stymied---this is an OPENED board. Feel free to either respond or not as will I
If America chooses to do a trial run by refusing to give aid to the poor then it's most likely a productive decision from America's POV.
I can only say that from a Canadian's POV, the cost in pain and suffering to America's poor is not ever going to be condoned.
I've told you that it's not the end solution and I've suggested that it's a solution that shouldn't have been necessary. Or unnecessary, depending on your opinion.
The solution was to not allow the situation to develop in the first place!
Speaking of! America is the richest country in the world.
-----------------------------------------------------------
I simply have to suggest that Americans would care a lot more if it wasn't a situation in which non-white people are most of the ones that are suffering.
Why? You decide if you want to talk about it!
from where did you get the idea that the USA does
not aid the poor? Have you ever lived in the USA
under the condition of actual poverty? I have.
As to "non-white" -----<< that condition has become
a matter of choice. A famous american lady, Linda
Sarsour, has openly stated, in sum and substance,
' until I put a hijab on my head, I was just a white girl
from Brooklyn ' she MAGICALLY became a PERSON
OF COLOR. I have known persons from MYSORE
India. -----for the record---Hindus are not fond of
"mixed marriages"----In Mysore her DESCENT from a
non-hindu father is a FAR BIGGER PROBLEM than the
color of her skin. My own hubby is middle eastern,
far darker in complexion than is Linda Sarsour "the
person of color"----more like Kamala ----but then there is me------too damned white, we both bear the wrong last name, so we are disqualified from the advantages
of the person of color BADGE ---Poverty?-----far
more whites than blacks (that's actual numbers,
not proportionately)