When we see someone living on the street, most of us are aware they are in poverty. I usually ask myself how I can help that person. Perhaps I could give a couple bucks, but then I realize, based upon experience, any money I give will probably go for alcohol, so I do not.
I could make eye contact and say I care and ask what I can do to help, though that is not my style. I could give a hamburger. Sometimes I act; often not. I want to be more humane than just turning away and wrinkling my nose at their whiffyness.
I often have a George Bailey “It’s a wonderful life” thought — wondering if I had intervened years ago, would that have changed the person’s fate for the better?
A friend saw a Washington, D.C. television reporter doing a live interview with a homeless man who lived in a large cardboard box and was proud of it. The reporter, trying to evoke pity, asked with concern, “But what do you do when it snows?”
The homeless man incredulously said, “I gets in the box,” and wandered off muttering.
The ‘War on Poverty’ isn’t working
Our nation has had a 40-year, so-called “War On Poverty” that is no more effective this year than the very first year. The problem with poverty, like crime, war and pestilence is that the causes are so varied as to overwhelm simplistically thinking people. These tribulations cannot be cured in simple way, unlike preventing cavities with fluoride in the water.
Further, poverty is on a continuum, so that one person’s plight might not bother someone else. If you own your home outright but only make $10,000 a year, are you in poverty? The government thinks so.
Contrast that with those who have higher incomes but have maxed their credit cards and are deeply in debt. They have no cash at all but are not considered to be in poverty. In our country, poverty is a word used for the political purpose of getting people elected.
Lack of money does not automatically place people in poverty. Rather, it highlights a deeper societal malady.
Most homeless people are mentally ill, and efforts to help them with poverty are of no value. Years ago homeless people on the street might have been incarcerated for their own safety, but that time passed when there was no political advantage to do so. Now they are ignored. We are not being compassionate by allowing the homeless to grind to dust unseen on our streets.
Likewise, it is not compassionate when government programs cause families to remain stuck in the same realm of poverty generation after generation. These programs trade keeping people in perpetual poverty for a guaranteed monthly check because of our political needs.
We as a nation decry poverty in the Third World but we do not speak with one voice to decry the dictators who are the primary reason for the poverty. They keep their people in extreme poverty with no hope for the future. The continent with the greatest natural resources, Africa, has the greatest poverty because of the dictators controlling the resources.
Poverty is tied to government actions
We Americans seem to like the idea of the freedom of people to be on the street if they so desire, despite knowing that most of these people are very ill both physically and mentally. Their loss is because we have a political agenda of less government involvement and we apply it to them.
We like that families are safely held in the embrace of our government even though they give up their ability to escape poverty. We focus on their safe embrace, and not that at some point they say, “Forget the cheese I just want out of the trap.”
These recipients of government largess vote almost exclusively for one party, so that party has a stake in keeping them as they are. However, each poverty-inspiring action we put a good face on is actually a human disaster. Each malady of poverty is tied to government actions that all too often are for the purpose of political need.
When will we as a society take an honest look at political human suffering?
Swickard is a weekly columnist for this site. You can reach him at michael@swickard.com.
Swickard bio │ Archives │ Feed