The other day I was asked how many homeless people there were in America. I live in a community that has quite a few homeless. At the time, I didn’t venture a guess but went to Wikipedia. Wiki said there are 3.5 million homeless, now that is a lot.
Many have been suggesting that we need redistribution of wealth to maintain “economic equality”. They believe the rich should give to the poor, even if we have to use law to do it. The 1% possesses the largest portion of wealth in the US. Wiki says they own 34.6% of the country’s wealth. That means we are left with 65.4% to split between the rest of us. The answer seems to be to take from the wealthiest and give to the poorest.
For a few reasons I believe there is a better idea. I think individuals in a position to help others should. I do not think that this needs elaboration. We are up for this idea as moral people. But I don’t think your money or time should be taken from you by “legislative force.” Since this is true for us. It is also true for the 1%. This is a moral principle, remember “do unto others…”
Another problem with taking from the 1% is that they are the ones investing in business and technology that we all enjoy. This means computers, I-Pods, airplanes, medicine and other business’. No investment in these areas means no more tech advances and fewer jobs.
The government could solve the homeless problem also. This will require more money from all of us. They would tax us more and use it to help the poor. But the government according to Gallop wastes 50% of the tax money they receive. Unbelievable! I would love to dig in their economic dumpster.
I think there is a better way. Since we are smart enough to avoid economic and technological decline and know the government is inherently wasteful, we are left with doing it ourselves. The 99% can care for the homeless. For example if you pay $1,000 in taxes and if the government were to use this wholly for the poor only $500 would go to help them. And only God knows what they do with the rest of the money. What if the Government let you keep your money so you could help the poor with $500 of your money and put the other $500 in your pocket. Or, If you were very benevolent you could give all the remaining $500 to the homeless with your original $500.
We, the 99%, possess all the people resources we need to help in this tragic dilemma. There are over 300 million of us! With a population of about 350 million in our country, the 3.5 million homeless only comprise 1% of the population. That means for every 1 homeless there are 99 of us to help.
The other day I received a call to help a family of four. They came to Washington for a job that fell through. They have no friends or family here; they have no help. So, we invited them to live with us. In addition, my son-in-law and daughter have two mentally ill elderly men in their house whom they are helping.
I grant that a large portion of those on the street aren’t ready for help, which means there are fewer homeless to help and less work distributed between the rest of us. For example, if only half of these destitute were ready to transform in to the mainstream, getting training and jobs, then the ratio is even greater. This would mean there are 198 of us to every 1 of them.
Moreover, the issue isn’t that the rich aren’t doing enough or that the government is wasteful and inefficient, but that we aren’t doing enough personally. It looks like we, the 198 or the 99%, aren’t taking action. If 198 of us teamed up we could care for one person. This would mean I would only need to provide for an individual two days a year. Would that kill me?