<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1">
<title></title>
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#ffffff">
Two posts: first post, I agree. Creativity is key to making these
things work. I am not a republican apologist, and am deeply
disappointed with the republican majority in the congress now. Pork as
bad and as deep as any chicago democrat ever dreamed of. I am opposed
to all sorts of welfare, from sugar subsidies that harm domestic candy
producers to egregious oil depletion allowances and on an on. Bush is a
big disappointment there. That's why I am very intrigued by the flat
tax proposals coming from the libertarians. No tax deductions
whatsoever. <br>
<br>
This post: absolutely. Unearned income corrupts, extravagant unearned
income corrupts extravagantly. Read <i>The Millionaire Next Door</i>
which contains heart breaking examples of how unearned income ruins
children. I see it in my own neighborhood. A good friend is heartbroken
over how he compensated his kids so they didn't have to suffer as he
did. But his suffering redeemed him. He is a success. The kids are not.<br>
<br>
We cannot outlaw trust funds. The money is not mine, so I cannot
control what happens to it, but people are completely stupid to give
their kids anything except bare essentials. That's how I raised four
splendid children, none in therapy, none in jail, none on drugs, blah
blah. Enough bragging. <br>
<br>
Also: In the past year there was an experiment that showed that people
winning ten dollars on a video game experienced a surge of dopamine
activity, saying to the brain, "That was great, pay attention." When
people played the video game, didn't win, but were given ten dollars
anyway, there was no pleasure center activity. Mother nature wants us
to work for our supper. <br>
Lynn<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Steve Hovland wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid01C4D56B.66D09860.shovland@mindspring.com">
<pre wrap="">The other thing your example points to is that
the unearned income of rich kids is just as
demoralizing as the unearned income that
welfare mothers get.
Are you in favor of abolishing trust fund babies?
Steve Hovland
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.stevehovland.net">www.stevehovland.net</a>
-----Original Message-----
From: Lynn D. Johnson, Ph.D. [<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:SMTP:ljohnson@solution-consulting.com">SMTP:ljohnson@solution-consulting.com</a>]
Sent: Sunday, November 28, 2004 4:19 PM
To: The new improved paleopsych list
Subject: Re: [Paleopsych] welfare
I teach an MBA course on Problem Solving, and use Joe Versus the
Volcano to illustrate various problems and their analysis. In the scene
"This is a real scene" where Tom Hanks/Joe and Meg Ryan/Angelica are
looking out over Los Angeles, Angelica talks of suicide. Joe says that
if we do what we are most afraid of doing, our lives work.
Angelica: You mean, stop taking my father's money and leave LA?
Joe: See! You know what it is you really want to do.
Angelica's response to Joe illustrates the dilemma of unearned income.
Later in the movie, Meg Ryan as Patricia learns that Joe turned down
unearned intimacies with her sister, Angelica, and she knows something
about Joe from that.
But you didn't deal with my point about my own experience in working
with those receivintg welfare, and the degrading effects it has. Like
Angelica, they thought they had no other choice, until the
Clinton-Republican alliance welfare reform of 1994 or 6, and they had to
go to work. Unlike your example of people working in degrading
conditions, they felt trapped because they were afraid of giving up the
dole. People say "Take this job and shove it" all the time, because they
see themselves as free. They can work elsewhere. The dole creates an
illusion of a lack of freedom. It is unearned, and one must placate the
welfare gods. One's energies are centered around keeping the dole going
instead of achieving something, as Joe Banks tells Angelica Graynamore.
This clearly is a personal position, one I confess comes from my
culture, but one that seems to have borne positive fruit (more people
are working post welfare reform). I believe in reducing welfare and
creating workfare programs because I believe people are more fully alive
and vital when they are producing something valuable to the group.
Howard has spoken to this point many times, the delirious joy of the
crowd responding to what you do, whether it is to sing or invent a
pocket fisherman. Then we are most alive, most energized.
Lynn
Michael Christopher wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">But I still believe welfare does allow a greater
degree of freedom than being forced into a work
program in which there is little choice of the type of
job or employer. Being forced to work most of the day
for someone who doesn't treat you well is not freedom.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
But you are free to leave any moment, and many do.
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Having a safety net that allows you to structure your
own time (or at least pick from a broad range of
training and employment options) does give a greater
degree of freedom.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
--That sounds like an ideological position, and let's
Yes, you are correct, it is ideological, based on cultural mores.
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">assume for a moment that it's true (perhaps it's true
for some and not others?) Are there ways of having
people earn their safety net income, without depriving
them of choice and dignity? I've met many people who
had gotten used to working for employers who were
bullies, and it seemed pretty degrading to them. They
were on drugs, unable to plan ahead, etc. So I could
make the same argument about a system which has a
permanent low-wage class, that you make about the
welfare system.
I think it's reasonable to give people options to earn
an income. I just worry that forcing people into a job
market ignores the psychological impact of such an
experiment, just as you worry about the psychological
impact of welfare. We have to be humble enough to
recognize that it's ALL an experiment, and we're
playing with the lives of human beings when we
abruptly change the system.
Michael
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard.
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail">http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail</a>
_______________________________________________
paleopsych mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:paleopsych@paleopsych.org">paleopsych@paleopsych.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.paleopsych.org/mailman/listinfo/paleopsych">http://lists.paleopsych.org/mailman/listinfo/paleopsych</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!----> << File: ATT00007.html >> << File: ATT00008.txt >>
_______________________________________________
paleopsych mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:paleopsych@paleopsych.org">paleopsych@paleopsych.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.paleopsych.org/mailman/listinfo/paleopsych">http://lists.paleopsych.org/mailman/listinfo/paleopsych</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>