Patreon Get some books Get some ebooks Leif & Thorn

Annotated Chapter 5 Page 11

Art from Fire Emblem: Three HousesJesus: "...because my advice was so clear and blatant, I thought it would be really easy to work out how it applies to people with three houses. My mistake, I guess." (Anyway, housing should be a human right, pass it on.)
Sparrow: Hey, Bee! I’m home! And I brought leftover free pizza! . . . so of course you’re already cooking something. Bianca: Sorry! Sparrow: Listen, it turns out I’m not going to make the play. We just stayed late at work organizing this last-minute protest for a Bennett speech tomorrow. I can’t get to the theater on time without slacking off on my proper share of standing with a sign. Bianca: I hope the sign’s nice, at least. Sparrow: It’s awesome! It has this really terrible quote, followed by a drawing of Jesus looking shocked. I wanted him to be saying “WTF?”, but Dot didn’t think that would go over well. Bennett: Do you think Jesus would approve of punishing success? Sure, he said if you had two coats you should give one to the poor, but he never mentioned anything about what to do if you have three houses! Sparrow: Hear that, Patrick? You’re going in human form. Better think up a nice suit. Patrick: I heard, Sparrow.

6 thoughts on “Annotated Chapter 5 Page 11”

  1. Pretty sure it had something to do with camels fitting through needles

  2. … and how big “housing” should be human right?

    General problem with punishing success is that for majority of people, material wealth is motivation. If you force them to “share” that wealth, they will lose motivation and become lazy. Some amount of wealth inequality is totally worth the motivation – and whole history basically confirms that.

    On the other hand, whole history also confirms that making poor people little less poor raises their productivity, not speaking about happiness.

    So, only missing step is finding the right compromise between those two …

    1. PS: Although it’s quite possible Jesus would disagree. He was generally very optimistic regarding changing human nature for better.

      I would actually say he was very naive if I didn’t suspect that he knew better and just pretended to be so naive.

    2. Nobody said anything about “punishing success.”

      Countless real-world experiments have shown that if you provide for people’s basic needs, they don’t get ~unmotivated~ or ~lazy~. Either they keep working at paying jobs — not for the material wealth in its own sake, either, but for the extra things it can buy — or they switch to jobs that you don’t get paid for, but that are worth doing. Full-time parenthood. Going back to school. Volunteering with a cause they think is important.

      (Just think about how much time it takes me to make these comics, even though there’s no immediate payout, and how I still keep that up even when I have a day job.)

      And “what should be the minimum level of basically decent housing?” is not some kind of trick question. It’s not that hard.

      1. So long as that minimum level of basically decent housing is not mandatory, I agree. But if it is mandatory, then I have to respectfully insist on supporting the rights of those who choose something like Linus of Stardew Valley (without the garbage rustling, because that really does risk both the health of the person doing it and those around them. Sorry Linus, but I’ve had too many experiences with eating food my parents said should be tossed even before it was in the trash can, let alone after.)

        1. …This is a weird thing to get pre-emptively worried about.

          The process of “letting people who want a better home know that it’s available, not letting anyone convince them they’re not eligible, and making sure there aren’t too many hurdles or access problems to block them from getting themselves hooked up with the housing” is already big enough to take up all the resources we’d throw at it. (That’s how it works with every single public benefit we have already.)

          If someone says “I understand that this free housing is an option, I’m not having any trouble with the signup forms, I just genuinely would rather live in a tent in the woods,” then sure, good for them. Whatever department is handling this process, they’re gonna have a million other cases to work on for people who want the help. I’s not like they’ll have a bunch of free time to spend arguing with people who don’t.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

*

*

 

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.