I think some of the power has to be put more efficiently into the hands of the people. The water supply is probably a good example of not doing that, you’re right. But aside from an occasional inspection, what can the FDA do, for example, about food-bourne illness besides set rules? Isn’t the fear of expensive lawsuits and recalls far more worrisome to a farmer than the threat of a visit from an inspector? In some of these cases, I think perhaps a government agency can set rules or guidelines and then spend their money educating the populace rather than performing inspections.

To bring it back to the debate topic, maybe in some cases the poor and the sick can be given more education and resources. Maybe in others it really is necessary to force an industry (especially one purveying goods or services necessary for subsistence-level living) to give the disadvantaged a break.

You seem to be arguing that it’s unethical to overcharge an unemployed, mourning parent for their loan debt. But the question is really whether or not the government can or should step in and stop this from happening. Regulation is too costly, regulators are too few, and business transactions are too many for government to effectively do this proactively. And the challenge with doing it as a response to complaints (like consumer protection agencies, for example) is to get enough information to the consumer for them to know when they are being badly wronged.

Here’s where I think the government could play a more effective and efficient role—in disseminating information and education about fair business practices, safe use of products, and such. I think information is power in these cases. And it might be the most efficient way to try to prevent lots of types of abuses.

Question for you: what are the primary goods or services you feel the disadvantaged are being screwed on to the point that the government should step in? Food? Utilities? Health insurance?…

How about this: if someone said they could cure cancer with a single shot but wanted to charge 1 million dollars per shot it would be wrong wouldn’t it? And if this cure was easily duplicated and doesn’t require overly rare materials to make and the actual cost of manufacturing was say tens of dollars – shouldn’t the price reflect that? And is there ever a moment when such things should be free?

I get paying for cold medicine – I rarely use it when I get sick myself so it’s not a necessity to live. I get paying for pain medication and even some psychiatric medications but the cost should not be excessive, for the well being of any one of us effects the sum total of us. And if cost was the only thing keeping someone from death – don’t we have an obligation to provide the help even if it’s not profitable? Isn’t that the moral, even American thing to do?

If there was a shot developed that cured a whole litany of horrible diseases and it would save the country’s population billions of dollars -shouldn’t it be supplied at cost? Wouldn’t that be fair? Must there always be a profit?

We’re all willing to use Facebook for free or even this site. But there are somethings, for whatever reason, we justify must be paid for and not only paid for but feed on top of. In the financial end of things – someone’s debt can be bought and sold, new terms set, all without talking directly to the debtor. There were two parties in that original agreement but we as a society act as if one of those party’s, the debtor, is less than the creditor. So we’re okay that they are charged extra. Even if we don’t realize that they lost their job, had someone in their family die and were trying to raise their children and the extra charges on their bills mean their kids don’t get what they need and they can’t pay their mortgage. We forget the personal human behind the number, the credit score, the balance. And shouldn’t there be a limit to some of that?

I list extremes as examples but the reality is, as you state clearly, there are no absolutes. A modest profit might need to be worked in if the extra money went in to more research or better materials but does it mean someone deserves a ten million a year bonus? In society there are a number of ways to profit free and clear of moral ambiguity – it needn’t come just from the core product.

At what point do we allow all to benefit from something? At what point do we simply collectively agree – we will take care of this for each other?

It may be idealist but let’s not forget – man made money to make life easier – there are always things that we do for each other that we do not attempt to profit from. Finding examples in the modern world gets harder but historically if someone found a watering hole they did not charge their fellow tribesman a fee to drink from it.

Now someone might sell you something to keep the water in.

You make it sound as if, when someone poor walks into a 7-11 for a cheap hot dog and a coffee, the clerk should just give it to them. Every time. No matter what. There are no absolutes in any debate. Making money off the sick or destitute is not wrong. I think it matters immensely how sick, how poor, and what goods or services we’re talking about. Sometimes it’s wrong. Sometimes it’s not.

I agree that profit can push reason to the side. I find it troubling that here in the United States people give to charity and receive a tax break in return – they gain profit from their contribution to the poor. This undermines the very act of giving charity. I wish folks would care more about the profit of the soul more than the profit of the pocketbook.

Although – like you so eloquently put – everyone needs money.

The average American was simply trying to survive and often relying on their neighbors for help. The concept of corporations and large companies was not a reality yet.

Profit is meant to act as not only an incentive to create goods and services but also as a means to reinvest in the future. It is not always used in this manner.

As a “child of the Amazon” I can say not every human looks at profit the same way. Some choose to focus on profit of the soul. The good will that is created when you help someone in need. This is a different and longer lasting form of profit. In tribal culture there is not necessarily a focus on monetary gain – money often not even being present. In tribal culture you may trade your abilities for support or goods but a tribe does not limit itself to personal gain. A tribe works together to survive.

