The Western IslesBoard

Thuzbekistan wrote:

But private institutions weren't capable of helping everyone who was in need, especially not on a long term basis like the current welfare system in the US is set up to do. Disabled and elderly people even in good times were bad off without social security as well.

Just an anecdote, but in my experience working with Catholic Charities in Baltimore and seeing the difference between their homeless shelters and the state-run ones, I'm pretty thoroughly convinced that the government welfare system is barely adequate for doing anything more for the truly disadvantaged than keeping them alive. Besides a massive difference in atmosphere and attitude, the services provided at the privately run shelters focus on getting people back on their feet, while the government offices seems more focused on bureaucratic procedures and doling out a specific amount of cash. The way people are treated and the ways that they are helped differ greatly, so it's not surprising to me that the private charities have much greater outcomes for the people they do serve than the government. I'm not for abolishing the government safety net, but I would be interested in a scheme that allows the private charities to expand, or a total top-down reform of how the government welfare agencies do their business, based on best practices from the charities.

Thuzbekistan wrote:

Worked great in the depression, right?

The difference between what the government did in the Great Depression and today is, the government made you work for the money, with the WPA and other similar organizations.

Thuzbekistan wrote:

Worked great in the depression, right?

Yes and no. Roosevelt's approach was to throw stuff at the wall and see what stuck. People came in with all sorts of ideas that may or may not have been any good, and they'd get greenlit and given a budget. A lot of the programs failedd to stick. A few of the porjects, like the CCC, WPA, and FWB provided things that we benefit from now, but at the time were not very effective at improving the economy. They helped some of the people that ended up working in them, but the amount of money spent on their projects, it has been argued, could have been used more efficiently in some other way.

Really, the only programs that stuck were the bank reforms, SSA, TVA, and a few minor bureaucracies.

Meylandt wrote:

This actually makes me depressed.

I'm neither a religious nor a material person, but seeing such a grand old monument of art and history being destroyed is very upsetting.

Heard about the notre dame fire in history today, last week we learned about the king who built it

Sad to see such an iconic building in the mercy of flames. I hope they can save most of it.

Balnik wrote:

[comment about God punishing the French here]

At least nobody died.

James V of Scotland, his daughter Mary, and her grandson Charles I were all married in Notre Dame

At least part of it is going out in style instead of crumbling due to lack of upkeep and old age like most historical buildings have by now

Agadar wrote:

Did Arya get out in time?

I'm not sure but the thorn crown did.

Athara magarat wrote:

Can we have more than one person as famous/infamous?

And by nation, does that refer only "Athara Magarat" (judging by the third question regarding celebrities, most likely this) or every political entity that had existed in the Magarat region?

You can have more than one, and I refer to the nation as a whole. You can have famous people from the other Hangates if you so desire.

Miklania wrote:

Just an anecdote, but in my experience working with Catholic Charities in Baltimore and seeing the difference between their homeless shelters and the state-run ones, I'm pretty thoroughly convinced that the government welfare system is barely adequate for doing anything more for the truly disadvantaged than keeping them alive. Besides a massive difference in atmosphere and attitude, the services provided at the privately run shelters focus on getting people back on their feet, while the government offices seems more focused on bureaucratic procedures and doling out a specific amount of cash. The way people are treated and the ways that they are helped differ greatly, so it's not surprising to me that the private charities have much greater outcomes for the people they do serve than the government. I'm not for abolishing the government safety net, but I would be interested in a scheme that allows the private charities to expand, or a total top-down reform of how the government welfare agencies do their business, based on best practices from the charities.

I wouldnt be opposed to that so long as it was effective. I just think it needs to be publicly funded to ensure the maximum amount of access.

Union of kalmar republics wrote:

Hello I am the Union of Kalmar Republics aka the UKR

Q.How did you hear about The Western Isles? A.I saw one of the Alteran Republics dispatches

Q.What's some information about yourself (hobbies, interests, country, etc.)?
A.one of my hobbies is drawing and i currently do track and field. I live in the big blob below canada on the weather map

Q.What kind of nation are you trying to make?
A.I am trying to make a highly conservative nation that is a formidable thorn in the face to invaders. My main exports would probably be vehicles building materials and services and technology

Ah hola Mexican. Welcome.