Of course, we could simply cut out the intermediate steps.
To add to this, there are tons of area geophysicist jobs available in oil companies and seismic data companies. There just simply aren’t enough geophysicist doctorates to fill these very high paying positions.
Wow.. that’s a long-term turnaround! When I was a kid (early/mid-1980s), I remember that you could swing a dead cat and hit a couple of unemployed geologists or geophysicists, because of the oil crash in Houston.
We should have the unemployed killed and their bodies used in fertilizer manufacture. They we solve 2 problems at once. Then they would not be useless.
I think everyone can acknoledge there are legitimate deadbeats out there- people who don’t pay child support, moochers, people who game the system. But I think that they’re not as common as we may believe. Its just its so glaring and polarizing to see, that people tend to think they see it everywhere.
The stories my Social Worker SO tell me are heart wrenching; for every moocher out there there are 10 or 20 other people who need help so badly and cannot get it for one reason or another. The moochers aren’t the problem, its our over-perception of them that is.
Pretty much, yes. And it brings to my mind paperclip savings.
I’m sure you all know what paperclip savings are, even if you don’t call them that. Pointy-haired boss of the company decides there’s too much waste going on. Hires a consultant, or maybe sets up a committee to trim the fat. After 6 months of studies, the end result is:“we need to fight employees stealing office supplies !”. Every paperclip must be accounted for. In triplicate.
End result: 500$ worth of office supplies go unstolen per annum. Productivity goes way down because of all the daily efforts, paperwork, checking, doublechecking to make sure there’s not a Bic missing in the building. The study itself cost 50.000$. Boss goes home in his (company) BMW, satisfied. Fat has been trimmed.
My point is, even if there was something to do about welfare mooches, and even if that something didn’t cost more than it saved (both in terms of money, and hassle to non-scammers and public clerks alike), how much do said mooches really cost the country ? As opposed to, say, Pentagon waste ? Bank bailouts ? Junkets of one type or another ?
Let these people mooch. They’re petty people, living petty lives out of petty scams. Yes, I know, the principle of the thing is irksome, all the more so that by their actions they put people who really need the help in dire straights. Learning to live with that still seems better to me than all solutions I’ve ever heard offered to solve the “problem”.
Over half the people on welfare are children. Does that bother you at all?
I think companies should start hiring the welfare people. Florida proved less than 2 percent of them are on drugs. I think that is better than almost any other demographic. Drug test the financial pros and bankers ,then we would have an understanding of who takes drugs.
(ugh, that would be dire straits of course. Dire straights are presumably from Fabulous Dungeons & Dragons)
Never Mind.
Bob
I know a family [my neighbors kids] that have 6 children. They range from age 30 to 40. Just two are working on the books. Has been that way for decades. Each works under the table some sell pot and have been busted for it. Still do anyway. Some fix cars behind their houses and sell. They are my wifes cousins and I grew up with them. I am sure that their backs are hurt butthey are working under the table. I even hire them to do odd jobs around the house fixed ny well and my porch added a ramp for my wheelchair. Thats why i am in favor of sales tax instead of income tax. Useless bunch all of them.
Well of course the point of all the concern about lower-class mooches is that it distracts the middle class (and lower class) idiots from the fact that the rich are robbing everyone else blind. It’s a classic misdirection technique that has been used successfully and repeatedly throughout history. For the Fox News demographic it is enormously successful. On the Dope not so much. I leave you to ponder which group contains many, many, many more voters than the other.
You shouldn’t watch so much US style pro football. It’s just a game.
I’ve seen people on TV, British citizens, who seem to spend their lives carrying thin umbrellas, wearing Harris tweed suits with bowlers, drinking tea, and harumphing. Are they dangerous?
If we’re talking about John Cleese, yes. Very much so.
Um, by your own admission they do things like fix cars, build wheelchair ramps and do odd jobs. How exactly is that “useless”?
While I don’t particularly like the term ‘useless people’ I’ll use it. I think that while some people will choose to live off others we also have systems in place which actively encourage that lifestyle and prevent the ‘useless’ from becoming useful.
I work in healthcare & frequently see people with chronic health issues who cannot work (become un-useless) because, unless they are eligible for employment at a job which has excellent benefits & pay, they can’t contribute at all. They’ll lose their welfare/healthcare.
People who have a child they are unprepared to support can be in a situation where they must choose between crappy poorly paid job which doesn’t allow decently paid childcare (and may make them less eligible for healthcare for themselves & kid) and welfare which is also poorly paid but does allow them to stay with their child and take them to the doctor.
Many of the people I think you’re referring to (lower socioeconomic) aren’t born into a life which provides a safety net (family, education) which can bridge the gap between a bad situation & a productive life. And I think that the systems of charity we have in can be counterproductive.
(btw: there also are ‘useless’ people who simply enjoy living off others. Some of them are welfare cheats. Some are wealthy jerks with an entitled attitude. I see both at my job and dislike them equally)
To address your questions
How’sabout we stop defining the “usefulness” of a person in terms of the wealth she generates?
Indeed, how’sabout we don’t think of people as “useless” or “useful” at all when doing political philosophy. Instead, let’s think of them as having an inherent dignity according to which they are owed the genuine opportunity not to be the tool of some other human being.
If we think of them in terms of wealth generation, we’ve turned them into tools.
The flip side of this is–if we stop thinking of them as tools, we will sometimes find we (as a society) need to “spend” more money on some people than those people “generate”. And if we’re not thinking of those people as tools for our use, then we will have no problem with this.
Thank you, Frylock. You’ve posted the most sentient response to this heartless OP yet. Human beings do indeed have an inherent dignity and worth. It’s only because a vast majority have bought into lies propagated by the elite that we now have a race to the bottom instead of being concerned that everyone has a home and need not worry about getting sick or where their next meal is coming from. It disheartens me to no end to see people at the top who already have all the advantages doing even more to take away from everyone else. Or as the old saying goes, the rich don’t want the poor getting ahead of them.
Bri2k
deleted post
I’m pretty useless to be honest…since let’s be honest, without money existence is abysmal to say the least. And I do not desire to do anything to make money outside of a pathetic job at a pizza hut. Not on welfare or anything like that either but also live at home. No free lunch as they say…parasitic in nature regardless.