Before I get too far into this I must point out that odds are if you are reading this you are of a privileged background. You obviously have internet access, a device on which to read this webpage and the free time to read it. You most likely have at least a Bachelors Degree from a college or university (yes even Michigan State counts) this puts you in the top 30 percent of the United States so stop right now with the whole we are the 99% bullshit. You are privileged and those on the ranks below you see you the same as they see your hated 1%.
I came across this Associated Press article about "The New American Poor" which got me wondering why we should give a fuck about these people who have made noting but bad decisions and keep passing on those bad decisions. I encourage you to read the article however if you do not wish to read it I will be breaking down what these people say and why we should just let them suffer for their decisions.
The story begins with 52 year old Irene Slayers. Irene has been married and divorced three times by 52. She runs a fruit stand with her boyfriend and they mostly live off of government disability checks. Irene is quoted as saying : "If you do try to go apply for a job, they're not hiring people, and they're not paying that much to even go to work," she said. Children, she said, have "nothing better to do than to get on drugs."
She acts as if it is the fault of the businesses in her community that there aren't jobs for the offspring from her three failed marriages and her grandchildren. Yes she has grandchildren. Irene has a daughter named Renee Adams who is 28 who herself has two kids. Renee is a jobless single mother who has a live in boyfriend. How does Renee pay her bills? She survives off of her boyfriends government disability checks. Renee goes on to say that she wishes that employers would look past her conviction for selling prescription painkillers so she can "buy her kids everything they need"
My issue is why did Renee have children and why should society give a fuck about those children. I have no issue with adults living off of disability checks. In fact I wholeheartedly believe that the best thing we can do is subsidize employment at 30 hours a week to ensure every adult American has 20,000 dollars a year (I will lay out this entire plan in a later post) but it has to stop there. If you choose to bring children into the world than you have to care for them. If you do not have the means to do this do not have children. Reproductive choice has been the law of the land for the past 40 years so yes Renee you did have a choice.
Look up where this lives and do a cost of living analysis of where you live to where they live. To live like I do in Manhattan a person would only need make 12,000 a year. That is basically working a minimum wage job 30 hours a week. So when Renee says that after they pay their bills they only have 10 dollars left to their name I have to wonder what fucking bills they have to pay. There is no reason if this family were responsible that they couldn't survive comfortably on one disability check on a one part time job.
As I have stated before the cause of poverty is population size. The only reasonable thing that can be done is to encourage those who cannot afford to have offspring to not have them. Especially since those who can best support offspring and who's offspring would be those ones that would fix issues of overpopulation in the future are choosing not to have offspring.
The only reason an individual can disagree with my points is if they have some dogmatic attachment to the sanctity of human life. If you have that dogmatic attachment than you had best go protest outside of an abortion clinic because if you do not then you are as much of a hypocrite as someone who finds abortion to be wrong except in the case of rape of incest. Either all human life has intrinsic value or no human life has intrinsic value.
(As to ensure that readers don't consider me to be a bigger monster than I really am Intrinsic is defined as: the ethical or philosophic value that an object has "in itself" or "for its own sake" )
No comments:
Post a Comment