The United States of America is a very very large tribe with a complex interdependent system of economics – far too complex I would argue. Profit can overcome value and reason. It can become the most important thing to an individual or company. But eventually even the most prolific company hits a profit ceiling and plateaus.

We are not taking care of our tribe.

Take the Health Care debate or the Debt Crisis in this country – both are profit-centric. Is it ethical to profit off of the sick? The elderly? At what point does someone’s disease cease being an illness and instead becomes a product to sell accessories for?

I understand the argument that only through profit do new discoveries get made. This is a bit of a fallacy. Most achievements in the history of invention had to do with furthering the human experience. Louis Pasteur did not want to just become a millionaire – he was simply trying to solve a problem. Albert Einstein found it impossible not to make discoveries and he too did it in the name of science and innovation. (although with regret about nuclear technology) Imagine if Dr. Heimlich decided to patten his “maneuver” – it would have cost my friend and I recently when he saved my life when I chocked on a piece of chili.

Although I am not a practicing christian – I was was raised in the church. Many of it’s beliefs I still hold on to even though my faith has taken me in a different direction. I am fond of the teachings of Jesus who did not hesitiate to heal the sick and feeed the hungry. He did not ask them to work it off. He did not ask them to pay him a pennance. He did not even ask them to worship him. He did it because it was the right thing to do.

In the early days of this country doctors worked in trade. They helped the sick in their town or village to the best of their abilities and would often take only a warm meal in return. It was the pinnacle of neighbors helping neighbors. This is not to mean that they do not deserve here in the modern age a wage – they do. But there must be a limit on how we allow ourselves to profit off of the sick and the poor.

What poor person can pay down their debt if that debt doubles? Triples? When would it be possible? The hole gets deeper – and before anyone jumps in and says “Hey – they chose to be in debt” – I would remind them that although that may or may not be true life sometimes takes you down a different road. A loved one becomes ill. A factory closes and a town dies. An industry becomes obsolete. Suddenly that mortgage or college tuition bill can not get paid as quickly as it expands with fees and interest.

This was not their fault. They thought that like their parents they would be able to work for a company for most of their life time. Here in the modern age, in the 21st Century, there are no longer any guarantees. Even the supermarket now has self-check out – service jobs will be replaced by technology eventually but when is not all that predictable.

If we are to survive as a nation we must begin working together. Making money off of those who are sick or dying or are destitute is immoral and unethical and not helpful to the larger tribe. This country is only as strong as it’s people – and if the people can not pay their bills and die off – then there is no country.

I replied to WhyOhWhy in a separate email – since WhyOhWhy has been so active on our site I thought I would respect that with a detailed reply. I will paste a part of it below in the essence of not rewriting my own response:

I have had a number of people make a great many assumptions about my life and my situation. Not something folks should get in the habit of doing – I think you would agree. I do not know the conditions of your life any more than you know mine. I did not choose to be unemployed no matter how much you want to try to believe that. The day I was laid off came as a shock as I was just starting to feel that the company was stabilizing.

There are MILLIONS of us out of work – I don’t know why that is not clear to you. That has an effect on the job market – there are 6 applicants to every job. Even those service jobs you think are the solution. The service industry is one of the first to get hit in any crisis – the first thing people cut back on are service luxuries – like hotels, restaurants (fast food included), etc. They for whatever reason still go to movies, still watch their televisions and still listen to their radios. You do right? I do as well. Now – they stopped buying DVD’s but that is only one area of our diverse industry.

First a bit about unemployment insurance – in order to qualify for benefits you have to have been laid off through no fault of your own and look for full time work every week. Which I was and I do. Unemployment Insurance is paid by companies with full and part time workers and is considered part of an employees benefit package. The extended benefits are paid by the federal government – some of it included in the Stimulus bill – and before you say that you don’t want your taxes paying for my UI remember – I paid taxes too (and still do by the way – UI is not free). So I have personally already paid to have this insurance.

Second a summary of what it’s like here in California. We have 12%+ unemployment – even higher underemployment. We have a hiring freeze by school districts with teachers all over the state receiving pink slips – this would have been worse had the federal government not stepped in with Stimulus funds. My wife is one of the many in the education field who is herself unemployed and can not get work again until the freeze is lifted. We were hit with two strikes (one full, one partial) just before the economic collapse that cost the state BILLIONS in lost revenue and upset the balance in the entire entertainment industry – a mainstay of our national economy. (consider how much media you consume (radio counts) and how you know about the products you buy) We also have a huge immigrant population both legal and illegal that adds to the labor pool.

