Welfare

[Vladimir Lenin]

Original link here

Now I don't know about many people here, but I believe stealing is wrong, no matter what the reason. I think most of us can agree with that, so then why do we support a government that steals from us, and gives it to another person?

Welfare is thievery from the men who earned it, to those who have'nt earned it.

[removeduser_487563287433]

Right.

How do you expect the state to pay for your defence?

When you are old will you gladly accept your rightful place as society's burden and quietly starve?

[Vladimir Lenin]

Right.

How do you expect the state to pay for your defence?

When you are old will you gladly accept your rightful place as society's burden and quietly starve?

1. I expect the Government to have a flat rate tax. Like say, 1000$ per citizen. It ought to be enough, considering I'm getting rid of welfare, pulling all troops out of other countries, getting rid of SS and Welfare.... etc.

Society's burden, never. If I can't get food or am too poor, I'll try to find a job. EVentually I'll be so desperate to survive I'd take nearly ANY job.

[Shaun]

1. I expect the Government to have a flat rate tax. Like say, 1000$ per citizen. It ought to be enough, considering I'm getting rid of welfare, pulling all troops out of other countries, getting rid of SS and Welfare.... etc.

$1000 will certainly not be enough, unless you wish for everything from the fire departments and road construction to street lighting to be privatised.

Society's burden, never. If I can't get food or am too poor, I'll try to find a job. EVentually I'll be so desperate to survive I'd take nearly ANY job.

Eventually you'll age and your health will deteriorate so much that you will not be fit to take any job. Do you wish people who are unable to work to starve to death?

[Vladimir Lenin]

$1000 will certainly not be enough, unless you wish for everything from the fire departments and road construction to street lighting to be privatised.



Eventually you'll age and your health will deteriorate so much that you will not be fit to take any job. Do you wish people who are unable to work to starve to death?

1. Yea, all of that would be privatized. Name nearly anything except the Courts, Military, and Police, and it would be privatized. Water? Privatized.

All we have to do is reduce our military, pull troops out of all countries and back to the U.S

2. Ok, I'm hoping that I would have saved money so that I'm not on the street deteriorating. I still live by a principle, one simple principle,

"I swear by my life and my love of it that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine."


3. Private Charities can take care of rare cases such as that.

[Problem Sleuth]

1. Yea, all of that would be privatized. Name nearly anything except the Courts, Military, and Police, and it would be privatized. Water? Privatized.

All we have to do is reduce our military, pull troops out of all countries and back to the U.S

Yes, privatize water. Because the people won't be forced to agree to the prices or go thirsty, correct? And don't say, "Lol, competition will bring down prices". We discussed this in other threads, Galt. It takes a huge investment and lots of time to build a whole new pipe system, and something tells me the company in charge won't be happy to simply give up their system to another. They will have the people at their knees, helpless.

Roads? No one but the rich would have any access to roads. Fire fighters? People would be hostage to them. It's perfectly concievable for the fire fighters to come with an agreement with the water company in charge. Deny water to other fire fighters in the local area, and in turn, they'll split the profit of the drastically increased rates. Alternatively, they can simply form a local monopoly, possibly combined with the above idea. Increased profit, which is what is in their rational self-interest. Education? You've just said goodbye to the success stories of the US of the poor turning rich (which is already rare enough). Take away their opportunity for education, and they'll no longer be able to advance themselves. The poor will lose the ability to turn rich to any reasonable extent, while the rich can still become impoverished. A system which will slowly become more imbalanced as time goes on. As the unskilled workforce increases, the demand for jobs will rise. Wages will lower as people will become more and more desperate. If you stop working, you get to starve to death. Even more people clamouring for unskilled jobs. "Oh, but I can get a better paying job". No, you can't. The job 'market' is saturated, so either you have to go for a lower price or someone will take your position. Why hire someone who wants 4.50 an hour and who's unskilled when they can get the same level of worker for 2.50 an hour? You have no savings, you're poor. The working conditions? Terrible. The safety of the products? Highly questionable.

2. Ok, I'm hoping that I would have saved money so that I'm not on the street deteriorating. I still live by a principle, one simple principle,

"I swear by my life and my love of it that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine."

