When I hear politicians speak of “the poor” I immediately think of the impoverished children I used to watch in those videos they showed in my grammar school. It featured a bony child surrounded by flies and bugs sitting in a cesspool he called home and looks longingly into the camera.
I think most of us think of impoverished people when we hear the term “the poor” but unscrupulous people take advantage of others good nature. In theory, government programs aimed at helping the poor are helping a class of people that does not need assistance.
A few years back, my church hosted homeless families in our parish for two weeks. I was surprised to see the families designated as poor had the latest cell phones and $100 sneakers. Taking a walk down the halls of any public high school and you will find a good portion of the students eligible for free breakfast and lunch have those same luxuries.
Meanwhile, those that are truly at the poverty level receive less aid because of these classless slobs and those in the middle class become more jaded since they are the ones paying for these programs. Does it surprise anyone why those in the middle class resent paying taxes when we see our money going to waste?
Would you be upset if you lent your friend $10,000 to help him pay for his mortgage and utilities and later find out he bought stereo system for his house, added a gazebo to his backyard and went for s pedicure? Then why aren’t you upset at people gaming the system and politicians turning a blind eye so they can continue to get your vote?
The problem with the middle class is the fact we are in the middle. We are not wealthy enough to sit at the adult table in the exclusive country clubs but we are not poor enough to qualify for such government programs like financial aid for schools. Meanwhile, we pay the most in taxes and receive the least in benefits.
People being allowed to game the system leads to increased cynicism and resentment among the middle class. Eventually, this house of cards will fall. We do not need politicians grandstanding and droning on about “the poor” and how government has a moral obligation to help them.
The government has a moral obligation to help all its citizens. Redistributing wealth never works to lift a nation. It only serves as its downfall. The federal government needs to focus on defending the nation, ensuring a sound infrastructure, and enabling commerce between the states. The states need to worry about the infrastructure within their borders and keeping its residents safe. The rest belongs to business.
A sound economic policy has the same effect as rising water. It lifts all boats. A nation of successful people creates more revenue for the government which should be re-invested in the country.
Is there a political candidate brave enough to eschew populism for sound policy?