Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: thames_sider who wrote (90467)	10/17/2008 2:24:45 PM
From: cnyndwllr	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541946

"We were looking specifically at those who view (monetary) handouts as an entitlement, so presumably those who don't feel any responsibility to match the rights they claim - not at the issue of welfare as a whole." I'm not sure you can separate "feeling of entitlement" from the larger issues. The welfare system presents people with a broad spectrum of rational choices. The people facing those choices range from the extremes of the unemployable parent with small children to care for and absolutely no one to turn to or, alternatively, the able minded/bodied employable person who has other options but makes a conscious decision to opt into welfare. All along the continuum are cost/benefit decisions that vary depending upon the alternative choices available and the different value systems each individual brings with them. If there are many jobs available that would pay better than being on welfare (including child care costs, working expenses and loss of medical or other entitlements) then you'd expect that only the very lazy with no moral/pride welfare issues would stay on welfare. On the other hand, if few such jobs were available and the competition for such jobs was fierce so that a welfare recipient was faced with the option of welfare or taking a job that "paid" a lot less than welfare, you'd expect that only those with moral/pride issues of accepting aid would take such jobs. I think most humans have an intuitive understanding that the emotional benefits of doing a good day's work for a good day's pay are high. I think that most people who "choose" to be on welfare have learned that they're not competitive in the job market and that if they were to find work it would be the kind of work that wouldn't be a "good day's work." I think that, like the fox that couldn't reach the grapes in the fable, many of those who give up on work decide they don't "want" to work. I think that our high-thinking required, low strong back needed society doesn't require their work so that we've basically mechanized them into welfare versus washing dishes or flipping burgers, and even there they find a lot of competition and thus painfully low wages. So if I'd have applied for job after job and realized that I was on the bottom of the list time after time, if I'd have struggled to feed my family and watched them go hungry, if I'd have been beaten down over and over again, losing a little bit of self worth every time, I might not have been too "proud" to go on welfare. And if I had gone on welfare I might have been able to convince myself that it was an entitlement. And if that happened I suppose some would say that I felt I had an entitlement but underneath that I think you'd find a guy who'd been knocked down so many times that he just couldn't stomach another punch to the head. Ed