RE: `capitalist' character valuesRafal Smigrodzki wrote:
"... the idea of giving money for nothing, of taxing the poor working people like me to feed the lazy, is rather upsetting, to say the least."
I'm so sorry they aren't paying MD-PHds more than poor working people's wages these days. Personally, I don't worry about "the lazy" - there will always be a smallish contingent of lazy people, and - who knows? -life may be more difficult for them. I've not found "the lazy" to be in any enviable position, in any case, starting with this "lazy" flaw in their character. However, with some so-called lazy people it's not that they're so lazy so much as that they're not very bright.
Then there are people who work but don't need to - like Bill Gates (but there are zounds of them, at less-extreme examples). Does Bill work harder than child-care workers ... or his own maids? Why this obcene disparity in wages? This is all personal, I realize - but I feel lucky to be healthy, relatively intelligent, productive and, most important, to have the capacity to enjoy life. So what if some of my hard-earned money goes to lazy people, or blind people, or schizophrenic people? They don't have to be punished any more than they've already seemingly been punished by Mother Nature. There are many things that upset me (racism, starvation, poverty, the dumbing down of education, authoritarian regimes, bombs ripping into children) - but having a portion of my wages withheld to fix roads or help some poor bloke enjoy a carefree afternoon visiting with his Gilligan's Island buddies ... naaaah.
"How about providing a guaranteed 1500 kcal of cheapest food/day, about 30sq.ft space in a shelter, and other necessities, no cash. This would assure that only those who really need help would take it (and only those who need it actually deserve it)."
Deserving v. the non-deserving - who's to say? $10,000 per year is a pittance as it is, but may provide a little more dignity - a feeling that someone is worth something (even if they're a bit lazy). And at $10,000 a year someone may not become so broken beyond repair and hope, which "a guaranteed 1500 kcal of cheapest food/day, about 30sq.ft space in a shelter, and other necessities, no cash" will almost guarantee. What would be the monetary difference, anyway, between "a guaranteed 1500 kcal of cheapest food/day, about 30sq.ft space in a shelter, and other necessities, no cash" and $10,000? A little less than $10,000? Half of $10,000? What about the potential added costs of the bureaucracy that may evolve in order to ferret out who's deserving and who's not?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Oct 12 2001 - 14:39:56 MDT