By: Kent

In reply to Frances T.

“Low-income families might not be so low-income if they were given the freedom and encouragement to work hard and increase their net worth. Government entitlement programs *keep* poor families poor because they’re then so dependent on the milk from the government’s bottle that they don’t need to make any concerted effort to do these things for themselves. If you don’t need to leave the shire, why would you?”

This comment is classist and ignorant. Look up the word “intersectionality” and at least read a summary of this book: Flat Broke With Children: Women in the Age of Welfare Reform by Sharon Hays.

“Prosperity, a sense of personal achievement, etc… these things increase happiness in people’s lives. When people are happier they help each other. When they’re poor, bitter and unhappy, that’s when the partisanship and live-and-let-die attitudes come into play. On a personal level: When you self-loathe, for example, you don’t end up being very nice to other people. But when you are strong, confident, healthy and prosperous, you’re able to share that energy with others. I believe this also applies on a macro level.”

If this is true, why doesn’t the 1% redistribute their wealth and “share that energy with others”?