trc (02/08/83)
Even if you are able to maintain the psychologically unrealistic position that everyone can save (most "bums" didn't start out wanting to be in poverty to begin with, anyway), you should have enough insight into your own self-interest to see that you are better off when more people can contribute to the general economic well-being. The idea that you can make yourself into an island fortress is totally unrealistic. Someone will take your hard-saved money from you one way or another. It seems to me that even heartless people like yourself should be able to look after themselves better than you are likely to do. Good luck when YOU starve. Martin Taylor Actually, your comment has little to do with "Social Security". Most of the payments of SocSec go to people who could very easily have provided for themselves and their future, had they had the money they paid into the "So-Sick System". However, I will reply anyway. I agree that it is "psychologically unrealistic" to expect bums to care enough about their own future to save for it. If they dont care, who am I to argue - they know themselves better than I do. I wouldnt dream of saying that the bum MUST a job, so why should he (or someone who thinks he can act for the bum) demand that I MUST give him money? (And I still argue that, with the living standard of a bum, one could generate sufficient savings through begging or finding money or doing menial tasks (all things bums do anyway), that one could save sufficient money to arrange for a life of the same or better quality when one gets to old.) I don't agree that it is in my self-interest to put my money into the SocSec system. It might be in my interest to put my money into an insurance program of sorts, that had low payments and only gave out money to individuals that met certain standards of poverty, and who had themselves paid into the system. On the other hand, it might not - different people have different circumstances. And I never said that I want to be an "island fortress" - you seem to have a very warped view of economics! When I pay for electricity or food, no-one is "taking" my money - we are exchanging things. And by the way, in the process, if it is not a forced transaction, both sides are improved a bit - the farmer had a surplus of food that would have rotted, and I had EARNED sufficient money to pay for food without which I WOULD starve!! (Something I have no intention of doing, by the way...) And finally, I am not "heartless". If I saw a bum freezing to death in the street, I might PERSONALLY decide that I would feel worse if I let him lie there than if I walked on by. In that case I would help him up and to someplace warm for some food and shelter. You, on the other hand, would apparently call the state or city welfare board and enter a complaint. I deduce this from your apparent attitude that it is the responsibility of some vague "Society" to take care of such things. And if you think that such a system "at least works", I suggest you walk down a few streets of New York. There were bums before the government stepped in, and there are bums now, and I expect that there will be bums in the future. Tom Craver houti!trc