an appeal to pity

[Romanman]

so there i was in my girlfriends car surrounded by a bunch of (USA) liberals, me the mostly libertarian boy raised by an very conservative family. Her family talked for an a good 15 minutes on how republicans hate poor people, don't want to help poor people, and are ignorant etc. 'twas a beautiful strawman argument that we've all heard before from party politics. But being the free thinker that i try to be i wondered are there any reasons other than pity that we should have a welfare system. The only argument i've ever heard of for the welfare system is that we should feel sorry for poor people and give them money. Maybe i just haven't been listening to the right democrats, or maybe its just that the pathos argument for welfare is better than the logos one.

So my question to you the users of this forum is.... is there a reason other than pity or altruism for a society to have a welfare system. your help would be much appreciated

[Claudius Gothicus]

So my question to you the users of this forum is.... is there a reason other than pity or altruism for a society to have a welfare system. your help would be much appreciated

Welfare? well that's kind of a wide concept.

A welfare system can be applied to many different areas and in very different ways. Giving checks to poor people is not the same as protecting jobs, creating a well funded and well administered educational system or establishing a public health care one.

The first creates lazy and unproductive individuals, the second one generates confidence and belief in society among individuals.

[Phier]

Protip: Find another girlfriend

I think the closet reason for welfare is that some people feel guilty over not being poor, and some rich people fear the poor.

[Tiwaz]

Protip: Find another girlfriend

I think the closet reason for welfare is that some people feel guilty over not being poor, and some rich people fear the poor.

There is actually a good reason to fear the poor. They tend to be huge in numbers, and if left to get really desperate... No longer have anything to lose.

Thus, for social stability it is good to ensure reasonable minimum quality of life. Issues rise when that quality of life exceeds benefits of working.

[CiviC]

There is actually a good reason to fear the poor. They tend to be huge in numbers, and if left to get really desperate... No longer have anything to lose.

Thus, for social stability it is good to ensure reasonable minimum quality of life. Issues rise when that quality of life exceeds benefits of working.

I agree, you don't want to stay in a mansion surrounded by shantytowns.

[Vizsla]

Empathy is not pity. It is a part of what it means to be human.

Insurance. One day you might lose your job unexpectedly out of the blue and not find another, so your wife divorces you and gets to keep the house and the kids and you’re left with a suitcase and a few personal possessions. This really happens.

Interdependence. There are lots of jobs that no one wants to do – like cleaning. Only desperately poor people will do them. You need people to be doing these jobs or else society would not function. These people can only exist if there is a welfare system.

[ivan_the_terrible]

There is actually a good reason to fear the poor. They tend to be huge in numbers, and if left to get really desperate... No longer have anything to lose.

Thus, for social stability it is good to ensure reasonable minimum quality of life. Issues rise when that quality of life exceeds benefits of working.

This. Welfare helps to keep the status quo.

[removeduser_4536284751384]

how would unemployed people live? Many of them are young and have no savings and can't get another job in these economic conditions. Mind you they should obviously show they're looking for a job and whatever. It should be the bare minimum, below the minimum wage obviously. But they need it to get by. It's a good safety net.

And are you also complaining about disability benefits? They should be quite generous. I mean if someone has a great job and one day due to no fault of their own they're paralysed, you would just let their relatives struggle to support them, or worse, let them die in poverty?

Interdependence. There are lots of jobs that no one wants to do – like cleaning. Only desperately poor people will do them. You need people to be doing these jobs or else society would not function. These people can only exist if there is a welfare system.

what? Since when do people with regular employment get welfare?

[Bernem]

what? Since when do people with regular employment get welfare?

This is not uncommon in Germany, if your job pays less then the estimated minimum requirements then you additionally receive welfare.

[Phier]

This is not uncommon in Germany, if your job pays less then the estimated minimum requirements then you additionally receive welfare.

Which I'm sure encourages people to find a better job

[Bernem]

Which I'm sure encourages people to find a better job

It barely encourages people to find a job at all, because what you get from a 40h week + welfare is only slightly more than what you would get from welfare alone

[Vizsla]

what? Since when do people with regular employment get welfare?

This is not uncommon in Germany, if your job pays less then the estimated minimum requirements then you additionally receive welfare.

In the UK we have tax credits for people in employment to rebalance the tax system. There are benefits for people with children, for people in essential jobs, like nurses, who have to live in expensive areas, all kinds of things. We Brits are crazy like that. My retired father gets a ‘winter fuel payment’ which he doesn’t need and very sensibly spends mostly on wine because that is fuel for the soul.

[Phier]

It barely encourages people to find a job at all, because what you get from a 40h week + welfare is only slightly more than what you would get from welfare alone

I know my point, democratic socialism is stupid.

