There should be a special program, in which, you, and a down-on-their-luck person will switch places for a week. The person who has to live out on the streets will see just how bad life is for people like that, and perhaps have different opinions on the subject. Could lead to more people donating... People who win large sums of money, ie, lottery winners, should have to do this, before they can get their money, to force them to see the bad in the world.
Or, perhaps, winners of lots of money would have to pay a small "poor tax". The money would be sent directly to the charities.-- friendless-person, Nov 26 2003 Trading Places http://www.moviepro...s/tradingplaces.htmEddie Murphy and Dan Aykroyd movie based on this idea [luecke, Oct 17 2004, last modified Oct 21 2004] Life Stinks (1991) http://us.imdb.com/.../tt0102303/combinedAnother movie based on this premise, this one by Mel Brooks. [krelnik, Oct 17 2004, last modified Oct 21 2004] Lotto winners already pay large taxes. If you take too much of the winnings, no one is going to want to play the lotto, which in itself is a pretty good fundraiser for schools and roads as I understand it.
Also, I believe there is an Eddie Murphy movie that is essentially the exact thing that you describe about a poor guy switching places with a rich guy.-- luecke, Nov 26 2003 We already did this one.-- DrCurry, Nov 26 2003 Already did this for a year ... and when I switched back, THEY HAD SPENT ALL MY MONEY-- Letsbuildafort, Nov 26 2003 Or even worse, THEY HAD DONATED IT ALL TO THE HOMELESS-- phundug, Nov 26 2003 Seroiusly, I haven't personally carried anything over a 5 dollar bill in over 8 months ...-- Letsbuildafort, Nov 26 2003 // Lotto winners already pay large taxes. //
Lotto loosers pay even more, 100%. As far as psychology is concerned it would be a good idea to adjust the odds so the actual winnings can be distributed "income tax free." Those who are not attracted by the get-rich-quick idea may be attracted by the the IRS-won't-see-a-penny-of-this idea.
[dag] How do you pay your lunch with just a $20k limit?-- kbecker, Nov 26 2003 Wouldnt it be cool if you had one of those glass pope-mobiles you could fill it with money and then role around in it while driving through destitute areas. I think it might motivate people to be less poor and stuff.
I may get called a nazi for this but if I do change places with a "down on their luck person" will I have to rob people to pay for my drug habit? Or if I found that morally reprehensible perhaps I should just beg for it? How about if I got myself a job and a bed at the Y? would that be considered ok or would that not give a good enough idea of what the life of the assholes that ask me for money everyday is like.
In the words of bill hicks:"Get a job! I aint giving you the hard earned cash my parents send me every week."-- harshbastard, Nov 27 2003 nice -but I live with your parents, well one of them anyway!
Face!-- harshbastard, Nov 27 2003 Sealerator, is that you?-- 2 fries shy of a happy meal, Nov 27 2003 [mfd] advocacy
/Or, perhaps, winners of lots of money would have to pay a small "poor tax". The money would be sent directly to the charities./
This issue makes me angry.-- sninctown, May 30 2006 It's sort of been done by George Orwell ('Down & Out in Paris & London').
Also, I don't think a week would be enough - that would be too much like a camping holiday, and people would still have access to their non-down-on-their-luck family and friends.-- pertinax, May 30 2006 As much of a liberal Green as I am, the fact is that the United States has a lot of social mobility. Those who are very poor stay poor due to their own decisions (albeit not always conscious... most homeless people are either mentally handicapped or addicted to something). I would rather see a TV show where CEOs are sent to live in a sh¡thole country where there is no such social mobility. Maybe they should work in their own sweatshops or something. That'd be entertaining, but unfortunately, you can't pay them enough to show the world what their operations are really about.-- kevinthenerd, May 31 2006 //I don't think a week would be enough - that would be too much like a camping holiday, and people would still have access to their non-down-on-their-luck family and friends.//
Still having access to family and friends after a week without a shower can be a touchy subject. Admittedly, a month, or a year would probably be more useful.-- ye_river_xiv, Dec 06 2007 I think the earliest example of this is probably The Prince & The Pauper.-- marklar, Dec 06 2007 random, halfbakery