No, I mean that...that the sense of "requirement" on both sides is the essence of the problem as stated in my above post. Job: "I am required to give you this money so that you can live. I'm not doing it because I want to or because you deserve it, it's just my job. In return, you are required to work for me for a set number of hours every day. You don't get a choice, and it doesn't have to be enjoyable or interesting, it's just your duty because I am sustaining your life." Welfare/benefit: "I am required to give you this very small amount of money so that you can eat. I really don't want to, but it's the law. In return you are required to accept third-class citizenship and the contempt of all decent hard-working folk till you get up off your backside and get a job, or else die and stop draining our resources." Those are the attitudes I have encountered. It may be different for people who have higher-level skills than I. But given those attitudes, I am not at all surprised that they breed an answering sneer on the faces of those who have to face them, or that people are tempted to try and cheat the system and get something for nothing.
You say "handout," I say "gift." It's a difference of approach. If your friend feels that the people around her don't think she should be getting what she's getting, she'll be all the more unwilling to give back.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2005-08-23 03:29 pm (UTC)You say "handout," I say "gift." It's a difference of approach. If your friend feels that the people around her don't think she should be getting what she's getting, she'll be all the more unwilling to give back.