Reconsidering Priorities

For starters, I don't know if this was intentional on Mr. Perkins' part or not, but I suggest that everyone read the articles in the order listed on the post. It puts the last article in a better perspective.

I pulled some quotes that I thought were especially important to me. A lot of these fit PERFECTLY with the conversations we were having on poverty and welfare.

"They try to keep them alive by feeding them, but sometimes they make the decision that this one has to go" -- I can read this sentence, but I don't think I can actually comprehend this statement. To me, it is like reading that 24 people died in a bomb attack in Iraq. The number seems staggering, but I realize that I will never (assuming our country does not take a significant downturn) be able to understand what it is like to choose between two children. What kind of way of knowing would you use to pick between two children. I think there is none. If this does not illustrate the severity of global poverty, what will ever cause people to take action? For most people, I sadly believe that it takes personal exposure to the experience before you can empathize. I think this is why the poor give a greater percentage to charities.

"The right to food should be seen as a human right" -- this quote simply posed a question. Is the right to food a human right? It is not in our bill of rights, and people die of poverty and hunger in the United States. The government attempts to combat this problem through social programs, yet "one in eight Americans struggled to feed themselves adequately." We afford even the worst criminals the right to food and shelter. Should this right be granted to everyone, regardless of circumstances or will?

"Instead of throwing fish in the crowd, we should be teaching people how to fish" -- This strikes exactly on the issue of personal responsibility that we discussed earlier. However, I think this illustration is significantly different. Those in the United States often argue in favor of personal responsibility because welfare is a drain on the system. This is not the same as the premise of personal responsibility that we use to argue. Instead, this refers to the necessity of TEACHING people how to grow their own food. I would argue that most of the starving Hatians are not starving because of a lack of personal responsibilty. They have VERY few ways of providing for themselves or getting an education, regardless of their willpower. Does our principle of personal responsibilty even remotely apply to a country without the opportunites that we have in America? Where do you draw the line in order to define personal responsibility? All Americans are not equal, just as all Hatians are not equal, yet I doubt that many would argue that these citizens are not in need of handouts, at least temporarily.

"The government said these people have several ways of coping -- eating less varied diets" -- interesting point that we talked about. Those in poverty rely more on processed foods and have less varied diet. It seems like a vicious cycle leading to poor health, high healthcare costs, less money for food, and a less varied diet.

"$14 million of taxpayers’ money to the project, including nearly $1 million earmarked for African aid" -- taxpayers money going to the arts over poverty? I think that this really poses important questions about the frivolity of society in general, especially in light of poverty. Is this spending justifiable? Even spending originally marked for African aid. It really makes us reconsider our priorities.

In light of this article, it makes me wonder if our intention to raise money for mosquito nets could possibly be redirected. The World Food Programme states: "hunger now kills more people every year than AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis combined." Though our idea is not bad, maybe this is a more pressing concern. Thoughts?