Explain how that saves you from starving to death.

3. Private Charities can take care of rare cases such as that.

I think you're seriously overestimating the abilities of private charities. After all, everyone will begin adopting the mindset of 'do what benefits me the most'. There is no concievable direct benefit for you in giving any money to a charity. Anyone who's rational who wants to serve themselves and only themselves won't give so much as a penny to charity.

[Shaun]

1. Yea, all of that would be privatized. Name nearly anything except the Courts, Military, and Police, and it would be privatized. Water? Privatized.

All we have to do is reduce our military, pull troops out of all countries and back to the U.S

Absolutely ridiculous to privatise such things as roads, street lighting, and the fire department.

2. Ok, I'm hoping that I would have saved money so that I'm not on the street deteriorating. I still live by a principle, one simple principle,

"I swear by my life and my love of it that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine."

So basically, you are serious about people starving to death if they cannot support themselves then.

3. Private Charities can take care of rare cases such as that.

But private charities are no guarantee. They rely solely on the good will of others, and a nation which wishes to totally abolish welfare of any kind will likely not have much good will.

[removeduser_487563287433]

1. I expect the Government to have a flat rate tax. Like say, 1000$ per citizen. It ought to be enough, considering I'm getting rid of welfare, pulling all troops out of other countries, getting rid of SS and Welfare.... etc.

Society's burden, never. If I can't get food or am too poor, I'll try to find a job. EVentually I'll be so desperate to survive I'd take nearly ANY job.

Engage the old brain matter, you are old. You may not be able to work. What then, starve quietly?

[ShockBlast]

1. I expect the Government to have a flat rate tax. Like say, 1000$ per citizen. It ought to be enough, considering I'm getting rid of welfare, pulling all troops out of other countries, getting rid of SS and Welfare.... etc.

Society's burden, never. If I can't get food or am too poor, I'll try to find a job. EVentually I'll be so desperate to survive I'd take nearly ANY job.

You are so funny do you study economics,do you know what stupid thing you said?
Can a homeless american pay 1000$?
So you like to be a slave all you life good for you when i`m going to be 50 i`m going to be a very happy person with a very big pension,and i mean big.
Ok so you want the averge Joe to pay 1000$ when he earns like 800$ a month and Gates should pay only 1000$ when he has 1 000 000 a month?
I don`t think that half of the US can pay that sum one a month.
I think you here refering to a flat % of you income,were you?
Even if you here it`s still very wrong you can`t ask Joe give 16% of his income of 800$ that is 128$ because 128$ is much for a person like Joe.
If you ask 16% from Billy who has a income of 1 000 000$ a monthly 16% it`s not much.
You need a progresive rate mate something like 0% for people under 400$ a month,5% for people under 1000$ ... 40% for people like Billy.

[Rush Limbaugh]

And it later ruled differently. But then of course that time it must have been wrong...

No they did not. And again there already and always were direct taxes in the constitution.

ou are so funny do you study economics,do you know what stupid thing you said?
Can a homeless american pay 1000$?
So you like to be a slave all you life good for you when i`m going to be 50 i`m going to be a very happy person with a very big pension,and i mean big.
Ok so you want the averge Joe to pay 1000$ when he earns like 800$ a month and Gates should pay only 1000$ when he has 1 000 000 a month?
I don`t think that half of the US can pay that sum one a month.
I think you here refering to a flat % of you income,were you?
Even if you here it`s still very wrong you can`t ask Joe give 16% of his income of 800$ that is 128$ because 128$ is much for a person like Joe.
If you ask 16% from Billy who has a income of 1 000 000$ a monty 16 it`s not much.
You need a progresive rate mate something like 0% for people under 400$ a month,5% for people under 1000$ ... 40% for people like Billy.

Well his 1000 wont work but the fair tax unfortunately will. It would work if we did all he said. The big problem is over spending not a lack of money.

[Mythos]

The irony is that even Neanderthals took care of those who couldn't take care of themselves. Seems like some instances of the home sapiens are less evolved that them.

