Adam Phillip Churvis wrote:
>
> I do not believe that someone else's need gives them the right to take from
> me what I have earned through hard work and determination and a lifetime of
> making the right decisions. It is effortless to fall to the position of
> need, whereas it requires significant long-term effort to earn the position
> of provider, so our current model cannot survive in the face of a lack of
> incentive. If there is always a cushion waiting to catch you when you fall,
> then you will soon lose the desire to strive.
>
> I believe in actions and inactions having proportional consequences. I
> demand self reliance and personal responsibility of myself and those within
> my circle.
>
> Why do these things make me a bad person in your eyes?
>
I can't speak for 'Gel, but for me, they don't, Adam. I admire your
thoughtfulness. However, despite the ever-popular sentiment against
people (generations of families) on welfare, there are a number of
people who have never reached the point that they can become
self-reliant in any way. Sharecroppers and two-income families with
three children and a net income below $20,000 come to mind. Supporting
them without requiring something in return has not worked and should be
replaced with something else -- agreed. But to expect these folks to
become entrepreneurs or junior grade managers in a corporation goes
beyond the pale.
I worry about the increasingly popular rhetoric that everyone should get
only what he earns. Unless we can figure a way to prepare everyone to
assume this level or responsibility, to suggest such strikes me as cruel
and uncaring, even a little bit selfish. With a college degree and 25
years' work experience, I can say, yeah, I can handle it. But if I'd
quit high school and spent the last 30 years doing manual farm labor,
that would be a tall order, indeed.
As a member of a society, I recognize that I'm not an island. I don't
claim a right to keep everything for myself. While some insist it would
be better to let individuals and charitable institutions tend to the
needs of the poor, I have no problem with at least some portion of my
taxes going toward supporting the less fortunate. If the truly rich in
our nation would pony up for charity, maybe government could get out of
the business. But I don't see that happening anytime soon. I think our
society, for the most part, actually believes what Michael Douglas's
character in the movie, "Wall Street," said: "Greed is good."
Personally, I see a difference between greed and ambition.
--John
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
