I don't think an empirical definition is really all that important. Clearly, one would include some while excluding others that in both cases didn't deserve it.
Here's what i think:
Not everyone has the capacity to obtain a Harvard MBA. And so it follows that not everyone has the capacity to hold even a $40,000/yr job. And so it follows that not everyone has the capacity to hold even a $20,000/yr job. You own a business, right Jonballs? Then you as well as anyone should know that i could bring 10 people to you tomorrow, 10 people who would show up every day, dutifully limit their breaks to 15 minutes, 30 minutes for lunch, give 100% in their efforts to do everything you ask them to do, that you still wouldn't hire for even some of the simplest tasks - simply because you'd have to hold their hand nearly the entire day. At the very least, you wouldn't pay them any more than the minimum wage. So the argument that people need to lift themselves up by their bootstraps only goes so far with me.
I also think (rather, i know) that millions of people have given their lives, their limbs, and even their sanity so i could have the life i have. What kind of soulless human carcass would i have to be to go on a hooker board and whine about having to give some tax dollars so someone else can have a better life? Especially when that "better life" is still only barely manageable. Especially when there is not one person in here who can claim their tax burden prevents them from having a pretty god-damned good life themselves. And certainly not the extent of their tax burden which goes towards helping poor people. I mean, really.
"Woe is me, i'm taxed and oppressed, blah blah blah....". You want "oppressed"? Try living in a system that determines you'll never make barely more than minimum wage. Try coming back from a war and living with PTSD. Or try giving your life for someone else, then talk to me about being "oppressed".
Some people in here, frankly, disgust me.