It’s well understood that innovation is the
key to advancement for any society/civilization. The truth is, without new
discoveries we would grow stagnant as individuals, and our economies would
inevitably grind to a halt – monopolized by those corporations who, over the
decades, would eventually buy out smaller companies in an effort to claim
supremacy over market space. It takes the branching-out of new ideas to
stimulate growth, add to the job market, and eventually produce “the next big
thing.” There is something far more inherently fascinating, and otherwise
terrifying about the nature of innovation though – not to say that progress is negative – and that is the fact that with all of the individuals who
prosper from the ability to apply their knowledge to their prospective sectors,
and with all the jobs created, money earned and milestones achieved as a
product of progress through innovation, there will inevitably be those who do
not prosper, those who are simply not mentally prepared or intellectually
equipped with the ability to do things like hardwire computers, provide patient
care or code software. What happens to those individuals?
My concern stems from the reality that the
majority of those in the lower middle and lower classes in this country are
becoming inherently dependent on a government that, it seems, would prefer to
keep them that way. Government programs supply a steady stream of income – in
the way of food stamps, welfare and so on – that those who have access to would
be foolish to give up in exchange for unskilled labor, whose end result would
often times see them pull in far less compensation than they would if they were
to remain on government assistance. The aim of these programs is to provide
assistance, some short term, and some long term; more often than not, though,
this creates a dependency. I read a statistic recently that translated the
government assistance programs of different states, to a “dollar per hour
amount” based on a 40-hour workweek. Most states averaged around the $12 - $14
dollar an hour mark, with the highest numbers - like those of Connecticut, New
York, Hawaii and Rhode Island - equating the amount of the average government
aid to an individual making between $17 and $22 per hour. Who needs to get a
job when you’re pulling in that kind of money for nothing?
Here is the troubling part: If we combine
these facts with statistics which show that minority households make up the
majority of the lower end of the income scale – earning almost half of the
income that Asians and white households do (as seen in image 1) – it would be
safe to assume that these programs would inevitably have a devastating
effect on the minority populations of this country for several reasons:
1.) The first issue I see is what I like to call
“The rebound effect.” While not in every case, chances are good that an
increased flow of money will lead to purchases that were otherwise not
affordable for a low income household, say for instance a new car, which was
not previously an option, but is now feasible given the new income. The rebound
aspect of this scenario has to do with the inability of the low-income
individual to maintain payments on a car note that will inevitably last far
longer into the future than the aid will. This leads to a default on payments,
credit issues and a financial burden greater than what was initially an
issue.
2.) A second issue I would like to highlight
occurs when an individual cannot realistically match the income that was
previously being gifted to them. Nine times out of ten, an aid recipient’s
funds run out – this is the unavoidable end result of most government aid. When
this happens, the individual now faces a situation where they have no better
options for employment than they were initially facing, prior to applying for
aid, and the money vein has run dry. If and when an individual does become
employed, the new position is often not a skilled one, and therefore does not
command a wage anywhere close to that which was the average of their aid. This
scenario sees a person use up what little government backing they receive only
to come out on the other end with no formal training or learned skills that
would better their chances of obtaining a job, and no more funding coming in
from the government that once enabled an unsustainable way of life. This could
eventually lead to depression, anxiety and other forms of mental illness, which
will only serve to complicate an already dire situation - when all else seems
hopeless, suicide could result.
3.) We also can’t overlook the fact that in the
majority of these situations, there are children involved. Often times these
children become accustomed to seeing single mothers or single fathers, seeking
out and living off of government funding. As children grow, these observations would undoubtedly lead to the notion that it is normal for individuals to
live off of the government. Children are rarely taught where this money comes
from, and so, never learn to truly appreciate how the system is supposed to
work, and that they should indeed try their best to contribute to the fund, as
opposed to taking away from it. Despite the balancing act one must do with
political correctness in this country, I feel it must be said that the reality
is that the seeds planted into a child’s mind in this way, will undoubtedly
have disastrous effects on the mindset of future generations, and will only
serve to anchor these generations into an imaginary fallback plan, where we
will then see this inhumane cycle occur all over again – and these are only a
few of the proposed problems that I have chosen to expound upon.
The department of commerce shows us that
even though the minority population makes up less than 30% of the nation's
population, it accounts for over 55% of the nation's government aid recipients.
(http://www.statisticbrain.com/welfare-statistics/)
Where will that leave the majority of the minority population in the future?
One would have to imagine that this combination of evolution and the inherited
diseases of addiction and dependency will inevitably have disastrous effects on
the psyche and the overall wellbeing of entire categories of people – evolution
is funny in the way that is slowly changes things, and one would have to
understand that just as traits for alcoholism and other forms of dependency and
mental illness are passed down through genetic transfer, this form of
dependency too, is transferred from generation to generation.
(Image 1)
This leads me to consider: It being the
case that the upper levels of the income gap are inhabited by those who hold
jobs that most would consider as having a direct impact on innovation and
therefore progress – tech jobs, money management and analytical positions, etc.
– we can assume that the individuals in these sectors will pass on more well
adapted cognitive and analytical functions to their children. As this trend
continues, it should have a much more positive long term effect on its line,
producing minds which are much better suited for problem solving, analytical
processes, and which are generally better equipped to thrive in a future that
will be dominated by industries of innovation. With one group heading down a
more positive evolutionary path, while the other develops crippling
dependencies as a result of it being hardwired into the brains of those who
will have been dependent for so long, I can only conclude that we will continue
to see a widening in the gap not only between the poor and the wealthy, (or at
least the well off) but also between those effected by the mental and
psychological aspects of dependency. Take this into consideration as you try to
visualize these situations: What do you suppose the effects would be on the
nation or on a particular sub category of the population, if that population
consisted of, say, 40% alcoholics, as opposed to the 4% that is the current
rate? I will leave that open for you to consider, but will point out again that
40% receiving government aide is where the minority community currently stands,
while making up less than 1/3 of the total population – food for
thought.
