Many recent posts may lead some to believe that I'm advocating the end of donating money as a form of helping people. This is not the case. There are times when giving money is crucial and necessary. My point is that those times are far more rare than we think they are and should be severely limited.
Going back to my post that talked about the eleven billion dollars poured into Haiti since the January 2010 earthquake. The experts say that the long term effect has been negative but in the early days the money helped people cope. That is the key. In situations of extreme emergency when all or most means of self-sufficiency have been lost due to accident or natural disaster, then providing short term financial assistance is absolutely the right thing to do.
When we continue to pour dollars into a situation after the emergency has passed we are no longer being helpful. Instead we are crippling people's ability to lift themselves out of disaster and re-establish a normal life. Even if the new normal looks nothing like the old normal it's vital that they be allowed to work toward it.
This point is important: When we continue giving emergency aid to people who have suffered a disaster after the emergency has passed we effectively prolong the disaster and keep them in emergency mode.
Living in a constant state of emergency, urgency and need for outside support crushes the soul, breaks the will and destroys personal motivation and productivity. So when we give money without any restrictions, accountability or expectations it should be done very, very rarely, for a limited time and with clear communication to those receiving it so they don't expect it to keep coming forever.
No comments:
Post a Comment