|
|
Post by natashaauer on Jan 14, 2016 8:11:48 GMT
In regard to Maxwell's point about murder, I think poverty is an issue that is much harder to control than murder is. You say that people those in poverty should be held accountable for being in poverty because they put themselves there just like murderers are held accountable for their actions because they killed someone. But what if that person had no control over being poor? What if they were born into poverty? it's completely unfair to tell a child that it's their fault they are in poverty even though they had no control over the situation. Also, what about war veterans? Veterans from recent wars often end up on the street because there is no family or secure job for them to go back to; also many veterans come back unstable and unable to return back to normal life after the war. I feel like its unfair to say that it's their fault for being poor even thought they served our country and came back to nothing.
|
|
|
|
Post by flashgordan on Jan 14, 2016 18:57:04 GMT
On of the central questions surrounding this topic is the morality of denoting poverty as an individual responsibility. I've recently been reading Nietzsche, and I would like to add that his views on this matter would probably lean to the side of social darwinism, as Michael suggests is the basis of our capitalist economy. One of his recurring themes in "Beyond Good And Evil" is that there is a class that is mean to rule, and a class that follows with a "herd mentality". On pg. 81, he says, "'Pity for all!'-- would be hardness and tyranny toward you, my dear neighbor!--" I took this to mean that extending kindness towards all can have negative consequences on society (and yourself).
That being said, another one of the lovely Nietzsche's quotes is "Woman learns to hate to the extent which her charms -- decrease," so I generally think his philosophy is a load of hogwash. In summary, Nietzsche might think leaving the poor to fend for themselves is moral, but I certainly do not.
|
|
|
|
Post by andrew y8s on Jan 15, 2016 5:36:29 GMT
I think that it is important to recognize that growing the entire economy and not just helping the poor can be just as effective as giving handouts to the poor. As we have seen over the past decades, the income inequality is growing, in fact it is at its highest point in the past 70 years. Paralleling this rise, there has been a rise in technology, education, and many other areas, leading to much higher standards of living for all. Except for the extreme poor, such as perhaps the homeless, life in the 21st century is better for everyone than it was for all but the richest a century ago. As we've seen, the growth in the economy and technology has led to great improvements in everyone's standard of life. In fact, we learned about a similar situation in class last year, how there were many extreme rich profiting off of the poor workers in the factories in the 1800s. However, despite the terrible conditions and large inequality, absolute standards of living were improving for everyone. The most predictable and reliable way to improve the lives of the poorest Americans is to stimulate the economy which will lead to technological growth, helping everyone.
|
|
|
|
Post by nicholasscopazzi on Jan 15, 2016 6:06:57 GMT
Camillo, I think having a post to at least discuss the ideas is a good way to counter balance the chats. There have been a few studies to show where a man gave a homeless man a job, helps him sober up and get in an AA community. He later find the man begging for change a few month later. His results gave him the conclusion that homeless people are afraid of responsibility. With the article to back it up the first claim could be backed up. Do not worry I will not judge you or discriminate against you based off of this post.
|
|
|
|
Post by laurenmclaughlin on Jan 15, 2016 9:09:17 GMT
Maxwell, while I agree with your point, I think you fail to see that some people truly cannot control their actions, so they therefore cannot be held accountable for them. For example, someone with a mental or physical disability, health issue, or handicap have not chosen not to work because they are " lazy". Illiterate or uneducated did not " throw away" their money, but maybe rather did not know how to strategically and efficiently spend it. I agree that we as Americas must learn how to be accountable for our actions, but to an extent. In cases such as the ones listed above, its really not fair to force these individuals to take full responsibility for the life they could not help being born into.
|
|
|
|
Post by brianli on Jan 15, 2016 23:47:10 GMT
I agree with Camillo that wealth is a byproduct of hard work. Although social background could influence success in the future, it is still mostly determined by self-worth. Many poor people also waste their money on drugs and gambling, creating a vicious cycle where a poor person will never garner any real money. I also agree with Lauren that welfare encourages poor people to be lazy. Therefore, the government should not be directly involved in helping to solve the problem with poverty. The problem doesn't lie in the government, but in the free-market economy.
|
|