Why then would we continue to enable
individuals to maintain their dependency on government programs that only serve
to diminish their chances of competing in a future that will demand sharp
intellect if we are to be successful, both as individuals and as a nation?
Should we not be concerned that this type of dependency will inevitably lead to
a decline in the mental and emotional health of those dependent? These are
simple evolutionary principles we are talking about here. Despite what we would
like to believe, human beings are evolved animals, in so much that we
continuously evolve as any other creature on this planet does – be it by the
doing of a divine being or a big bang, the evidence of science is still the
same. Would we be so foolish as to allow unbeneficial traits to be bred into large
portions of society by our own hand, even if doing so will only continue to
influence the onslaught of mental illnesses, depression and dependence? We
should be focusing our efforts on removing the vein of dependency, and
redirecting individuals to programs that will nurture the intellectual
capabilities so that in a future where complexity is common, entire categories
of people will not be hindered by their ancestor’s inability to better
themselves, and a system designed to ensure that there is a reason for this
inability.
This system must change, and it is for this
reason that I propose we enact an incentive initiative for those who seek assistance - be it in
the form of courses that teach programming or other relative computer skills,
or program goals that require participants of government programs to complete
reading and writing assessments, financial management training, or gain skills
in engineering. We must make an effort to not only keep those in need afloat,
but also to better their chance of thriving in the future. We should empower
those who need to take from the pot, to eventually possess the skills to be
able to put back into it. This is the nature of a self-sustaining system. These
actions will see those who are currently, or were once addicted to a vein, to
the trap of free income, no longer be dependent on a system that is taking from
those who are producing, to give to those who have no choice but to further
cripple the intellectual capacity and the probability of success, of future
generations.
It is understandable that not every
situation is the same. There will always be a select few who need help because
they just need help. My proposed vision serves multiple purposes: It allows
individuals to better themselves by requiring the learning valuable skills that
will eventually lead to some finding good jobs in booming sectors. This type of
system would also serve to eliminate those who milk the system as merely a way
to pull an income without having to work for it. If one is not willing to seek
a means to an end, said individual will not be allowed to simply sit around and
collect a paycheck – despite what we like to think, there are many individuals
who do slip through the cracks in this way. This type of system will also serve
to strengthen the intellectual capabilities passed on to future generations.
This may seem like a laughable point, or even one that offends some – the notion
that intellectuality may not be even across the board – but the reality is that
it’s fairly basic science which shows us the links between issues such as
intelligence, heart disease and addiction, and how they are passed on through
our genes. It is well known amongst scientists that
family history is a strong predictor of who is most at risk for becoming
addicted. Biology – for example, age, and presence of other diseases – and
environmental influences – such as stress, diet, and peer pressure – do play a
significant role, but according to the National Institute on Drug Abuse,
addiction is a chronic, relapsing brain disease characterized by a compulsion,
despite it’s harmful consequences. This disease process is the same regardless
of what a person abuses. Like many other diseases, addictions are preventable
and treatable, but left untreated, their damaging effects can last a lifetime –
and genetics account for 40 to 60 percent of a person's vulnerability to
addiction. While it is true that we
are far more advanced than any other species on this planet, the rules do still
apply. Certain traits and patterns of thinking will be inherited, and so,
passed on to future generations, and this will eventually lead to the rewiring
of our brains, even if only at a pace that is not apparent to the human eye.
Eliminating dependencies and therefore the inherited traits of dependency will
only serve to better our societies, and our species as a whole; and to that I
say, we need not wait to advance such ideas.
Sources:
Census Statistics
Katherine Hall: Web Article
http://www.qualityhealth.com/mental-health-articles/addiction-hereditary
Boughton, Barbara. "APA 2009: Family History Linked to Alcoholism but Does Not Predict Remission."
American Psychiatric Association (APA) 2009 Annual Meeting: Abstract NR2-017. Presented May 18, 2009. Medscape Medical News. Web. 25 May 2009.t;>http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/703251
National Institutes on Health. National Institute of Drug Abuse. "Drug Abuse and Addiction." Web. http://www.drugabuse.gov/scienceofaddiction/addiction.html
National Institutes on Health. National Institute of Drug Abuse. "NIH Researchers
Complete Unprecedented Genetic Study That May Help Identify People Most at Risk for Alcoholism." Press release, August 24, 2006. Web.http://www.drugabuse.gov/newsroom/06/NR8-24.html
National Institutes of Health. National Institute on Drug Abuse. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. "Genetics & Addiction." Heads Up. Web.
Brody, Jane. "Addiction: A Brain Ailment, Not a Moral Lapse." Behavioral Health Digest9(4). Web. http://behaviorhealth.org/addiction.htm
About Me: I am a Software Engineer w/ a Masters in Computer Science, a business man -- holding a Bachelors in Business with a focus in Enterprise Administration from Fordham University, Magna Cum Laude -- a writer, a blogger, a philosopher, a philanthropist, a veteran, and an all around thinker and do'er. My purpose is to point out that there is a reason for everything and an opinion for every reason. I am designed to interpret what I see and dictate what I've interpreted. My hope is that my words will not be seen as harsh, rather as liberating, and at very least, thought provoking. I enjoy everything from technology, to race relations, biology, genetics and economics.. for a start.. 
0 comments:
Post a Comment