Ultimately your argument comes down to the misconception that unemployed people, on average, choose to be poor. This simply isn't the case. There are dozens of factors involved - environment, education, upbringing - all of which influence a person's ability to 'get a job'. I don't need to come and live in Midland. I grew up in Maddington, Gosnells and Armadale and I know what poor people are like. They are generally not poor because they choose to be. They are poor because they are ridden with mental and physical illness, a lack of self-confidence and problems with authority. People do not become this way through choice. They are like this because they are exposed from birth to the cycle of poverty and 11 years of federal governance by people who share your opinions means they have next to no opportunity to break out of it.
I agree with this. I can think of dozens of cases of people I grew up with (Belmont!), exposed to alcoholism and abuse or just neglect and never had parents to teach them... anything really. They come to school where they might learn those things, except that teachers are generally overworked anyway and can't afford to invest that much time into children who are "problem children" and have to deal with them with simple discipline instead. Inevitably, as these kids grow up some of them went out and get jobs and like your brother (talking to meghan here not reaps in case he thinks I am insulting mark or something), are awful at them, swear etc until they are fired.
I don't deny there is an element of personal responsibility with these people being unemployed but saying they are just "lazy" is an incredibly narrow view to take of their personal circumstances. These are people who've struggled with life and in a lot of cases failed to struggle hard enough against circumstance. Considering they've been struggling since they were old enough to speak, that's not entirely unreasonable. Health care, education, welfare, all of those things tax pays for shouldn't be denied to these people just because you can construe these people as lazy.
I'm pretty sure I am repeating what reaps said so I will stop.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2008-01-10 04:38 am (UTC)I agree with this. I can think of dozens of cases of people I grew up with (Belmont!), exposed to alcoholism and abuse or just neglect and never had parents to teach them... anything really. They come to school where they might learn those things, except that teachers are generally overworked anyway and can't afford to invest that much time into children who are "problem children" and have to deal with them with simple discipline instead. Inevitably, as these kids grow up some of them went out and get jobs and like your brother (talking to meghan here not reaps in case he thinks I am insulting mark or something), are awful at them, swear etc until they are fired.
I don't deny there is an element of personal responsibility with these people being unemployed but saying they are just "lazy" is an incredibly narrow view to take of their personal circumstances. These are people who've struggled with life and in a lot of cases failed to struggle hard enough against circumstance. Considering they've been struggling since they were old enough to speak, that's not entirely unreasonable. Health care, education, welfare, all of those things tax pays for shouldn't be denied to these people just because you can construe these people as lazy.
I'm pretty sure I am repeating what reaps said so I will stop.