Having an attitude of entitlement tends to make a person unlikeable and therefore socially isolated. In this isolated state there is a propensity to blame others and claim victimhood, often to the detriment of true victims. With a romanticized idea of a life that was not achieved, feelings of persecution, or a burning zeal to “share other peoples’ stuff”, these false victims band together, and their appetite for funding is relentless. To keep the money flowing their way, the victimhood narrative must be continuously repropagated. The social net in many cases is being exploited by these people, taking advantage of a poorly designed system. In essence, the constant procurement of funds has become an emotional shakedown of the taxpayer.
Over the past several years, even the model to care for true victims has become a bloated layering of interceding bureaucracies, leaning more toward harm-reduction than being solutions-based, which encroaches into the periphery of enabling undesirable situations.
It appears taxpayers are being partially deceived and half informed. What many have not yet grasped is that a segment of the population has tossed aside the pride of self-sustainability and personal responsibility, replacing it with an unabashed dependency on others – without the unsuspecting benefactors’ informed consent.
Ultimately, the attitude of being entitled to the fruits of another person’s life is a bizarre notion, considering that the unwritten civil contract humans have evolved to expect, with few exceptions for true charitable causes, dictates that psychosocial arrangements are to be reciprocal and earned.