Illegal to Feed Homeless in Parks

[MaggieL]

Originally Posted by Spexxvet

Yeah, it's really incompassionate to encourage someone to drive a Caddy instead of a Mercedes...

Make up your mind: are you espousing charity, or advocating cooercive wealth redistribution? Because that "glutton" namecalling won't attract much philanthropy.

[MaggieL]

Originally Posted by Spexxvet

By taking my hard earned money? I don't think so.

It's in the Constitution; that's the contract.

Nowhere does it say anything about "taking money from people Spexxvet thinks have too much to give it to people Spexxvet thinks deserve it more".

[Spexxvet]

Maggie, do you think the disparity of rich to poor is good for our society?

Edit: yes or no, only.

[MaggieL]

Originally Posted by Spexxvet

Maggie, do you think the disparity of rich to poor is good for our society?

Edit: yes or no, only.

Sorry, I don't do requests.

The only alternative to a "disparity between rich and poor" would be everybody having equal wealth. I do not think that would be a good thing for our society.

[DanaC]

The only alternative to a "disparity between rich and poor" would be everybody having equal wealth. I do not think that would be a good thing for our society.

You are probably right; however, what do you think about narrowing the gap? What do you think about a system whereby the people at the bottom are not actually in the gutter and the wealthy could stay wealthy?

[MaggieL]

Originally Posted by DanaC

You are probably right; however, what do you think about narrowing the gap? What do you think about a system whereby the people at the bottom are not actually in the gutter and the wealthy could stay wealthy?

I design "systems" for a living, in a environments with many fewer political oxen to be gored. They are like big factories for unintended consquences. Governmental mucking about with the economy to implement sombody's notion of "fairness" or "equitability" doesn't work; it's like trying to deal with blood pressure instability by installing a spigot in your aorta.

If you're unhappy with how the government does defense, do you think they'd do a better job managing your wealth?

[jinx]

But our poor aren't actually in the gutter - use marichico as an example... she has her own place, an suv, a computer with net access, a purebred showdog etc etc...

I grew up in suburban, middle class, mostly white neighborhoods with good schools. The number of my peers, even relatives, that are on state assistance of some kind is very frightening to me. I don't see a whole lot of "compassion" involved in letting people born on 3rd base raise the next generation on welfare - which is what I think Maggie has been saying over and over again....

[9th Engineer]

The people at the bottome are not in the gutter, it takes lifelong irresponsibility to do that. The U.S. has one of the most well established middle classes of any country in the world, it's absolutely rediculous to say that we are divided into a rich class who wallow in luxury and a destitute class that is trapped and struggling to survive. I add the word 'trapped' to that because it's crucial to the idea that the poorest need active help. If they were not trapped in that fate through no fault of their own, then their plight will not garner sympathy. The small population of very poor in the U.S. is not trapped, everyone is provided the opportunity to live comfortably if they choose to make the choices necessary at the proper times in their lives. It starts in highschool, not once they've partied away their 20's. Jobs change as well and it's not an excuse to say "well my dad made a good living putting wigets together". The world has moved on, adapt.

[MaggieL]

Originally Posted by jinx

I don't see a whole lot of "compassion" involved in letting people born on 3rd base raise the next generation on welfare ...

We have now several generations of urban poor whose entire culture has been shaped by the welfare state, disincentives to build two-parent families, and a constant subliminal environmental message: that because you are a poor member of a racial minority that you cannot survive without a government handout, and the only way to succeed is to be a sports star, rapper or gangsta (or maybe all three), and the best route to a meaningful life as a woman is to get pregnant before leaving high school.

This was all done with the very best of progressive liberal intentions, rooted in a desire to elmiminate poverty and driven by intense guilt about the inequities of the past. It's surely no accident that the epitome of this "war of poverty" was a US president from Texas, born into rural white poverty in the deep South, elected to Congress during the Great Depression, and thrust into the leadership as a combat hero of World War II.

He meant well...and died long before the "unintended consequences" of his Great Society policies could be appreciated.

[Spexxvet]

Originally Posted by 9th Engineer

Using words like 'heartless' in your accusations mean nothing and are appeals to wayward emotionalism, not logic.

So is insinuating that homeless people are lazy or just playing the system.

Originally Posted by 9th Engineer

Wouldn't it be far more useful to provide education on how to avoid being stuck in a $10/hr job and just let people decide for themselves where they want to sit in society?

Someone will always be stuck in a minimum wage job. KFC won't go away just because the entire world has an MBA, or MBAs will be working at KFC for minimum wage. That is unless the executives choose to make less, so that the front line workers can make more.

Originally Posted by 9th Engineer

Aid for certain classifications of injury is workable, but with stipulations about moving to a new type of work that the injury doesn't inhibit. As a last resort the only thing that I could see working would be a sort of large dormitory style housing project complete with integrated/mandetory schools for the children. I can rationalize myself donating a roof, running water, and a bed, but not anything more. A tiered system along these lines would catch the people with the ambition and will to improve their situation, the rest can freeze according to their own choice.

Thank you for some constructive input.

[9th Engineer]

You're right that low income jobs will not disappear no matter what percentage of the population has a good education. But lets approach this from a slightly different angle. By saying "KFC's not going anywhere, so we'll always need people to hand us our chicken" you are acknowledging that people are going to want their chicken, but who says it needs to be people handing it out? We could easily switch over to a completely automated chicken distribution system run by one or two technicians who would be making better wages than the 'you want fries with that' people. (Anyone else think of Monty Python-esque extrapolations when they see 'automated chicken distribution system' ). Same goes for many other low wage positions, not all, but we can make a start. Automation inflates wages, lets get creative.

[MaggieL]

Originally Posted by Spexxvet

So is insinuating that homeless people are lazy or just playing the system.

Everybody is playing the system.

That's why you want a system with natural energy flows, as opposed to a social engineering patchboard machine responding to the feel-good impulse du jour. Tinkering to creating a niche with an unconditional permanent food source creates unconditional permanent inhabitants.