On Handouts

[awmperry]

I read a weekly email newsletter called This Is True (www.thisistrue.com) - which is well worth subscribing to, by the way, and tell them I sent you - and in this last issue was the tale of an IRS staffer called Bill who wanted a free upgrade to the $24-a-year Premium edition. He was rebuffed in no uncertain terms, and was called all sorts of things in the comment thread accompanying his letter when it was published. Maybe he deserved the humiliation, maybe not... probably not. I wouldn't beg for a freebie like that, but without knowing more specifics about his circumstances I'm not one to judge. Anyway, the thread's at http://www.thisistrue.com/blog-hook_a_man_up.html, and - in case you can't find my comment or if it was declined, here it is:

It's curious to see the black-or-white division on this issue - but then, it seems that middle grounds are rare these days.

Can Bill afford a subscription? I don't know. I don't particularly care - that's his business. But five sprogs can't be cheap to raise, and taking in foster kids and trying to give them the best childhood possible is a laudable thing.

Anyway, there are two things I particularly wanted to comment on:

Firstly, someone referred to Starbucks as selling "gourmet" coffee. Now, I'm Swedish - I know good coffee. And Starbucks isn't gourmet, not even close. Oh, it's good, but nowhere near great. The only way to get it anywhere near strong enough is to get an espresso (still too weak, though), and even then it's served in some sort of minuscule thimble arrangement.

Secondly, and perhaps more importantly, one thing I've always wondered about is - and I'll happily cop to a degree of generalisation here - this curious thinking Americans seem to have that only those who serve in uniform are serving their country. Being ex-military myself, I'm an avid supporter of the armed forces, and I'm thinking of joining the police, but their are other jobs that do just as much for the general publics for far less recognition.

Municipal services, for instance - the people who make sure our rubbish goes away, that there are stripes on the roads, that the lawns in the parks get mowed. They get sod all money, and to most of us, they're invisible.

Telephone companies? Granted, in more and more countries they're becoming privatised, but imagine where we'd be without phones. People working for phone companies serve their countries as well.

Even the IRS - or Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs as we call them - do their bit. Oh, we hate them - at least they don't take half your gross income, like in Sweden - and we pick on them, and so on, but they serve their countries. Without taxes, we'd have no roads, no health care, no schools... no money to pay the uniformed services...

Most people who work in civil service don't get paid much. And saying that "they already get our money"... Well, no they don't. Does anyone seriously think the underpaid clerk who records delivery of your cheque gets to keep the cash? Your taxes go to the roads you drive on, not (usually) to keep filing clerks in Bentleys.

Civil servants of all stripes serve their countries with just as much dedication as soldiers. Sometimes less money, sometimes more, and of course they're not usually shot at on a daily basis. But they serve their countries.

Maybe Bill can afford premium True, maybe he can't. Maybe he deserves it, maybe he doesn't. But - speaking, remember, from an ex-military point of view - suggesting that only people who put their lives on the line are serving their countries and/or deserve help and charity is both wrong and, frankly, rather offensive.

Any thoughts?

Comments

[awmperry.livejournal.com]

That's it, I'm disabling bloody AutoCorrect.

(Also, "publics"?)

Oh, and did you look up the Not So Grand Funk Jam Band?