[removeduser_487563287433]

so there i was in my girlfriends car surrounded by a bunch of (USA) liberals, me the mostly libertarian boy raised by an very conservative family. Her family talked for an a good 15 minutes on how republicans hate poor people, don't want to help poor people, and are ignorant etc. 'twas a beautiful strawman argument that we've all heard before from party politics. But being the free thinker that i try to be i wondered are there any reasons other than pity that we should have a welfare system. The only argument i've ever heard of for the welfare system is that we should feel sorry for poor people and give them money. Maybe i just haven't been listening to the right democrats, or maybe its just that the pathos argument for welfare is better than the logos one.

So my question to you the users of this forum is.... is there a reason other than pity or altruism for a society to have a welfare system. your help would be much appreciated

Um... right, well firstly the USA already has a welfare system, it's just unfashionable so Republicans like to pretend it doesn't exist. This attitude has lead to a grotesquely expensive and ineffecient welfare system, with social security that is a disaster waiting to happen and a health system that leaves Americans spending more on it than the people of any other liberal democracy in the western world yet getting the least out of it, with millions with no coverage at all.

As to your question, is there any reason other than pity why we should have a welfare system? Well, if you want to know what a developed country with no welfare looks like I would suggest you read up on the work and life of Mr. Seebohm Rowntree.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seebohm...udy_.281899.29

Britain's efforts to improve the state of the working class in the early 20th century, which included shocking items of socialist welfare such as... pensions.... meant that slowly the country picked itself up from unstability and meant that whereas Russia fell to communism and Italy, Spain, Portugal and Germany fell to fascists, Britain maintained democracy. Average lifespans went up, as did health, as did personal wealth. Victorian Britain was the shining example of the Republican "drip drown" theory on making the people of a democracy wealthier, and it left us with millions upon millions living in horrific conditions.

"I see no glory in an Empire that can rule the waves yet not flush its own sewers". That was Churchill's position on the matter. I'm guessing explaining to you that Churchill was a Conservative, then a Liberal, then a Conservative in his career is going to make your head spin.

[removeduser_4536284751384]

is there a reason other than pity or altruism for a society to have a welfare system

is there any reason other than empathy for you not to secretly murder everyone you don't like?

[removeduser_487563287433]

But what you are discussing is how far welfare should go whereas the OP is questioning the value of any welfare whatsoever.

[Romanman]

thanks for some good answers, I've really never had too much empathy for poor people, probably because there are very few poor people who i've actually liked or respected. a point for welfare that i liked was to keep make sure the poor don't become to desperate or angry, another point that i liked was that if someone gets unlucky they will have a safety net.

"Um... right, well firstly the USA already has a welfare system, it's just unfashionable so Republicans like to pretend it doesn't exist. This attitude has lead to a grotesquely expensive and ineffecient welfare system"
Ferrets54
because the USA system is inefficient what are some current systems i should look at too see a functioning welfare system?

[Aetius]

thanks for some good answers, I've really never had too much empathy for poor people, probably because there are very few poor people who i've actually liked or respected. a point for welfare that i liked was to keep make sure the poor don't become to desperate or angry, another point that i liked was that if someone gets unlucky they will have a safety net.

"Um... right, well firstly the USA already has a welfare system, it's just unfashionable so Republicans like to pretend it doesn't exist. This attitude has lead to a grotesquely expensive and ineffecient welfare system"
Ferrets54
because the USA system is inefficient what are some current systems i should look at too see a functioning welfare system?

I agree. Poor are (and always have been) the dregs of society. Sure...some of them are victims of terribly unfortunate circumstance, but most not. In my experience they are uncreative, unintelligent, and unmotivated. The poor range from hindering society to having a negligible effect.

Welfare keeps these people relatively content, probably keeps crime rates lower as well.

Also have you all noticed there are a lot of insane people? I swear like 3/4 of homeless people are insane or partially insane.

[Vizsla]

I agree. Poor are (and always have been) the dregs of society. Sure...some of them are victims of terribly unfortunate circumstance, but most not. In my experience they are uncreative, unintelligent, and unmotivated. The poor range from hindering society to having a negligible effect.

Welfare keeps these people relatively content, probably keeps crime rates lower as well.

Also have you all noticed there are a lot of insane people? I swear like 3/4 of homeless people are insane or partially insane.

Such opinions were quite popular in Germany around the 1930s and 1940s.
Work brings freedom?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arbeit_macht_frei


Unless your post is dosed with a heavy dose of sarcasm, in which case good work.

[removeduser_487563287433]

Ferrets54
because the USA system is inefficient what are some current systems i should look at too see a functioning welfare system?

Scandinavian countries are always the set examples. Sweden is an extensively capitalistic free market economy with an extensive welfare system and some of the highest quality of life and personal wealth levels in the world.