That's the bad thing about us messing with natural selection. The "bad apples" just keep going and polluting the gene pool.

[Gary88]

Society's burden, never. If I can't get food or am too poor, I'll try to find a job. EVentually I'll be so desperate to survive I'd take nearly ANY job.

you realise that old people are almost unemployable...no wait you read Ayn Rand you probably believe like all rich people work so much harder than those with less money.

[bushbush]

welfare and Social Security are necessary.

imagine US didn't create those during the Great Depression?

plus, it's a way to balance out wealth in the society.

the country with the least rich-poor disparity is often the happiest while the country with the largest gap (with least social security and welfare) is often the most unhappy and unstable country.

[Sidmen]

I love it, totally ignore the fact that the welfare states are the most stable, happy, and rich countries in the world, and go straight into believing that corporate slavery is far superior.

I'd support the abolishment of the welfare state only if the minimum wage was matched to what someone can actually live on - instead of what people can sort of exist on.

But nah, they're the 'poor' they're basically slaves and should be treated like crap while being paid jack. Just face it, only rich people like pure capitalism - because they're lucky enough to have the correct connections/money/and support to ream the 'lil guy'

[molonthegreat]

I think it would be better if it was like charity so the people who want to help the ones that are to lazy to work can give them food and money that so the rest of us don't have to.

[Rush Limbaugh]

Eventually you'll age and your health will deteriorate so much that you will not be fit to take any job. Do you wish people who are unable to work to starve to death?

Its amazing we havent gone extinct

Why is the job of the government to take care of you? Thats the job of your family. And who knows if he will get old. He could die tomorrow.

[LoZz]

Its amazing we havent gone extinct

Why is the job of the government to take care of you? Thats the job of your family. And who knows if he will get old. He could die tomorrow.

1. not everyone has a family that can take care of them
2. cost of living doesnt get any cheaper as you get older, families are struggleing to put food on the table as it is, now the burdern of having even more people?
3. in the past, you will notice it was rare to live beyond 60(working age), now we live quite a bit longer. and medieval man never had to fill out a tax return.
4. so you suggest apon retirement we all throw ourselves under buses? is living beyond 65 now selfish?

1. I expect the Government to have a flat rate tax. Like say, 1000$ per citizen. It ought to be enough, considering I'm getting rid of welfare, pulling all troops out of other countries, getting rid of SS and Welfare.... etc.

Society's burden, never. If I can't get food or am too poor, I'll try to find a job. EVentually I'll be so desperate to survive I'd take nearly ANY job.

i dont think you fully understand econominics. and if i was an employer and i had the choice of employeeing an older person who can hardly move, or a young 19/20 student who i can pay a lot less, guess who i will pick? its kid with braces and freckles over mr incontinence pants any day.

[Rush Limbaugh]

1. not everyone has a family that can take care of them

Then you have your neighbors. Most do have family however.

cost of living doesnt get any cheaper as you get older, families are struggleing to put food on the table as it is, now the burdern of having even more people?

Thanks to the government.

in the past, you will notice it was rare to live beyond 60(working age), now we live quite a bit longer. and medieval man never had to fill out a tax return.

Not because of welfare we dont.

so you suggest apon retirement we all throw ourselves under buses? is living beyond 65 now selfish?

I suggest if you intend to retire put some money away. Besides we have SS here. You dont need welfare for retirement.

[Shaun]

Its amazing we havent gone extinct

It isn't because anyone with sense has long since realised that those who cannot help themselves need to be helped by the government.

Why is the job of the government to take care of you? Thats the job of your family. And who knows if he will get old. He could die tomorrow.

Because you and a few other people seem to have radically different ideas on what the government should and should not do, which under "not do" seems to include helping its citizens who cannot help themselves.

[Rush Limbaugh]

It isn't because anyone with sense has long since realised that those who cannot help themselves need to be helped by the government.

Thats for sure.

Because you and a few other people seem to have radically different ideas on what the government should and should not do, which under "not do" seems to include helping its citizens who cannot help themselves.

Blame the constitution

was refering to the ideas, not you personally. though you are old

Read the above.