In “D’Evils” Jay-Z says, “Nine to five is how you survive. I ain’t trying to survive. I’m trying to live it to the limit and love it a lot.”
Nobody is happy to just survive. Everyone wants to thrive.
If you grew up in abject poverty, I might let you off the hook for being so selfish.
Then factor in my middle class upbringing, having never felt the pinch of hunger or no shelter, and you might convince me I’m in no position to judge.
Then point to America’s proud tradition of capitalism and how we’re programmed to believe that, if you work hard, you’re entitled to anything that you can afford, and you might persuade me to buy into our me-first system.
But, no, I’m not having it.
People can be absolutely heartless at times. But in spite of that, you rarely see or hear somebody in America openly mock another person for being poor. And when I say poor, I mean too broke to buy clothing.
So what does this tell us? There’s an innate human instinct to assist anyone or anything that can’t meet basic needs for themselves. Wouldn’t you feel pity if you saw a dog shivering in the cold rain? Then why do human beings live poorly when there’s so much money to go around?
Here’s a theory. People need only a few basic physical amenities to survive: food, clothing and shelter. Once the big three are met, a person could conceivably move on to the second tier of Maslow’s hierarchy.
If this is so, why don’t the people who have so much give to the people who have so little? I believe if everyone who had more gave their surplus to those who had less, the people of the world could reach some common ground. We’ll call this admittedly far-fetched concept the Divine Average.
Think of it like this: many of us are horrified by the concept of being forced to buy clothes at Wal-Mart, preparing every meal for ourselves and living in a one-bedroom, one-bathroom apartment. But to the people who are naked, starving and homeless, we live the lavish life.
And the media is no help. From the jump we’re bombarded with the idea that we’re somehow entitled to have everything we want. Maybe you think that’s just a side-effect of marketing. That children are targeted by advertisers just to get their parents to spend money. Money isn’t always the aim.
Take for example “It’s the Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown.” If you’ve seen this cartoon, you might remember the scene toward the end when Linus and Sally are out in the pumpkin patch waiting to catch a glimpse of The Great Pumpkin. When La Calabaza Gran doesn’t show up, Sally rails on Linus for convincing her to chill in a field all night instead of going trick-or-treating.
Sally tells him, “You blockhead! You kept me up all night. What a fool I was! I could have had candy apples, and gum, and cookies, and money and all sorts of things.” Who was that marketed to? What was that selling, besides the idea that children should seek instant gratification rather than spend time with friends?
The Atlantic Monthly estimates the number of morbidly obese Americans (100-plus pounds overweight) sits somewhere around 9 million, contributing to roughly 300,000 premature deaths annually, stating “obesity may soon surpass both hunger and infectious disease as the world’s most pressing health problem.”
How ironic is that? In poor countries, having too little is killing people. But in wealthy countries, having too much is killing people. So what’s the answer?
We can’t mail gobs of cash to poor countries, or even poor areas of our country, because corrupt governments will just pocket what they consider to be their share of that money and pass whatever fraction is left to the people for whom the money was intended.
And we can’t hand our money directly to the people themselves because not everybody is responsible with money. It’s hard to imagine a starving person spending a cash windfall on a television set. But rest assured, there are plenty of people who would do that.
What we can do is buy things that people don’t have. We can buy food to give to the hungry. We can buy clothes and shoes to give to the exposed. And we can buy supplies and labor to build shelter for the homeless.
So that covers where the money will come from and what needs to be done with it. Now the question is “Who’s going to set it off?”
I can sit here and spit this advice at you all day, but you have the right to tell me to shut up because I’m no better than anyone else. I’m afraid to give up money for the same reason most people are: “What if I’m the only person who does it?” Nobody wants to be the chump who gave all of their money and possessions to charity, only to find that everyone else decided to keep their stuff.
I regret I don’t have a solution to this problem. The best I can do is beg anyone who feels they do to speak up. Even if your idea isn’t the one that saves the world, maybe it will spark a dialogue or inspire somebody else. Together we can find a way for everybody in the world live a better life.