Point: XYZ wants to require a pay stub each week OR a person will work in a government job. She’d also eliminate fancy car tire rims and stereos.
Counterpoint: Assuming that people with tricked out cars live on government assistance may not be accurate. Many people desperately want work that pays living wages. However, there are not enough jobs for those with low skills. Additionally, people need transportation, child care, people skills, and good health to be able to work. The infrastructure required for getting and keeping a job has huge gaps in it. A lot of people would like government jobs when one looks at the benefits often enjoyed by federal workers.
Point: XYZ believes that people should learn from their bad choices rather than being rewarded.
Counterpoint: Of course we should learn from our bad choices because we all make them. Some of us have a better and deeper support system that catches us when we fall. We can more easily survive the consequences of our bad choices. However, when everyone in a person’s social network is in the same economic dilemma, there may be no options for doing differently.
Point: XYZ would not allow anyone on government subsistence to vote.
Counterpoint: That means employees and owners of many corporations could not vote because of the government subsidies received. Military personnel and school teachers could not vote because they live on government money. We use roads built by our tax dollars and visit parks supported by our government. None of us could vote…not even our elected officials because they live off the government.
We all have a fund of knowledge that is based on our particular circumstances. When we are willing to look beyond our own ways of thinking and feeling, we might experience new understandings and then develop solutions for some of these long term problems. We’d all like to abolish persistent poverty. How we do that is open for informed consideration and discussion.