> it seems impossible to me that some people will ever understand this, especially and shockingly, those who need it the most.
After many years of denying it, I've come to the realization that to solve social welfare in the United States we need to first solve racism and religion. So I agree it seems impossible.
What do you mean when you say we need to "solve religion?"
I don't mean my question to come across as combative or challenging, I just don't understand what you have in mind.
What I mean is we have issues with racial/ethnic/religious tolerance in the United States, and it's impossible to divorce politics from it. When it comes to social programs, the lines of support of/opposition to policy can be drawn pretty cleanly around identity.
We can't "solve" social problems with welfare unless we "solve" the problem of identity, where we can't even agree whether its the role of government to provide (or just fund!) services if there's a large group of people who believe such support is an attack on their ethnic identity, or something they have a religious opposition to.
There is a significant minority of conservative religious people in the US who see any kind of government-provided social-welfare benefit program as an unwelcome infringement on the proper domain of the church.
Some 12yos think Jesus is just like Santa. They think this amazing analogy exposes all of society to be idiots. Everyone else is indoctrinated. But not them.
After many years of denying it, I've come to the realization that to solve social welfare in the United States we need to first solve racism and religion. So I agree it seems impossible.