November 5, 2024

3 thoughts on “Drug me up, Scotty!

  1. the man in poverty played more of a role in landing himself in the current position than the elderly patient.

    eh… technically yes but you’re really being too broad in saying that. Misfortune can befall anyone.

    it is essential that Americans remain empathetic to the plight of those less well-off and benevolent and determined to bring those up from lower economic status. It is not, however, responsible to bring entitlement to some while discounting the situation of others.

    So given the essential empathy, what do you do if not give an “entitlement” to help those “less well-off” ? What good is the empathy?

  2. Thanks for the comment, Mohib.

    I guess you could say you pretty much answer your question in your first statement. The reason for the empathy is because, just as you point out, misfortune can indeed befall anyone, and it often does so unexpectedly. Remaining empathetic and striving to bring up those who are down is still important because the situation could at any moment be reversed. The choice of being monetarily benevolent and exceedingly generous must remain the option of the individual, not the state.

    Yes, my first statement is broad; is intended to be. Even if only .01% of the poor are to blame themselves, the percentage of people playing a role in the alternative system mentioned is always 0%. While undoubtedly people will ‘get the short end of the stick’ with such policies, it is still an exceedingly better option than collectivist ones.

    The purpose of the article is to highlight the hypocritical tendencies of the latter policies.

Comments are closed.