True Life 4: Low Income Suffering

Mrs. Julia Casaboon  was married to Charles Casaboon 50 years. They started as most couples did of there generation. Charles was a War Veteran, he worked a few industries for years, and finally retired. The Casaboon’s lived a ideal life for all their years. Till Charles died. He did not have much of a pension, which Julia lost some of the money because the income was cut and so was Social Security.

After 45 years in one house, Julia could no longer afford to live in the house she called home. The kids had moved out and gone on with their lives. They where low income people supporting their family. Finally the day came when Julia lost the house. She tried to save it, but no dice.

One day the sheriffs department forced her out of her home. Then the Dumpster was deployed and all her life for 50 years was thrown into the hopper. She lost everything, all the material that made their lives and memories. The workers took great glee in throwing their stuff away. Tearing things up arrogantly, as if adding insult to injury.

Julia was devastated. It broke her heart to see her life trashed before her eyes. Disrespected and loss of dignity, she was humiliated by the experiences of having her house and goods trashed. Julia went to live with her cousin. After several weeks Julia died from depression because she couldn’t take the stress anymore.

In New jersey your house is never really yours. Charles income was reduced for Julia and after all of his hard work, Julia lost much.  Making $20,000 a year was not enough.

Anything less would have burned her life down faster.

May 2015 foreclosure rate: 1 in every 483 housing units in foreclosure

After a few months out of the top two spots, New Jersey is back on the high end of the nation’s foreclosure activity. April’s foreclosure rate was one in 594 — a lot of new foreclosure filings were reported in May.

Bill Stodds made decent money welding. Then came the day he needed disability. His disability paid 3/4 less. His wife left and then he lost  the house. The people at TANF and Welfare told him he needed to find a “sit down job.” The state of New Jersey believes that for everyone one job lost 8 are created.

He lost his house and was just about put out, but the welfare department found he had a savings in which case they made him buy a shed to live in rather than live in the street.

A Livable Universal Income would have rescued him from the government and government control. He could have kept his home, stayed off the controlling welfare system, and had his life on his terms. The government practiced kleptocracy and stole Bill’s life and home.

A “factor” and a “cause” are not quite the same thing. A “cause” can be seen as something that contributes to the origin of a problem like poverty, while a “factor” can be seen as something that contributes to its continuation after it already exists.

Poverty on a world scale has many historical causes: colonialism, slavery, war and conquest. There is an important difference between those causes and what we call factors that maintain conditions of poverty. The difference is in terms of what we, today, can do about them.   What we potentially can do something about are the factors that perpetuate poverty.

It is well known that many nations of Europe, faced by devastating wars, such as World Wars I and II, were reduced to bare poverty, where people were reduced to living on handouts and charity, barely surviving. Within decades they had brought themselves up in terms of real domestic income, to become thriving and influential modern nations of prosperous people. We know also that many other nations have remained among the least developed of the planet, even though billions of dollars of so-called “aid” money was spent on them. Why? Because the factors of poverty were not attacked, only the symptoms. At the macro or national level, a low GDP (gross domestic product) is not the poverty itself; it is the symptom of poverty, as a social problem.

The factors of poverty (as a social problem) that are listed here, ignorance disease, apathy, dishonesty and dependency, are to be seen simply as conditions.  No moral judgment is intended.  They are not good or bad, they just are.  If it is the decision of a group of people, as in a society or in a community, to reduce and remove poverty, they will have to, without value judgment, observe and identify these factors, and take action to remove them as the  way to eradicate poverty through a Living Universal Income.



Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s