As for your comments – one thing stands out that consistently frustrates me and I fear it is my industry’s failure to communicate clearly as to what we do out here. We are an industry filled with professionals who have spent their entire lives learning their crafts. These are real people, with real jobs who can not simply transplant to another industry over night. Just like a Doctor may not be able to become a car mechanic over night. Those who do hit a wall often go back to school to train in another field. I can not afford financially to do that – it’s not in the cards. So I have spent a chunk of my time training myself and increasing my skills so that I can find a job in the industry outside of my prior vocation (DVD). I took matters into my own hands – I had to.

Please though feel free to send a link to your stats – you wrote: “Others such as healthcare, educations, govt. service – job prospects are actually UP or stable. “ Now I don’t believe this is true – certainly not across the board. Like I said education jobs in this state are way down, healthcare is also struggling. I have relatives in both fields and know this first hand. And I would have to go back to school to work in the either of those industry’s full time. Which like I said – not possible financially.

I did not CHOOSE to live in California. I was moved here my father in high school and since have felt at times trapped. After my time in the Amazon I lived for many years in Texas and know the state well – I attended elementary and junior high and part of high school in the Dallas area. And I have no problem with conservatives on a personal level (first I used to be one and second most of my family considers themselves conservative) and I have many friends in Texas – most conservative. (By the way I voted for W. in 2000.) No matter – it costs money to move and a job has to be there for me when we get there. I do not have money. I am not rich. Heck our television is from the 1990’s!

As for your home movie and website comments. First – you are here leaving comments, thank you for that, your comments move us one step closer to being able to monetize the site. We have bloggers from all around the country and world and consider the site not quite a business yet but with the potential of turning into one down the line. Most of our bloggers have full time jobs just like I did when I started the site in 2008 with a conservative friend of mine.

As for my home movies – first you’re attempting to insult me – that’s just immature. They are not home movies. My web series is a SAG sanctioned project with professional actors – many of which you may recognize and have enjoyed in their other efforts – our third season which premieres March 15th features actors from “Heroes” and even “Avatar”. My commentary bits on CNN range from short documentary subjects to simple web-cam commentaries. I did most of them while fully employed during the election and have over 1 million hits on CNN alone. It is through this work that I have found yet another area that I am passionate about as a film maker – the field of journalism. Both sets of projects I would do no matter where I was and no matter where I worked. I design them all so that I can do them even if fully employed.

I’m deeply sorry you are unable to understand the scope of this crisis for it is people like you who may allow it to continue by not helping those who are in fact the victims of the crisis. Just because the word “victim” is over used does not mean it lacks meaning. There are many people who do not have safety nets and UI who are unemployed right now. I fear for them – for they are in a horrible position – and if I can help defend them I will. I believe neighbors need to help each other – no matter where they live.

All the best in the world
David P. Kronmiller
Editor in Chief – The Avocado Jungle

PS – I really don’t like being called Dave I do prefer David.

Victimization and blame (GOP aren’t the sole owners of this mess, everyone had a hand in the current crisis – we’ve been kicking the can down the road on the hard problems for decades) seem to be the MO. Not super inspiring or positive.

“it that you feel David has reassigned responsibility for things that in his own power?”

Yep, that about covers it.

In South Africa, we have an extensive and entrenched bill of rights in our constitution. However, we don’t have the ability (be it resources, man power or such) to carry out many of the specified rights. The gap between the ‘haves’ and the ‘have-nots’ is huge, and while our government tries, it is almost impossible to secure socio-economic rights and freedoms to everyone.

Another problem is that many businesses are private owned and are less attached to government regulations. While all laws and regulations are mandatory, private companies need be less transparent when compared to public companies (to public detriment). This poses a problem in having government regulate the source of the business’ profit. It would also be difficult for government to monitor how and from who profit is attained.

Another problem is the defining line: who is defined as being sick? who are the people poor enough to constitute the protected poor? Doctors still have to charge patients, no matter how sick they are. The impoverished still have to pay for their own resources. Where would government protection begin and self-survival end?

Treating the poor, sick or disabled differently from the general public may lead to further inequalities. At the moment, government subsidies are being provided for these groups in whatever way they can be provided. Employment and bursaries/scholarships in South Africa also give the indigent and disabled primary opportunities. However, deferentiating between different groups of people is never a good foundation for a law/regulation no matter how good the intentions are – it often leads to bitterness and prejudice. Many people do not fully understand the reason behind legal implementations, whether educated or not. It is not within their general areas of knowledge.

Another thing about South Africa is that there is a large population of uneducated people, many of whom do not speak English. They often live in rural areas and know almost nothing about the law. Such people are often the most affected by people excessively profiting off them and exploitation…