2 ms·
Having a home is better (more successful) than being homeless. Having children to care for and who (hopefully) love you is better (more successful) than not hav
by ghufran_syed 5y ago
Having a home is better (more successful) than being homeless. Having children to care for and who (hopefully) love you is better (more successful) than not having those things. Both of those things might be at risk if she didn’t work hard.
I think your example says more about your own values rather about society in general
- bluefirebrand 5y agoMy own values are that someone should be able to have those things, a home and family, without working three jobs to barely stay on top of things. Again what I am talking about, and you are ignoring, is the magnitude of the work being done here, versus the relatively scant level of success achieved. Barely being able to afford a roof over your head is not success by any measure except against the most basic of standards. If you have to compare your level of success to someone who literally lives on the streets, you're in a dire situation. We should absolutely want better for people than "they barely aren't homeless and it takes a monumental effort for them to stay that way"
- ghufran_syed 5y agoWanting to help the poor with other people's money doesn't seem particularly virtuous, compared to, say, spending one's own time or money. Deciding arbitrarily that the amount of wealth we have is nice but not excessive, but the amount of wealth those evil rich people have is excessive seems rather self-serving. Particularly when "rich" is always conveniently defined as "more money than I have"