"Life's most persistent and urgent question is, 'What are you doing for others?' " ~~Martin Luther King, Jr.
|
Christmas is fast approaching (it's
fast to me because I'm an old codger)
and we see the Salvation Army out with
their kettles and bell ringers. It
is the time of the year when we think
of contributing to charity so that
poor children can have at least one
happy day in the year.
Contributing to charity can make
us feel good in several ways. We
can consider it another step toward
a heavenly reward. We can consider
ourselves to be generous to those
less fortunate than ourselves. It
makes us feel superior and in charge
of our own destiny. It gets those
annoying solicitation people off
our porch so we can go back to the
football game.
But that is now with our POM economy
and ability to give money to others.
What about in a non-POM economy.
Non-POM money cannot be given to
others and all it will buy are luxury
goods and services. It hardly seems
like charity to give someone a luxury.
Charity feels like giving food or
clothing or a place to live to the
destitute. Charity doesn't feel like
giving someone tickets to see the
latest rock god gyrate on stage.
So imagine yourself in a non-POM
economy. You have extra food which
you give to some hungry people. And
you get paid for doing so. Well,
that sort of takes away the sacrifice
on your part. You have clothes that
you don't expect to wear any more
now that you have lost that extra
20 pounds so you give them to those
who need clothes. And you get paid
for doing so. You take care of a
child while the child's mother works.
And you get paid for doing so. Where
is the charity in doing things that
get you paid? Is this the death of
charity? Does this mean that those
who are kind to their neighbors will
lose that feeling of moral superiority?
Perhaps they will.
But you can always keep your giving
to others secret. I believe that
the Bible has something to say about
that. Something about not letting
your left hand know what your right
hand is doing? (Perhaps someone more
familiar with the Bible than I am can
set me straight.) If you want to
feel noble and self sacrificing,
you can always hide your good works.
So much for individual charity,
what about organized charity? What
about organizations like the Salvation
Army? I would expect that in the
early days of the conversion from
a POM to a non-POM the charity organizations
would be given quite a bit of food
and clothing and (for the medical
community) drugs and other medical
supplies because there would exist
millions of poor who will need such
things as they need them now. I would
expect that it would take a while
to set up the distribution apparatus
(stores and such) for the food and
clothing that will be made available
to the poor. While that is being
arranged, the traditional charities
will be the backbone of such distribution
because they have the knowledge and
the organization to get the distributing
done. They and those who contribute
the food and clothes (probably from
the huge agribusinesses and clothing
manufacturers) will be paid for their
efforts when the poor eat that food
and wear those clothes.
Housing is a different matter. Yes
there are a few organizations which
help arrange for housing for the
homeless but owners of housing will
be much more likely to want to have
more say about who is to use their
structures. I would expect the real
estate industry to do most of the
arranging for people to have whatever
constitutes minimum standard housing.
I would expect them to keep records
as to how those who live in this
housing treat the building. Those
who "trash the joint" may
find themselves homeless again since
none would want to let them do that
to their structures. I think that
some would produce housing which
was very difficult to damage or very
cheap to replace (or both) to warehouse
such difficult "guests."
But we are drifting away from our
topic. These organizations which
are considered to be "non-profits" would
still be non-profit but would also
still earn money for those who contribute
their time and effort based on the
good they do. And that doesn't look
like our traditional view of charity,
either.
So in one sense, charity would almost
become a thing of the past, something
that our descendents might come to
wonder about as a strange concept.
The need for charity would have ceased
to exist. There would be no poverty
in the sense of people who did not
have access to adequate supplies
of the necessities of life. There
would simply be no more need for
charity. The actions which today
are considered noble would be, rather,
considered practical and another
way to make money.
Christmas will never be the same.
That will be a loss. But on the other
hand, there will be no more Tiny
Tims who will die unless some wealthy
person decides to take pity on them
and pay for the medical care they
so desperately need. There will be
no more babies that have to be born
in a stable and laid in a manger
because there is no room. There will
be no more poverty stricken families
with children who will get no toys
unless those more fortunate than
themselves donate. I think it will
be better when charity is no longer
needed.
Previous: Non-POM and the Rich
Next: Reputation
Ready to discuss the book and articles? Please join us at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/pomeducation/.
Care to comment? Please click here to email us!
|