It seems that more people have problems with welfare than not. Most people do not like the idea of someone taking their money and giving it to someone else. You say "Why don't you go earn your own money." The counter is that the people who receive welfare are incapable of at least momentarily of providing for themselves. That side that is pro welfare would say there is not enough.
Where do I stand. Well the conclusion that I have come to is not on either end of the spectrum, nor in the middle, it is somewhere far off on a radical island with ideas that however logical they may be would never be adopted. The thing is, that I do not see the current system working or any type of logical compromise anywhere along the spectrum.
Lets analyze the system. In a free market system life is dog eat dog. They only handout anyone is going to get is one that is freely given. So welfare is not a capitalist ideal, is it a socialist ideal? yes it is. Hopefully you have read my previous blog and understand that socialism in my view is not a negative thing but it is often misused which is negative and that a pure form of either economy is incapable of functioning.
So welfare is a form of socialism, yes. I say then if you choose socialism it has to be all the way. I point out that the problems come the government trying to keep its cake and eating it to. So if you implement a socialist idea you have to do it all. I say ok you want to take part in socialism you will, if you want money from the government then the government has the right to put you to work however they see fit. Give an individual the freedom to work on their own, attempt to allow them to provide for themselves, if they don't then with the government should have every right to force someone to work. I would suggest having some type of program where businesses reach out to employ people who would other wise be on welfare for maybe a type of tax break, but then we could potentially have road crews manned by otherwise unemployed. (just an example that comes to mind.)
So for the people that are handicapped, Social security, or injured virtually nothing would change at all. I have lived in the ghetto for many years and I have seen first hand the misuse of finances. I saw neighbors (of no specific ethnicity) Sit in front of their house with the door open and air conditioning running for hours,the tv on with no one home, (solution, energy cap.) Kids drinking soda's and fake juice by the gallons, individually wrapped snacks and just generally food with little or no nutritional value, (Solution, tighter food stamp regulations.)
Are any human rights up in arms, well I say they have the freedom to get a job, make money and spend it how they please(except for the energy part that is just irresponsible.) If however someone else is providing for them, well, who ever foots the bill should have the larger say in how it is spent.
In many forms these ideas are in existence but I feel they are not as socialist as they need to be to function properly. Maybe if you receive welfare for your children you would be required to not have any more or be incarcerated, or possibly subject to some kind of preemptive forced birth control maybe even sterilized. I mean really, no one has the right to be a burden on the rest of society, so if you cannot use your freedom to be responsible why should anyone be able to keep that freedom.
Man Shane you are harsh. No harsh is Free Market, every man for themselves. I am logical enough to see that if you are going to implement a system you have to do the whole package or else it will not work.
Where do I stand. Well the conclusion that I have come to is not on either end of the spectrum, nor in the middle, it is somewhere far off on a radical island with ideas that however logical they may be would never be adopted. The thing is, that I do not see the current system working or any type of logical compromise anywhere along the spectrum.
Lets analyze the system. In a free market system life is dog eat dog. They only handout anyone is going to get is one that is freely given. So welfare is not a capitalist ideal, is it a socialist ideal? yes it is. Hopefully you have read my previous blog and understand that socialism in my view is not a negative thing but it is often misused which is negative and that a pure form of either economy is incapable of functioning.
So welfare is a form of socialism, yes. I say then if you choose socialism it has to be all the way. I point out that the problems come the government trying to keep its cake and eating it to. So if you implement a socialist idea you have to do it all. I say ok you want to take part in socialism you will, if you want money from the government then the government has the right to put you to work however they see fit. Give an individual the freedom to work on their own, attempt to allow them to provide for themselves, if they don't then with the government should have every right to force someone to work. I would suggest having some type of program where businesses reach out to employ people who would other wise be on welfare for maybe a type of tax break, but then we could potentially have road crews manned by otherwise unemployed. (just an example that comes to mind.)
So for the people that are handicapped, Social security, or injured virtually nothing would change at all. I have lived in the ghetto for many years and I have seen first hand the misuse of finances. I saw neighbors (of no specific ethnicity) Sit in front of their house with the door open and air conditioning running for hours,the tv on with no one home, (solution, energy cap.) Kids drinking soda's and fake juice by the gallons, individually wrapped snacks and just generally food with little or no nutritional value, (Solution, tighter food stamp regulations.)
Are any human rights up in arms, well I say they have the freedom to get a job, make money and spend it how they please(except for the energy part that is just irresponsible.) If however someone else is providing for them, well, who ever foots the bill should have the larger say in how it is spent.
In many forms these ideas are in existence but I feel they are not as socialist as they need to be to function properly. Maybe if you receive welfare for your children you would be required to not have any more or be incarcerated, or possibly subject to some kind of preemptive forced birth control maybe even sterilized. I mean really, no one has the right to be a burden on the rest of society, so if you cannot use your freedom to be responsible why should anyone be able to keep that freedom.
Man Shane you are harsh. No harsh is Free Market, every man for themselves. I am logical enough to see that if you are going to implement a system you have to do the whole package or else it will not work.
