4 ms·
I don't see a reason why the U.S. can't in this article. Or did I miss something? It worked pretty good even when they've been in the open. Recently we had a t
by aluhut 9y ago
I don't see a reason why the U.S. can't in this article. Or did I miss something?
It worked pretty good even when they've been in the open. Recently we had a topic here where people were reporting about homeless people being carried out of the cities.
It seems to me that the U.S. got quite comfortable with their poor. Probably even working as an negative incentive for the (still) employed. Don't forget the American Dream too. I mean according to that: it's just their fault...they COULD have been rich!
- sbarre 9y agoI think the end of the article is where the author(s) make the case for looking to help at home as much or more than abroad. "The U.S." in this case is not the government or institutions, but rather the people who are willing and able to help others, and how the traditional "help poor countries" wisdom should be revisited and perhaps changed to "help poor people".