I’m ashamed

 

I'm ashamed to admit that I am a taxpaying citizen of one of the riches nations of the world and yet we have people who are hungry, who lack shelter, who are sick and can't get medical care, who are ignorant because they have no school, and who lack work when there is work to be done.

Prior to World War II the country was still in the throes of the "Great Depression."

The federal government, mostly I think at the urging of Eleanor Roosevelt, became the "employer of last resort" and the "welfare state" as we know it was born.

The government developed many "make-work" projects, some of lasting value, some of artistic worth.

It created the Works Progress Administration, later the Works Projects Administration (WPA) that "employed millions of people and affecting almost every locality in the United States. Between 1935 and 1943, the WPA provided almost 8 million jobs. The program built many public buildings, projects and roads and operated large arts, drama, media and literacy projects. It fed children and redistributed food, clothing and housing. Almost every community in America has a park, bridge or school constructed by the agency. Expenditures from 1936 to 1939 totaled nearly $7 billion." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Works_Progress_Administration

It also created the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC). According to Wikipedia, "the CCC was designed to aid relief of high unemployment stemming from the Great Depression while carrying out a broad natural resource conservation program on national, state and municipal lands." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_Conservation_Corps).

I understand the current administration is trying to generate jobs with its stimulus packages, but trying to "fix things" with more borrowed money alone just extends the pain.

When Uncle Sam went into the Employer of Last Resort role, it was "all inclusive." It "fed children and redistributed food, clothing and housing."

I think this country needs, not a good 5-cent cigar, but a comprehensive program to help Americans help themselves.

Since I am not a "bleeding heart liberal" I would object to helping people too lazy or shiftless to help themselves.

On the other hand, I think we need to care for those people unable to care for themselves for any of many reasons. At the same time, I remember my medic days when patients – enlisted, officers, and $1.75-a-day dependents were expected to work to their abilities while "guests" of the hospital. I have seen colonels' wives folding linens next to Navy strikers' wives doing the same job – and telling stories among themselves (stories, they made it clear, not fit for a male's ears).

The U.S. has military installations going to ruin from disuse. Barracks, medical facilities, mess halls (dining halls) – all are available. Surely there must be surplus clothing for people of all sizes and shapes. I'm not talking about Dior gowns or Seville Row silk suits; actually, fatigues are more in line with my proposal.

In addition to the closed bases, we have thousands of current and former military personnel – some of whom probably are looking for work – who could provide training in in-demand job skills: mechanics, HVAC, air conditioning & heating, plumbing, barbering – the list is nearly endless.

Bring un/under-employed people who are willing to work to the bases. Singles, marrieds, and families.

Provide them with housing, basic medical (emphasis on preventive) care, education, both academic (to GED level) and job skills, decent, healthy meals – smart food managers make excellent, tasty meals from government surpluses (Gerber California's school had such a food wizard circa 1972) – and suitable clothing, from shoes to hat.

When the person completed training, provide some decent "civilian" clothes and, if necessary, relocate the person (and family, if any) to a waiting job.

(Would the U.S. court allow this? When the first Haitian influx flooded Miami Florida, the government wanted to resettle the immigrants, mostly illegals, in the mid-west; Idaho, I think. The Haitians or some liberal group went to court complaining that the Haitians were not used to the cold and that it would be unfair to send them to a cold, less populated area of the U.S. The court agreed. On the other hand, it was OK to draft an American lad in Florida and send him to Thule Greenland or Seoul Korea where it is MUCH colder than Idaho, or to Vietnam where the American life expectancy was much lower than in Idaho.)

Must the government be the "employer of last resort"? In some cases, probably. Hopefully only for the short term.

There already is, or was, a government subsidies program for organizations that hire the hard-to-employ.

Meanwhile, everyone's favorite Uncle is well advised to "discourage" U.S. companies from sending jobs across the borders and from inviting foreign workers for jobs American can do. I understand this nation's greatness is in a large part due to its immigrants, but for the short term, can't we limit immigration to the physically oppressed and, temporarily, close the doors to those simply desiring a better financial opportunity. (As long as I'm offending people, let's stop rewarding illegals with citizenship and all the benefits for which taxpayers foot the bill – and that applies to ALL illegals, regardless of country of origin.)

I proposed something similar maybe 20 years ago and was promptly dubbed by a bleeding heart in Texas as a "nazi." Now, as then, I am not proposing that we FORCE anyone to take advantage of the program, but I AM suggesting that anyone who CAN work and refuses the program should forfeit any benefits.

That may take away my "liberal" label (whilst leaving my "fiscal conservative" badge tattered but intact), but it certainly does not make me a "nazi."

Yohanon Glenn
Yohaanon.Glenn at gmail dot com