How much sympathy/compassion do you REALLY have for the poor? (drug, healthcare)

[PCALMike]

Originally Posted by Eeyore1954

Why should I have to give more to the federal government for this. There already are plenty of programs to help those who need it.

Really?

So if you were born disabled, could never work, or perhaps were involved in a car accident as a child and became permanently disabled, you can get a maximum of $700 a month. Do you really think that is adequate and plenty?

If you bring up section 8 housing and how luxurious it is, lets remember that you are far from guaranteed that and in addition could wait ten years or more to be accepted.

[itshim]

It all depends.

But I can tell you that I am ALOT LESS sympathetic after working for the system that provides for the poor some years back.

I can't tell you how many times I have been told "Why would i work? I'll get less money from the government than the money I would be making if I worked."

[PCALMike]

Originally Posted by itshim

It all depends.

But I can tell you that I am ALOT LESS sympathetic after working for the system that provides for the poor some years back.

I can't tell you how many times I have been told "Why would i work? I'll get less money from the government than the money I would be making if I worked."

So why do you not attack the system that provides wrong incentives in that case, instead of attacking rational individuals?

Are you referring to means tested programs which are cut if a person makes above a certain threshold? Then attack those means tested programs instead and advocate for a universal system where people dont lose their healthcare or their home if they start working.

[aileesic]

Originally Posted by katharsis

This question is the result of the current thread about the elderly couple's murder-suicide due to their inability to pay their medical bills (and possibly also due to the wife's health problems). One person was courageous (or foolish) enough to imply that he had absolutely no sympathy for them. That led me to wonder how many people would be willing to let the poor die if doing otherwise would put an additional financial burden on them.

So, in order to put some kind of number on it --

What percentage of your income would you be willing to "donate" through an additional tax deduction to help support those U.S. citizens who cannot support themselves? (Just to take the issue of illegal immigration out of the question.)

My answer would be either 0.5% or 1%.

However, my first choice would be to completely overhaul the U.S. healthcare and "welfare" system.

Yes, a lot of people are willing to let the poor die. From my own experiences in life, if a person is in such poor health, elderly, disabled or anything that impedes their ability to contribute in terms of personal income (government benefits do not count as income), then most people do not feel sorry for them. In fact, I think the majority of people nowadays would vote yes to some sort of end-of-life procedure for people who become a burden upon society if that were possible. People are just not willing to donate any portion of their income to support those who cannot support themselves long term. Many would rather commit suicide than be poor for the rest of their lives.

[FC76-81]

This really depends on how exactly they became poor. I have a lot of sympathy and compassion for the poor that are this way because of physical and/or mental disabilities stemming from birth defects and/or accidents and old age. For those who are poor because they just got out of prison for criminal behavior, drug use, or just plain not wanting to work to support themselves, I have none.

[aileesic]

Originally Posted by PCALMike

Really?

So if you were born disabled, could never work, or perhaps were involved in a car accident as a child and became permanently disabled, you can get a maximum of $700 a month. Do you really think that is adequate and plenty?

If you bring up section 8 housing and how luxurious it is, lets remember that you are far from guaranteed that and in addition could wait ten years or more to be accepted.

Somewhere around $700-1000 a month figure is adequate (depends on where you live) if paired with housing, food, and medical assistance. A disabled person living by themselves and no other obligations can live just fine on that amount.

[Open-D]

Originally Posted by katharsis

Very true!! However, if the question I asked was actually debated in Congress -- meaning that they were actually considering imposing some kind of "poor tax" -- what would be your personal limit before you would raise 'holy Hades' with your representative or Senator?

We already pay prodigious amounts of $$$ to help the poor remain slothful/irresponsible. Buckets of $$. I am willing to only pay less, much less, NOT more.

[in_newengland]

Due to my past experience as a teacher, I have seen many examples of kids who are poor and because of being poor, do not achieve much in school or even in wider life.

Their parents are stressed out from working too many jobs, or there is just one parent working all the time while the kids are left alone. I visited the home of one of my six year olds and the eight year old was responsible for cooking and watching the younger ones. The husband had run off and the mother was always working. I figured something was wrong because these kids seemed intelligent but were poorly dressed and acted up in class.

Our welfare system is broken. As far as I know, as soon as they start to work, they are penalized by losing their health insurance and having their rent raised. So, just as they say, they were better off on welfare. BTW, their subsidized rent is based upon their gross pay--not fair to base it upon money they never even see.

If they fix our welfare system so that it eases people into the workforce and allows them to keep the money they earn and some form of health insurance, I'd gladly pay more in taxes. This is a rich country but the money is going to the wrong places and the welfare system is flawed.

[charolastra00]

Originally Posted by Eeyore1954

Why should I have to give more to the federal government for this. There already are plenty of programs to help those who need it. I am in favor of a safety net but I feel the net has gotten too large and covers people who don’t need it.

I a

Looking for the "plenty of programs."


Echo.... Echo....


I review applications for young adult cancer survivors who are seeking small amounts of financial assistance to get back on track following treatment. We're talking $2000 to pay back rent, $1000 to pay off that last medical bill that's in collections, $800 for a computer so they can take online classes, $100 so they can afford a suit to wear to interviews after a prolonged period of time out of work, etc. It's easier to get into Harvard than to get assistance from us, and we're the leading and largest organization serving this population.


One of the reasons why I'm constantly posting in these kinds of threads is that people seem to think there's all kinds of help out there. There just isn't. The only assistance I could find when I was diagnosed with stage IV cancer a month after my 23rd birthday was the local food bank.

[Yeledaf]

I was poor for several years in my twenties and the last thing on my mind was wondering if other people felt compassion for me. I was too busy looking for a job, then looking for a better job. I didn’t need compassion. I needed a damn paycheck.