Philosophy Discussion Forums

If you haven't already, check out the blog post that I posted today: Misuse of Assistance Hurts Anti-Poverty Campaigns

Please use this thread to post comments on that blog post and discuss the topics raised in it.

What do you think about the general public being scared to invest in poverty alleviation because some lazy people misuse anti-poverty programs that they do not truly need?

How do you suggest we simultaneously fight poverty while stopping those lazy people from misusing the funds?

Do you agree that the solution is NOT to invest less in poverty alleviation? Why or why not?

I agree that fighting poverty vs. allowing NO abuse is a false choice.

Perhaps we allow free education as a requisite for a continued or prolonged "leg up"?

Scott wrote: What do you think about the general public being scared to invest in poverty alleviation because some lazy people misuse anti-poverty programs that they do not truly need?

Hello, this is Stacy Siivonen from an area occupied by the Government of Finland.
I think only right-wing populists bring up the topic of misusing welfare, which is pretty rare. In Finland it is much more common that people receive less welfare than they are entitled to, or the payment of the subsidies is delayed, or messed-up altogether, which is commonplace if you are working part-time and receiving welfare.

At least in Finland the trade unions are a legalized mafia and they oppress brutally people that are working part time in order to maintain the elitist privileges of the lessening amount of people (their members) that work full-time. Therefore, the welfare system is designed to promote laziness. The penalties for most crimes are lighter than the screwed payment of welfare subsidies and additional control and bureaucracy that come from accepting part-time employment.

The government is not really interested in fixing this problem either partly because the trade-union mafia is so influential.

In Finland there has been a continued trend towards unemployment even before current recession even though the government propaganda has told otherwise. The statistics show that the total of work hours in Finland has diminished while the number of employees has risen, therefore there is a lack of work. In very unpopular and low-paid jobs such as parking control there has been 28 applicants for one single job opening. Would it make any difference if there would be 35-40 applicants instead, some of them there only because they were forced to apply by some goverment agency?
In reality, students cannot get practice in their line of study because part-time jobs are already taken by formerly unemployed people. Foreign students in Finland are starving and in need for food-assistance. Wouldn't it be good for everyone if some people voluntarily step out of the bloody competition for work? That is what the trade unions aim when they harass part-time employees. The government, OTOH does not allow that and it does not work for people that want to work, but can't.

There is no use worrying about how some people in all walks of life are antisocial.

However to try to minimise antisocial behaviour with respect to stealing charity resources, the best thing to do is to choose a charity that has a good and strong reputation from reports in reputable media. One of the more reputable media is a world religion, by which I don't mean an obscure or brainless sect. There is no need to be a believer in a religion's metaphysical doctrine in order to use its distribution expertise and ethical standards.