[EA]

Originally Posted by lvmensch

You can set a bottom. No you have no way to guarantee equality of outcome and I see no particular reason why one would even try. But setting a minimal outcome is workable. The question is where.

Up to the individual.
There's no other fair way to do it but let individuals decide what to do with their own lives.

[lvmensch]

Originally Posted by EA

Up to the individual.
There's no other fair way to do it but let individuals decide what to do with their own lives.

And let one year olds starve in the streets? People die in the parking lot at the hospital for lack of the funds to get treated at the emergency room? Really?

Some rational level of care is simply the mark of a civilized society.

[Code Stemi]

Originally Posted by lvmensch

People die in the parking lot at the hospital for lack of the funds to get treated at the emergency room? Really?

Highly doubt this is happening. We treat people at the hospital all the time who are uninsured and without financial ability to pay. They aren't out suffering in the parking lot dying.

[EA]

Yes. Let them starve to death. Let there be repercussions for bad behavior, laziness, unwillingness to do what it takes to make it. Let junkies lose their babies. Let losers starve and die. Let the poor do without. They can either sort themselves out or fall out of existence. Punishing me because they suck is not right.

[ij_bg]

If you don't see the problem, there's no problem I guess

[WestieJeff]

I believe the majority of society does not agree with you, just that simple.

Originally Posted by EA

Yes. Let them starve to death. Let there be repercussions for bad behavior, laziness, unwillingness to do what it takes to make it. Let junkies lose their babies. Let losers starve and die. Let the poor do without. They can either sort themselves out or fall out of existence. Punishing me because they suck is not right.

[EA]

Most of society is wrong.

[longviewJoe]

Originally Posted by EA

Most of society is wrong.

That's an interesting question really. Of course we wouldn't know the real truth unless it was a totally blind and concealed survey.

In the meantime we deal with our society as it is. Some agree with you we should let these people die and some people disagree with you. I suspect more people disagree with you but that's merely a guess on my part. In reality I think many of these people do die prematurely. When I think of the drug addicts living in the tunnels in Vegas I tend to doubt they have a long life expectancy.

[Cold Warrior]

Of course we wouldn't know the real truth unless it was a totally blind and concealed survey.

Truth is a survey? What does that mean?

[EA]

Originally Posted by longviewJoe

That's an interesting question really. Of course we wouldn't know the real truth unless it was a totally blind and concealed survey.

In the meantime we deal with our society as it is. Some agree with you we should let these people die and some people disagree with you. I suspect more people disagree with you but that's merely a guess on my part. In reality I think many of these people do die prematurely. When I think of the drug addicts living in the tunnels in Vegas I tend to doubt they have a long life expectancy.

Appeal to popularity doesn't appeal to me. I don't care if everyone else thinks the complete opposite of me.
They're wrong and I can prove it.

How? Well, we've been "fighting" homelessness my entire life and the homeless population has done nothing but increase. The easier we make it to be homeless the more people are willing to do it.
I'm against "helping" the homeless for the same reason you don't feed wild animals. Dependency.