Has anybody here read the book “ALL SOULS”, by John McDonald? It is about the author’s experience, growing up in a fatherless family , in a housing project in S. Boston, MA. I found it very engaging, and VERY depressing. I guess the thing I learned from it was that poverty is a curse. Your whole life can be negatively influenced if you are born to a fatherless family on public assistance. Young John was one of 9 children-of the nine:
-four (4) of the male children died before their 25th birthdays-one from violence (he was shot attempting an armed robbery), two from drug overdoses, and one from suicide. In addition, one daughter suffered irreversible brain damage-the result of drugs.
Their mother was a very strong woman-but she was overwhelmed by trying to keep her family together. The children were not stupid-two managed to gain admittance to the prestigious Boston Latin (exam school)-yet both dropped out-because of the influence of their “friends”.
Their life was full of tragedy-yet they had some good times. What really made me wonder-how much control do we have over our life’s direction? Several of these kids made it-one son gradusted from college, and became a naval officer; the other daughter obtained a degree in nursing. Some of their screw-ups seemed to me to be a basic lack of common sense. I know it is easy to criticize-but then I never went to bed hearing the neighbor next door beating the crap out of his children (in a drunken rage).
Please read this book-I’m sure it will change your mind about poverty in America. It made me really angry, that we ship billions of dollars abroad, in foreign aid, and don’t have anything for these poor kids in our own country!
I’m sure the book is very affecting, but I don’t think I understand why the life of a child in another country is worth less to you than the life of an American child.
[STRIKE]egkelly, you pathetic wretch…[/STRIKE]
oops, sorry, not the Pit.
But not a General Question, just semi-witnessing. :wally
OH, MODERATORS
Was this the same John Macdonald of the Travis Mcgee series of books and of “Cape Fear”?
Off to Great Debates, I guess.
I’ll tell you Cher why they are more important…because they are OUR children living in poverty. Charity begins at home is the old saying. Althought I do believe some on this board would disagree with the idea that our society should be taking care of it’s own or anyone else for that matter.
Survival of the fittest seems to be the tone around here and with an awful lot of people these days. Never mind that poverty and crime are closely linked along with child abuse. Let’s clean up our own neighborhoods before we start sending our hard-earned tax dollars off to foreign countries where we can’t possibly be sure by the smallest margin if the money is doing any good.
I have to agree with egkelly.
Needs2know
There is absolutely no reason why we can’t have both.
The programs are out there, perhaps more prevalent in some cities than others. The problem is not the lack of welfare, it is the lack of programs to ween families off of welfare. Welfare/charity does what it is supposed to do, feed, clothe and house. The welfare to work program is excellent, we need more of that. Better public education or options in cities and local districts that are losing their base. The exodus to the suburbs is basically feeding straight into the title, The Lost Souls. Haven’t read the book, but I have seen what you are talking about.
It isn’t a lack of funding, it is a lack of insight and corrective measures in the programs. Here is a prime example, the City of Baltimore has a free needle exchange truck that drives around giving heroine addicts clean needles. Great idea for preventing AIDS, terrible idea for the message it sends. ‘It is okay to do drugs, the City says so or they wouldn’t be handing out free needles.’
Humanitarian programs are needed, but if the cycle is never broken it is a disservice and an injustice to those the programs benefit.
Blah, blah, blah, blah…send a message to drug addicts right? Well statistics show that while first time drug use and recreational drug usage fluctuates, and is indeed down right now, hard core or chronic drug use statistics have stayed pretty much the same since the early 70s. Use a better example.
Besides if we’re talking about “setting an example” for children let’s say, then that needs to be done at home. I’ll agree with that. But if mommy works and they cut off her assistance because she does get a job but now she can’t make ends meet because she isn’t making enough, she might as well go back on welfare or start walking the streets.
Sounds to that this family is a prime example of the very sort of family that needs assistance, in various forms. But when we abolish programs in an effort to “weed out” the so-called abusers then the folks who really need the help are left out in the cold too.
Needs2know
I am by no means an opponent of welfare or other assistance programs to the needy. What I do not understand, though, is why some people feel the need to balance it against foreign aid.
New flash: foreign aid is not predicated upon the proposition “every possible need at home is taken care of so let’s send some of this leftover money overseas”.
Foreign aid takes a number of forms and is used primarily to advance US diplomatic initiatives, cement ineternational relations, foster forms or reforms of government of which the US “approves”, or deliver humanitarian aid in the case of disaster.
The “take care of our children first” argument seems rooted in a spirit of isolationaism that ways outmoded 80 years ago and would be disastrous if applied today. The US is the strongest country economically and militarily in today’s world. It will not remain so for long if it cuts itself off from foreign markets and foreign talent.
To my way of thinking, a child in Uganda is just as valuable as “one of ours”. I have no problem with the US sending foriegn aid to help alleviate the suffering of fellow humans in other countries.
While I have sympathy for the kids in poverty in America, it is very difficult for me to take the stand that we should relieve all poverty in America before we help others. One of the reasons I feel this way is because there is such a vast difference in the level of poverty in the Frist World as compared to the Third. If a child in the Third World had the same food, housing and clothing that an impoverished American child has, and the child could attend school (not to mention having a TV and a phone), s/he would consider themselves very lucky indeed. In fact, they probably wouldn’t even consider themselves poor anymore.
As I said in the beginning, I see no difference between a Ugandan child and an American child, and how to distribute aid, IMO, should be a matter of where the greatest need is.*
*Note that I am speaking of my perfect world situation here. I am not so niave as to think that we actually distribute aid based on need.
May I be the first to point out that the money we spend on foreign aid is a tiny proportion of our GNP, and much, much smaller than the amount spent on domestic poverty programs. We are also giving less now than we traditionally ever have before. Much of “foreign aid” comes from World Bank/IMF assistance rather than direct dollars from the US.
The real problem with foreign aid is preventing it from lining the pockets of the heads of states to which we give.