When enablers are addicted to feeling superior

I was listening to an advice program on the radio today—a mom called about her addicted, bi-polar son who wanted to move out of the group home to an apartment so he could be independent.  He was receiving SSD but always came to mom or a brother when he needed money (usually spent his check quickly). I don’t think she really wanted help.  She wanted to whine.  And she wanted to be the rescuer, even though she realized it was wrong.  The very kind, patient Christian host told her several times to let him fail, or he would never learn to be on his own.  It was like spitting into the wind. And so it is for so many government programs.

Disabling, enabling programs intended to help have grown as often under Republicans as Democrats. But as far as I know, only the GOP is demonized and lied about for being stingy meanies--like the Obama phone story (it was a Reagan program), or the EITC (Reagan) or when GW Bush gave a tax refund to everyone, and to be fair, even to those who hadn't paid income tax for years, or ever. Until President Obama, no president had grown the social programs like George W. Bush. He was an extravagant spender for domestic issues. There was a huge expansion under Nixon, also.  A smaller government with lower taxes is good for everyone. The best poverty program is a job. Raising minimum wage does not help the unemployed, and may actually hurt them.  A husband/wife household both working at current  minimum wage jobs puts that family above poverty level and outside most welfare type programs, including Medicaid and food stamps.  Obama wants tax increases not to help the poor, but to punish the rich, because based on GWB and JFK eras, tax cuts bring in more money to the government coffers (which again is a problem because they invent more programs).