Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
By
I am a Liberal, and I am in favor of the Social Welfare Net. I suppose part of it has
to do with compassion, but I’m not sure. You see, it is pretty hard to find a “bleeding
heart liberal,” most of us are pretty thick skinned. In fact, most of the positions that we
take are based upon enlightened rational self interest. Instead of using the base emotion
of selfishness to guide our decisions, we choose rational self interest, which is a function
The idea of the Social Welfare Net is that regardless of what income you might
have, in the Great Society, you are entitled to live a life where your basic human needs
are met. Thus, each of us is entitled to have basic food, clothing, shelter, education,
One of the arguments in favor of the Great Society and the Social Welfare Net is
that a culturally sophisticated person finds it distasteful to live in a world where people
are starving to death, or are homeless, or ignorant. Compassion aside, from an aesthetic
point of view poverty is disgusting. I follow Kant’s idea that persons are to be each
given a very high value intrinsically, regardless of their utility to society. Rather than
murder or force poor people into suicide, the culturally sophisticated person prefers to
pay the freight so that the poor can have a decent life
Now, another reason to favor the Social Welfare Net and the Great Society is the
done unto us. So, if I choose to live, without protest, in a society with no Social Welfare
Net, my Karma for the next life will be to be a poor person in a world with no Social
Welfare Net.
Society, and the Social Welfare Net, am purchasing “Karma Insurance” so that in any life
that I might live in the future, I will be guaranteed the basics of food, clothing, shelter,
should always try to moderate extremes in one’s culture or face the likelihood that you
will be dealing with one of the extremes in a future life. While you might try to gamble
that you will be rich financially in most of your lives, statistically, this seems doubtful.
There really are not that many millionaires in America relative to the population as a
One final objection to the Social Welfare Net is that it is impractical to put in place
because of the working poor and lower middle class. The argument is that people on
welfare should not make more than a working poor person. I am not sure about that. If
the job cannot pay a living wage then maybe the person is better off on welfare from an
individual as well as a societal point of view. Additionally, in the Great Society, there
are many governmental programs open to the working poor and the middle class. For
example, in the great society all schools, public or private, should provide a good
nutritious breakfast and lunch for every student. No child should go to school hungry
and no child should go home hungry from school. Education at every level should be
free or at minimal cost so that all can participate. I argue that such a world is possible
and is economically efficient. The Great Society is filled with Great Companies who
have Great Employees working for them. The companies who invest the most in their
employees make the most money. The countries that invest the most in its people do
very well economically. The Social Welfare Net and the Great Society is the rational
choice.