Should more be done for the poor?

No

1 of 1

by A.T. Meininger

• 

Write now Print Invite a writer™ Add to Favorites RSS Feed Contact this writer

What is misleading here is the obvious question "By whom?" Who will do things for the poor? I'll assume that the person asking means by the society or government, to which I would answer: No.

When asked "What would happen to the poor in an Objectivist society?" Barbara Branden answered, "If you want to help them, you will not be stopped". This demonstrates the individual's willingness and desire to help over a societal dogma to "do more for the poor". There is no societal responsibility because there is no society. Society is an aggregate and as such, cannot possibly have responsibilities. Individuals have responsibility, groups do not.

The other possible implication is whether the government should do more for the poor. As shown by the efforts of the past, the consequences of governmental action to provide for the poor at the expense of the rich (or middle class, depending on definitions) have been catastrophic. Imagine Soviet Russia, Nazi Germany, Red China, Allende's Chile, or a modern day Zimbabwe. The same results happen time and time again when a government cares for its poor people. A dictator comes to improves the quality of living, he initially helps the poor with basics such as food and shelter, and then demands more taxes (first at the rich) then at the middle and working classes. Their banks print more money which later becomes worthless and hyperinflation happens. The people are worse off than before. The same effects have happened to a lesser degree in the United States. The War on Poverty kept the impoverished people permanently in the lower class and the unions (intended to protect people) have forced companies to lose their productive workforce at the expense of the union dues and demands.

Individuals can provide for the poor and the question is, whether they should or not. The means by which to provide for the poor should not be detrimental toward one's own goals. If I make $30,000, I should not give $3000 because my livelihood if greatly affected. After all, I do not want to be impoverished myself. If I make $30 million and choose to give away $3000 it should be understood that the decision has no more moral bearing than if I were to spend it or keep it to myself.

So often we're told "you should really help the poor", and I have to question why. Certainly there are some feelings or gratitude or joy that can be felt by giving, but does that really mean that it's imperative? It depends on the individual. Some people feel good giving money away and others do not. That is the basis by which people should (or shouldn't) do more for the poor.

Learn more about this author, A.T. Meininger.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.