Quote:
Originally Posted by bUU
We can begin to have that conversation when you sincerely agree with the overriding prioritization rather than simply looking for an excuse to deflect away from it.
|
I don't know what you mean by "sincerely" except to think that it means "agree with you".
Quote:
Regardless, the reality is that when there is patient in critical condition medical professionals always do two things (1) stabilize the patient, and then (2) apply remediation to prevent recurrence.
|
I don't disagree though the patient has to be willing to accept said remediation as an example stop drinking alcohol to excess, stop filling ones face with fast food, stop filling ones nose with drugs or smoking whatever one is smoking. You also have to agree that there's some people who will never be "saved" because they don't want to be. You also have to agree that there are people that just don't want to be productive because they don't have to be.
Quote:
Right-wingers want to skip to step 2 ignoring step (1), probably because they aren't willing to care enough about the immediate victims of the problem to address the suffering imposed on them by the problem, or because doing so would adversely impact their comparatively petty concerns about their own comfort and luxury.
|
In order to have any chance of fixing the issue you need to get past the huge generalization you posted above. Sure there are some that think as you describe on BOTH sides of the political spectrum though for different reasons. Figuring out what those reasons are is the challenge. Do they want to toss money at the problem because they care or just want to remain in power. Do they want to withhold money because they're selfish and don't care or is there a better way than just tossing money at the issue. What floors me is the amount of people on BOTH sides that slavishly follow the dogma of their respective "leaders". I'm sorry but I can't believe after being in discussions with many larger groups of people and seeing how their opinions differ that all those in the respective political groups actually
believe the line their party is touting without question.
Talk about group think.
Quote:
So that's the answer: You do both. We're not going to eradicate poverty, and surely not overnight, but we do have an obligation to redress the impacts of poverty on satisfaction of basic needs, while we're seeking out solutions that better achieve full employment with living wage jobs.
|
Here's a couple of problems that pop up when you "satisfy" basic needs. First, what is a basic need? Is it food or housing or medical or all of them? Is having a phone,car,internet and tv a basic need? There's those that think so.
The other problem is if you provide "basic" needs without requiring something from the recipient then what encourages or motivates said recipient to take care of themselves (if they're able) so you don't end up with a few working and a bunch just taking?
One needs to figure out this last issue before opening the money spigot as that faucet is almost impossible to shut off once opened. Basically, make people comfortable doing nothing and many will fight to remain doing nothing.