Some Clarification on my Soapbox

As he frequently does, Darell Nelson hit the key point was trying to make (but just missed) in the midst of my soapbox.

The problem isn't that most people don't care about poor people. No one wants children to suffer or be needlessly ill or go hungry. No one wants single mothers to work themselves into an early grave or have to give their children up for adoption. No one wants hardworking people to lose their homes or not be able to pay their bills because someone got cancer.

My concern was the one he pointed out: that, though no one wants this, they're so concerned with what they perceive as rampant misuse of the social systems, they're concerned about committing to more social programs.

And that is exactly what I'm complaining about. It is comforting to believe that most of the people who need help could do better if they just tried harder, that they're lazy or milking the system. Because, if you think that, it's a great deal less frightening than the actual extent of the problem: that even the educated and people with good jobs can face financial ruin if they catch the wrong disease (even with insurance) - I've seen someone on federal health insurance go bankrupt and all their children lose the chance for college because the father had and beat cancer - both were professionals but they were forced to work jobs 200 miles away to recover. That hardworking people who have toiled honestly their whole lives can lose everything with a single pink slip. That mothers can lose their children entirely because they just can't afford to pay for child care while they are working minimum wage. Seen it. I know it happens.

And it happens far more than we like to think it does. Nearly 30% of households in the US make less than $30K/year. Not personal incomes, households.

What does that mean? That means nearly a third of families in this country who wonder how they will buy groceries week to week. That means a third of families where "owning" their own home is a distant dream. That means a third of families where college is unlikely to be considered an option. That means a third of families that likely live in close proximity to crime, who fight and scrimp to go to the doctor or buy clothes or shoes.

And that's in this nation.

It's easier to think that it's just a little unseen portion of society, that they were too lazy to take school seriously or aren't willing to work, that they're actually making out like bandits with cardboard signs on the side of the road or working the system. It's so much easier to think that, so much less painful than the realization that, even in this wealthy nation, many of our citizenry are suffering, not because they deserve to, but, at least in part, because they're too ashamed to ask for much...

And because we don't want to see they need it, to know good people are suffering, to acknowledge how many are suffering...and remind ourselves that it is frequently fickle fate alone that stands between our fate and theirs.

In the end, which is the greater tragedy? That some get money they really don't need and didn't deserve because they could work the system? Or that people fall through the cracks, children die, families suffer, because no one wants to acknowledge the real size of the problem?

I know on which side I would rather err.

Read more...

Sunday (Monday) Soapbox: Money Does Not Equal Merit

*Steps on soapbox*

I struggled with not writing this, but it's completely irritating me. I try to be patient. I understand that it's hard on several different levels to struggle, and that people, who work hard for what they have, can be impatient with those who haven't worked so hard.

I totally get that.

The problem is that there are many poor people who have worked just as hard who have nothing and no options and no opportunities. There are many people working two or three jobs who still can barely make ends meet, that still can't afford insurance or child care or get a vacation, or pay the mortgage or a car payment or...

There's a pervasive sense, pushed by certain factions and media, that poor equals laziness and sloth, that every penny spent on social services is money poured into the ungrateful account of a non-working welfare recipient, that people who are financially successful are inherently smarter and more meritous, that they deserve to be wealthy. However, to take that as a given, one has to assume the reverse, that people who are poor deserve it as well.

You know what, being poor is not a reflection on who you are any more than being rich indicates you're cultured, educated and good. No one willing to work "deserves" to see their child go hungry (actually, what child deserves to go hungry no matter who their parent is?). Why are we comfortable with the notion that people deserve to die if they can't afford insurance or that families deserve to go bankrupt if one of them gets ill.

There are educated folks out there struggling with unemployment. There are people who have worked hard their entire lives who are hurting terribly through no fault of their own.

I know I'm lucky to be where I am, that I'm lucky to have people I can count on, that, if something happened to me, my children wouldn't go hungry. But I've been where I needed help, where I didn't know where to turn. Not everyone gets away from that.

Being poor is hard enough without everyone who isn't assuming you deserve it. It's stupid, too. History shows, time and time again, concentrating money in the hands of the very few leads to economic ruin and/or political upheaval (frequently violent).

You know, if we stopped spending so much time and effort in villifying people who are already suffering, perhaps there'd be less suffering.

Is that really so bad?

*steps off soapbox*

Read more...