07/07/10 Journal 6: Who do you least identify with from the film?
We recently watched Michele Ohayon's, “It Was A Wonderful Life”. The trouble with documentaries is, even if the film makes a valid point and is speaking about a just cause, the film often suffers from tunnel vision. By tunnel vision, I mean that we only see the story through the eyes of the director. We only see what she wants us to see. That said, I enjoy documentaries which tell the after story. At the very least, a summary of what happened to each of the characters in a relevant time range is necessary. I did, however, enjoy the part of the film that showed the cops auctioning off the BMW owned by the deadbeat dad. This Robin Hood-esque seizure of luxury items from the rich for the sake of helping the poor is exactly what is needed in these situations.
I have no sympathy for Josephine the college educated, starving artist who found herself homeless after a “bad financial investment”. I have trouble being compassionate for a woman who lived a lavish life, then lost it all due to her own bad decisions. She may have been led into that bad decision by deception, but it was her responsibility to take care of her assets while she had them. The fact that she never took the time to develop any real marketable job skills is also her fault. I am curious to know what her “honorary doctorate” degree is in, and also what she did to earn it. If you're good enough at painting watercolors to earn a doctorate degree, then how come you haven't held down a job outside of the art world?
I think it's important for everyone to cultivate relevant, real world job skills. It's part of the responsibilities associated with being a productive member of society. I'd love to sit around my house and make music all day, but I realize that I need to eat. Creativity is good, and it's good to cultivate it, but one should first take care of basic needs before allowing creativity to take over. If you aren't willing to toe the line long enough to earn a living, then you're destined to starve. Creativity takes a back seat to living within the confines of the real world in my book.
07/12/10 Journal 7: Response to professor comments
Q – What brought my parents to the US?
A – My folks wanted to raise their family in the land of opportunity. They wanted my brother and I to have access to the things the US has to offer as opposed to the poverty stricken Philippines. What they didn't realize is that all the opportunities you find in the US come accompanied by an American sense of entitlement amongst other evils.
Q – What did you think of Nickel and Dimed?
A – I absolutely loved it. I was a very broke college student at the time I read it, so I found it easy to identify with some of the budgeting dilemmas Barbara faced throughout the course of the novel. One of the jobs I had as a teenager was a member of the stock team (I put the cans on the shelf and made sure all the labels were facing outward) at the Winn Dixie of east Athens, GA. I had a hearty laugh at the part of the book where Barbara explained the atrocious uniforms she had to wear while employed at WD:Marketplace.
Q – re: drug testing for all of those who receive benefits, What would happen to those who test positive? What resources are in place for treatment? What happens to the children?
A – Those who test positive would be subject to rehabilitation. By rehab, I don't mean the celebrity rehab that involves a trip to an ocean front resort where you receive counseling for exorbitant amounts of money. I'm thinking rehab in a Horner-esque apartment. Only the bear essentials would be provided, ie: padded walls and peanut butter sandwiches. Upon successful completion of the rehabilitation program, benefits would be restored. I'm sure resources are slim, if in existence at all, for treatment. The children lose every time. I suppose orphanages and other shelters are over populated, and this solution would only result in another glut of children without a home, but is it better to bounce from orphanage to shelter or to live with parent(s) who are strung out on drugs?
Q – Do you feel this one observation has informed your viewpoint of an entire group of people?
A – I understand that my viewpoint is very biased, and that I shouldn't judge an entire group of people based upon the gentleman in my story. I now realize the mistake I've made in prejudging the population by only allowing such a small sample to determine the outcome for the rest. I also understand that TANF, SNAP, WIC, etc works for 85% of the people on the program (if not more). I shouldn't let one bad apple sour the entire bushel.
Q – re: food boxes, give folks less choice?
A – Yes, that is the idea, but thanks to our resident diabetic-former-Comcast-installer, I now understand that this stipulation doesn't allow wiggle room for dietary concerns. My counter argument is, would you have diabetes if you were concerned with your diet before being diagnosed with the disease? The first solution that comes to mind is, still limit the choices by giving allotted food boxes, but make 20% of the boxes “diabetes friendly” (and also one for those gluten intolerants). I'm discriminatory against vegetarians/vegans, but honestly, that's a dietary choice. Beggars can't be choosers.
Q – re: monthly drug testing, for what? Most drugs leave your system within 72hrs.
A – I was unaware that most drugs course their way through your system in 72hrs. That fact essentially invalidates all the drug screens that I've had to take over the course of my career. I suppose if you're truly addicted to a substance, it's probably hard to go 72hrs without it, so that kind of validates the need for drug screens prior to employment. However, the fact remains that my logic is flawed.
Q – re: less morally responsible parties, ?
A – This comment was made to point a finger at the classic case of a wealthy politician feeding his wife and 2.5 kids while also “taking care” of a single mother with a child or two of her own. I'm referring to the people who have found themselves in a bad financial situation because they fathered multiple children from multiple women while always having a stable of girlfriends “on the side”.
Q – Did “they” pay into the system already?
A – Perhaps they did, but I'm willing to bet if you're throwing a fit about the state not paying for your crappy beer, you aren't exactly a model citizen, and you're most likely trying to use every advantage available to you even if that requires being dishonest about what you feed your kiddos. Exploiting the system by using TANF or SNAP to improve your lifestyle is not what those funds were appropriated for.
No comments:
Post a Comment