Who is this Emo/Scene kid?

Welfare: Who is worse off, a starving kid in Africa or a rich kid who falls into the same situation from a previously amazing life that he has been used to?

• Suppose rich kid Rory John Gates becomes a starving African kid overnight, with all his memories intact, thereby constituting a huge psychological inertia against adjusting to this new life. Who is worse off now? The original African kid - let's call him Gakuru Mburu - who has gone through tremendous suffering all this life? Or Rory John Gates who is traumatized by this overnight fall from grace? Who deserves more compassion and support from everyone? Which one can still be expected to be happier by themselves and thus less deserving of the society's resources? Can we tell Rory to let go of his earlier life and start living on equal terms with Gakuru? Can a person both cherish their earlier life in their head and not suffer because of the difference of their current situation from it? All characters and names appearing in this question are purely fictitious. Any resemblance to real persons, living or dead, is coincidental.

• Answer:

  They should both be given equal compassion and care. Rory's internal struggle is his own journey and no people should be treated differently based on that. The only differences in treatment should come from differences in present external state and action. That's just natural. A person could cherish good life in the past without suffering in the not-so-good life in the present. Not many people act as though they could though.