I believe that if small business owners, entrepreneurs, NGO's and other charity organizations take the initiative in their hands and help the needy ones instead of letting the government take the matter in its hand, they can do a much better job. Relying on government wont be a reasonable option because it has many other things which are more important to them. Many charities and business owners can take this step and help the poor.
Government. Yuck. The government shouldn't be responsible for anything, because anything the government interferes with gets messed up. The free market should take care of charity. Sure, it might not give you a free house, free phone, free food, and pretty much provide for your entire existence while you don't have to work at all, but that's just more incentive for you to actually work.
One of the reasons there is far less donated to charity is because government taxes so much. Charities are accountable to their givers, while governments' taxation are, in reality, are not. The US government's monies usually only get to 10% to the poor, while charities' percentages are almost always much higher.
I believe that the government is not responsible for you; it only has the responsibility to protect society from harm. If you give it this responsibility, then you give it too much power over you and therefore open it up to corruption.
As is evident by current events, the American people have a humanitarian spirit and will want to help those who need it, not those who want an easy life. Entrepreneurs and charities would most likely manage the money better than the government which has an ever-increasing national debt. Because of this, they would also be the ones who actually have the money to help these people. It would be people helping other people in the community, not a faraway government program that has so many loopholes it's useless.
Entrepreneurs and charities should not be relied on to help the poor. Firstly, entrepreneurs are business people that are seeking ways to make money, often more than the average person. While there are entrepreneurs who help worth while causes, there are just as many that don't. Charities are common, however, some use more or less of there funding to operate, making them less helpful than some government programs.
When times are good and most people have plenty of money in their pockets they may feel generous and give some of their spare cash to those less fortunate than themselves, but when the economy is in decline and times are hard, they tend to save any spare cash for rainy days ahead. Sadly, it is during these economic downturns that many people lose their jobs and have to rely on welfare payments to survive, and if that safety-net was taken away from them and with people no longer giving to charities, they would be forced to beg, borrow or steal in order to feed themselves and their families.
My money is my money, except what I have to pay to the country in taxes. The government already help the people who cannot work and unfortunately some who choose not too. The goverment seems to have that part already covered and why fix what is not broken. On top of that I believe that the money you work for should be yours, taxes are already confusing concept but why would I have to pay for the poor also? Charities I believe should use their money for their intended charity and not to help the poor unless that in their intended charity.