The Challenge of Writing

It’s funny. I started by writing a short one-act play. I submitted it to a local one-act production at a community theatre, and it was accepted and performed. I wrote a second and it was also chosen and done. There were not thousands of entries, but at the least, mine were top 5% to 10% of the submissions. I wrote a third, which I submitted to a professional equity theatre company, which meant the competition was stiffer. It was also selected and performed.

All that gave me confidence in my work, so when I wrote my first screenplay, I felt sure it would do well. It was a wholly different level of competition, and my work didn’t place at all. I kept working and kept writing and revised my work to make it stronger. Then I saw a contest for either female writers or female protagonists. Since I had works with female protagonists, I submitted two pieces to it.

They had 25 ‘official selections’ which I take to be effectively finalists. Both of my pieces were among those 25 chosen. I got traction with some other competitions as well. At this point, I’ve had 19 contest placements with ten different works. I have failed to place in the Nicholl or Austin, which are the biggies, but have placed in some second tier, including some semifinals.

I’ve also written some short stories, which I posted to an unpaid site. The readers can rate the stories, and 80% of my stories rate 4.5 or better on a 5 point scale. Even there, I fall short of the top, since 4.81 is my highest rating and some place 4.9 or better. I can tell my work is decent, just nothing exceptional. It is all frustrating, even though I have some success at what I’ve done.

I write because I have stories to tell, but make no money at it. In one sense, money is a secondary consideration, but there is a satisfaction in feeling that my work is good enough for someone to pay for it. Beyond that, I would like to see something I wrote be made into a movie. I’m working and promoting, just without reaching that last step.

Takers

 The common thread among right wing folks is that poor people are takers. These takers want others to give them things without them having to work for it. To be fair, there are some people like that. They will use others, taking as much as they can get from them. We have all met those people – hell, we may even be related to some of them.

The fact that we liberals want to help people in need, doesn’t mean that we don’t realize that fact. The difference is that we know that many poor people work their asses off, just trying to stay afloat. Most of them are happy to work, as long as their work is appreciated and as long as they can make enough to get by.

How do we help the deserving needy without being used by the true takers? 

There are several things we can do. First, we need to make sure that anyone who is willing to work has access to a job. Second, we need to make sure that the job they get will pay their basic expenses – housing, food, utilities, clothing, transportation, and medical care. Third, we need to make sure that they have access to affordable medical care and medications. If people lack the skills necessary for available jobs, we need good job training. We need government programs to provide the above.

We also have to deal with those who cannot work, children, the disabled, and such. Welfare programs, Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid can deal with those. For those who have been said to be at the dawn and dusk of life, we need to provide for them.

We need good affordable education for all. That includes normal public education, but should also include college education at community colleges and state universities, as well as tech training for other jobs. We should not have people undergoing a lifetime of debt for a college education. If someone wants to go to expensive private colleges, they can figure that out for themselves. 

What about those who truly are takers, who only want a handout? Honestly, I’m not too concerned about them. There are homeless shelters and soup kitchens so they need not go completely without, but we need not provide much for those.

I’ve heard people ask why those who are working should have to pay for those who don’t. In a sense, they shouldn’t, but we have people who are extremely wealthy, who have more wealth than they truly earned by their labor. Those people should be taxed to pay for the kinds of programs I suggest. Instead, we have cut taxes on the very wealthy, then cut programs to help the needy. In my view, that is short sighted and bad for the country.

I can already hear people screaming about socialism, and frankly I refuse to be intimidated by that word. For the last hundred years or so, every program designed to help the less well off has been decried as socialism by some people. We are supposed to be one nation, and we need to make sure the whole nation is taken care of.

We should not have people dying of preventable diseases. We should not have people dying because they can’t afford their medications. We should not have people going without because either they can’t find work or because their job doesn’t pay enough to cover basic expenses. 

I’ve heard the chorus of folks who say that if someone doesn’t have a job that pays enough, they should get another job. That’s easy to say when you have never gone without. When you struggle to get from paycheck to paycheck and don’t have the skills for a better paying job, then you’re in an impossible situation.

On the contrary, I would argue that if an employer can’t pay a living wage, they should not be in business. Instead we have top executives making millions a year in salary and benefits, while the bulk of their workforce barely scrapes by. That, to me is unacceptable, and as a society, we should not accept that.

In short, those who can work should be given a chance to work, and should make enough to get by when they work. Those unable to work should be taken care of. Those who are able but unwilling can get by on whatever someone is willing to give them. If they want more, let them work.