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CHARITY? – The government or the individual?” is not the question because the US has always been a compassionate society. That was the case long before government welfare existed. Hull house in Chicago is one example close to where I live. The orphan train that placed children from cities to farms on the great plains. If you are a member of any church the history of charity is at your finger tips, just ask.

    The question should be “WHO GAINS FROM WELFARE?” The goal of the government programs is SECURITY for their employees and funding level year after year. That means keep people receiving welfare for ever. The last Republican controlled congress during Clinton introduced the requirement of working. Obama ended the requirement in 2008. Obama said the recession was the reason, but Obama keeps telling us the economy is recovering and jobs are being created. But Obama has not started to enforce this law.”


  4. Tim Bryce said

    An R.C. of Denver, Colorado wrote…

    “Government induced charity is NO charity. Charity by definition is an act of the will of an individual reaching out in compassion to his fellow man and using his own resources to help that fellow man, Welfare is government theft masquerading as charity, with the main aim of making people more dependent on government. If liberals are so concerned about the poor or downtrodden they should do what conservatives/Christians do and use their own money to help those in need. Unfortunately it is well documented that liberals are notoriously stingy with their own money but rather free spending with other people’s money.”




Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: