the2real4mafol said:
Yeah it's true if you don't live within your means and you are already poor, you only make yourself poorer. It is a bit like that in my family. A lot of them smoke and drink and have takeaways a lot. They get expensive phones, drive alot and don't save up so are massively in debt for it, because they don't keep track of their spending. My mum on the other hand gets paid half of what they earn and let she has almost no debt because she plans her spending well and saves money wherever possible. State benefits did help her alot though while i grew up. But, my point was more about the poor in the developing world most of who work very long hours on farms or factories. They do work hard but even by their standards don't get paid enough. People in the developing world can't really complain for the reasons you said unless they are homeless. And i understand what you mean by choices but to some people having a child is far more valuable than being rich and you don't need 200k to live comfortably, maybe 30k should be good enough. But you also have to take into account the cost of living. Stuff like fuel and rent are increasingly unaffordable (in the UK anyway) and depending on where you live, giving up the car is not an option. But despite all that, i think the poor do need some government support in free healthcare and education and possibly benefits if they need them. |
I would never assume that there are no hard working "poor" there are plenty of them but the point is that does not mean they are impoverished or even unnhappy or unhealthy. Yes not having a lot of money can limit your choices and/or options. You do raise some good points, and yes some people can actually make good on the use of government assistance. There are exceptions to the rule and my main point is just that it creates more harm than good when you plunder others to the benefit of another. The lack of appreciation and attitude of entitlement is very destructive... Just look at ANY houing project and you can see the lack of pride or gratitude in how quickly many of those projects become destroyed or unlivable.
No one would say that the POTUS, or Bill gates, or The Queen of England has the same optionsor resources as your avergae Joe but who is to say they aren't just as happy or content? And if one feels that they are not paid enough then they DO have options as they are not indentured or slaves (though I am sure people feel that way at time during their working lives LOL) and need to be able to take stock in their lives and sacrifice to change that IF that is what they want. It can be done and NO not everyone will always get those posh lifestyles they dream of etc. and NO amount of government support will change that.
As for having a child, and it is of value to you then why would you have it when you KNOW you simmply cannot afford it? Why doom this human you 'love' and/or cherish to poverty and misery? Look I'm not prude or unrealistic. But asking people to think first and at least CONSIDER keeping their junk in their pants is not unreasonable if you can't afford a child.
I'm for help for those who cannot help themselves. Orphan children and those born with disabilities need help. Unfortunately we are forced today to funnel that help through their parents who are the source of the problem in the first place! These kids are born and then the parents mismanage the financial help given by the state or abuse it and many times those who truely need the help don't often get it. I think welfare is still, even after our best attemt in the mid 90's to reform it, to lax and rife with fraud and abuse.
We used to things like mutal aid societies and while we still have charities for children they suffer due to the lack of funding because while the government has taken over much of the 'charitable giving' though inefficient and corrupt redistribution of resources, people are forced to cut back on charitable giving.
There is no such thing as utopia here on earth and no amount of government assistance will change that.
