There are many ways we can help those who are disabled, poor, and old without just giving them money. Maybe the disabled cold be an outlier if they're unable to do a lot of things by themselves.

For the elderly they should save whIle they're working for retirement and they have family to depend on.

But for the poor the government can always invest more in poorer communities and fixing the criminal justice system.

The disabled  is more tricky since there are a ton of disabilites. But there are already anti discrimination laws for the disabled.

Also society does not always equal government. There are charitable organizations.

1. He really dropped the ball with the mexico paying for the wall part.

2. Most middle class and poor Americans recived tax cuts along with the rich. It is good for everyone.

3. I wish he would have cut spending more honestly. Not a big fan of social security anyway.

4. Yeah the debt should have been top priority imo. It's getting way out of hand.

5. His cabinet could be better but its alright. Even if they are billionaires meh.

6. Trump has actually done a pretty good job when it comes ot millions of new manufacturing jobs throughout his term. Some misteps for sure but overall its been good imo.

7. I though the Mexican trade war ended already with the thing they signed with Canada/US/Mexico. The China trade war is dumb tho and should have ended a long time ago but if it ends up working that will be good.

8. Yup, Obamacare needs to be replaced asap.

9. We should have never got involved in the ME to begin with. Even if ISIS is not fully defeated let other countries handle it.

I've seen a pattern in political party spending and ideologies.  It goes something like this:

Jesus fucking christ stop calling it Obamacare. It's "The affordable care act", republicans who hate Obama use his name as a derogative in order to devalue what it actually does. I bet if you actually did your research you'd know that 'obamacare' is actually a remarkably beneficial thing to ALL americans, and anything that it's replaced with will just be a tweaked version of the same thing. 

You want healthcare but hate that Obama's name is on it to 'own the libs' or whatever, but what you don't seem to realize is that in this case both sides want the same thing but are locked in some foolish, frankly stupid argument about it because it got the moniker 'obamacare'. 

Could you be any more transparent? 

Maybe I just view it all differently because I often put my own life at risk to save others, thus I have compassion and empathy towards others.

There is zero guarantees that anyone is going to have family to fall back/rely on. And why should they rely on family members? It's demeaning.
Some people I have cared for in the past who were elderly had zero family due to various circumstances.
I.E. They migrated over here.
I.E. Their family members passed away.
I.E. They were adopted/forced out of home and have no record of prior family. (Like Australia's "Stolen generation".)

Your approach is far to cold and leaves far to many people potentially vulnerable... And in my opinion is entirely unacceptable.

Why can't they do that anyway? Isn't the USA supposed to be the supreme example of a modern, highly developed, successful nation? Yet it tends to falter on various statistics.

And so there should.

Charitable organizations don't always have financial guarantees. Often they will run out of cash, food, clothing and shelter.

The ironic part about it all is... Welfare can actually increase economic activity, for example there was a business here that had the majority of it's revenue from welfare recipients... Certainly did more than just handing out billions more to the rich that sits in a bank account doing nothing somewhere. (Or going overseas for various schemes.)

Jesus fucking christ stop calling it Obamacare. It's "The affordable care act", republicans who hate Obama use his name as a derogative in order to devalue what it actually does. I bet if you actually did your research you'd know that 'obamacare' is actually a remarkably beneficial thing to ALL americans, and anything that it's replaced with will just be a tweaked version of the same thing. 

You want healthcare but hate that Obama's name is on it to 'own the libs' or whatever, but what you don't seem to realize is that in this case both sides want the same thing but are locked in some foolish, frankly stupid argument about it because it got the moniker 'obamacare'. 

Could you be any more transparent? 

Personally, I'm not one to risk my life for people im not close with. I do like helping people if i can but would not risk my life for a random person.

Someone having no family members to care for is pretty rare though. But in such a situation the person should have saved for retirement throughout their career because living on social security alone would actually be a struggle.

We have been doing more recently. The opportunities zone ec Trump signed a few months ago and the First step acts were good steps in investing in poor neighborhoods and fixing our criminal justice system. We can and should do more though.

Yeah but you mentioned society taking care of people. Charities should be the way its done instead of the government. In theory a good society will have charities that don't run out of donated money since people would continue to contribute ot them.

But if there were less or no welfare programs the government could cut down more on taxes to the middle class and poor which would give them more spending power. Also other types of taxes like corporate taxes could be cut which would also help the economy.

I never saw this reply so decided to add my thoughts in bold. 

That is sad to see... And is very much part of what is wrong with society of today.
People aren't willing to help each other... They are quick to moan about migrants, but not willing to assist their neighbor in need.

And yet it does happen.
And they might have saved for retirement for their entire life... But then you have things like the Global Financial Crisis that happened.

If living on social security is a struggle, then increase it.

All nations should strive for that, irrespective of leader.
If Trump is doing a good job on this front (I have no idea) then credit needs to be given where credit is due, regardless of what anyone thinks of him as an individual.

Charities don't automatically disappear thanks to social security. They are there to augment it still and will generally increase the standard of living even more... It also means that charities can invest in other avenues... Like safe houses for those trying to escape domestic violence.

The poor don't benefit as much from tax breaks as one would think, they are poor for a reason and usually it's due to income limitations...
What is the tax rate on the US minimum wage? And how much extra money would said individual gain per hour with a tax rate cut? It's not going to be much at the USA's stupidly low minimum wage rate that's for sure.

I guess my perspective on all of this is probably going to be different... As my own country has a very successful social security system that has done more good than harm and tends to trend higher in regards to standard of living in most aspects... And that is with moderate tax rates too.