Tweet
So to start this off I feel like I need to provide parameters here.
1) I'm not talking someone who may have a handicap like needing to be in a wheelchair
2) Is in all other ways equal to others
So say for example a two people are living in poverty.
Person A has a steady job that just barely covers their rent, food, and transportation.
They have been denied for state assistance and they make too much money to get health insurance without kicking at least some money in; money they don't have so they are uninsured and receiving no assistance. Charities tell them to be grateful and they don't qualify for help. Everyone feels that person is doing just fine even though they're basically scraping by and instead of living life they're a living ghost a cog in the machine who will die someday.
Person B is in the exact same situation except they're about to have a very bad day. They get evicted due to something that was beyond their control. With nowhere to go they lose their job due to a sudden drop in hygiene. They end up in a homeless shelter.
Suddenly Person B has state assistance they finally have the health insurance they've needed for years and resolve long standing medical issues. The state offers an "Employee Retraining Program" that actually gets them a better job than the one they lost.
Within five years Person B is now lower middle class living in a decent one bedroom apartment driving a small mid-sized car and has a bit of a savings account.
Person A is still showing up to the same crap job that barely pays them enough to live, still has no health insurance, lives with family or friends in some cases five men to one studio apartment. Has no savings and wishes he could afford to have a physical.
Person B lost everything and ended up better off than Person A but Person A isn't losing everything the only way for them to get the same help that Person B got is to intentionally walk away from everything an action that would actually disqualify them from most of the same help.
I feel like in this situation. Which has happened in the real world that the disadvantage of losing everything or having some sort of disability confers benefits on Person B that Person A would never be allowed to have even though said benefits are not bringing Person B to the level of Person A but elevating them past them.
I feel like in this case the more disadvantages you have the better off you will be.
Thoughts?
1) I'm not talking someone who may have a handicap like needing to be in a wheelchair
2) Is in all other ways equal to others
So say for example a two people are living in poverty.
Person A has a steady job that just barely covers their rent, food, and transportation.
They have been denied for state assistance and they make too much money to get health insurance without kicking at least some money in; money they don't have so they are uninsured and receiving no assistance. Charities tell them to be grateful and they don't qualify for help. Everyone feels that person is doing just fine even though they're basically scraping by and instead of living life they're a living ghost a cog in the machine who will die someday.
Person B is in the exact same situation except they're about to have a very bad day. They get evicted due to something that was beyond their control. With nowhere to go they lose their job due to a sudden drop in hygiene. They end up in a homeless shelter.
Suddenly Person B has state assistance they finally have the health insurance they've needed for years and resolve long standing medical issues. The state offers an "Employee Retraining Program" that actually gets them a better job than the one they lost.
Within five years Person B is now lower middle class living in a decent one bedroom apartment driving a small mid-sized car and has a bit of a savings account.
Person A is still showing up to the same crap job that barely pays them enough to live, still has no health insurance, lives with family or friends in some cases five men to one studio apartment. Has no savings and wishes he could afford to have a physical.
Person B lost everything and ended up better off than Person A but Person A isn't losing everything the only way for them to get the same help that Person B got is to intentionally walk away from everything an action that would actually disqualify them from most of the same help.
I feel like in this situation. Which has happened in the real world that the disadvantage of losing everything or having some sort of disability confers benefits on Person B that Person A would never be allowed to have even though said benefits are not bringing Person B to the level of Person A but elevating them past them.
I feel like in this case the more disadvantages you have the better off you will be.
Thoughts?
Comment