A thought on the poor

[mahnmut]

How much a society is worth is measured not by the way it treats its Have-most-s, but by the way it treats its Have-not-s.

Thank you, Ani.

Reminds me of a good principle I know from mountaineering:

The group goes with the speed of the slowest walker.

Or else, it'll break up and you'll lose half your fellow mountaineers.

Also works for Arctic/Antarctic explorers. Which is why the frostbitten Lawrence Oates deliberately left Robert Scott's camp and plunged into the storm - to get his mates rid of himself, and give them a chance to proceed with increased speed. Of course it didn't end well, but you get the idea.

Maybe some of my conservative friends would propose that the poor get left out to die in the storm so that the rest of us could proceed with increased speed? I can see it at the tip of their tongue, but political correctness prevents (most of them) from pronouncing it.

Comments

[anfalicious.livejournal.com]

The problem is, by leaving them behind, they don't actually die, they just get left further behind, dragging us backwards. Look at what's going to happen to us over the next century as we try to work out as a globe how to deal with the lack of resources we've left ourselves with. Trying to play this out as a zero sum game will mean everyone loses.

[abomvubuso.livejournal.com]

I think if someone's unwilling to look at it from the human POV, there's another way:

What if i say that by leaving the poor get further behind, society risks extremising them and revolutionising them, and pushing them toward desperation and hence, dangerous actions? Those who are concerned so much for the well-being of the middle and upper classes shouldnt forget what happened each time the poor were pushed to the brink of desperation.