02-26-2017, 07:35 AM
(02-24-2017, 12:34 PM)SomeGuy Wrote: ... I never argued for or against the existence of "scammers", I pointed out that our existing social safety net has been evolving into something similar to what you have been proposing and the outcomes are not particularly good, as demonstrated by numerous articles linked to/posted in this thread. This whole question of whether or not someone of those people "should" be on disability or what have you is beside the point. The point is that they are, and that far from being a solution it seems to be part of the present problem, in the sense that it is not really improving their condition, not that they are "taking advantage" of the system.
OK -- not what I thought you were saying. Yes and no. There is a real issue here, but the issue has more to do with our view of ourselves than it does with the safety net, in whatever condition it may be. We've all been raised to be hyper-individualists, and that's not a good option going forward. It's easy to be a failure and full of self hate, if your goals are unachievable by any means. Anu Partanen has written about this extensively; here's a short example.
So this is an American problem, but the culture of Appalachia is particularly resistant to communalism. Hillbilly Elegy covers that pretty well. I don't see that changing, but, then again, it's not universal. Some will find a way out, and may be in the best position to help others. The adaptation gene will be the success gene for most of your generation and the next. I'm already out ... or on my way. For me, ,it's academic.
FWIW, no community has been better at adaptation than the Jewish diaspora, and it's well documented. A little light reading?
Intelligence is not knowledge and knowledge is not wisdom, but they all play well together.