No one chooses
poverty for their family, but for many, it comes anyway. None choose for their
children to be fast-tracked to failure.
No parent chooses for their family to go hungry and slowly die from curable
illnesses. But it comes despite their attempts at escape.
was forced to move into the shelter with her four children when she lost her nurse's assistant job two months ago. | Mom
This November, do we have a candidate in mind who understands the issue in our country?
If a community
exists just as a coalition of businesses and the families who own them, of homeowners and consumers; well then, it makes
sense that they would provide for themselves to the exclusion of others. No sense in diluting the value of resources
by attaching too many teat-suckers to the udder, I suppose.
Public schooling
needn’t provide a quality education for the non-contributing members of society and their
offspring. They’re not in any position
to make good use of it anyway.
Healthcare needn’t
be made affordable, particularly. Basic
services should be enough for the masses.
Food distribution
should follow the flow of money, naturally.
Just like every other commodity, food costs money to produce, to
distribute, to buy and consume. It’s
natural that way. Food, transportation,
education, energy, water, roads, police, street lights, parks, libraries,
shopping centers, all of them naturally follow the money because they all cost
something.
If on the other
hand, a community (or nation) exists for the sake of its citizenry, then the
disenfranchisement of some is a troublesome circumstance. If the lesser resourced among us are
marginalized, then we at the center are the ones who have done them and their
children a great disservice.
Thus arises the
questions of what is to be done.
Both the issue and its solution are
structural, not partisan, not political party specific, and not
addressed by one-line slogans. Solutions, by the way, are many and
easily incorporated into local and regional processes. All the
impediments to such ... all the impediments are political and cultural will.
“The social contract is starting to unravel in many countries,” OECD
Secretary-General
|
The gap between rich and poor is a wide one and getting wider rapidly. In the 30-nation Organization for Economic Cooperation and
Development, only Turkey and Mexico have more unequal societies
than the United States. “Nowhere has this trend been so stark as in the
United States,” the OECD concluded in a 2008 study. In the U.S., the rich-poor gap has widened by 22 percent (1967-2015), more than in most developed countries.
Raghuram Rajan, the IMF’s former chief economist, says
countries with high levels of inequality tend to produce
ineffective economic policies. Political systems in economically
divided countries grow polarized and immobilized by the sort of
zero-sum politics now gripping Washington, he said.
Welfare, by the way, isn't a solution. It began well, and even now is a safety net for many along the way, but it's often more of a problem for a given community than a benefit. With billions invested each year, we've unintentionally rewritten the culture of the poor. Taking advantage of the opportunity offered, the poor are often entangled and eventually trapped as they adjust to what's required for continued survival. It's a dead end that kills every good thing along the way.
Simple solutions? Can you think of a few?