Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't get your logic there. The fact that there are more and more people depending on welfare is actually the result of that social-Darwinist attitude
In fact, it's not. The growth of the welfare-dependent class is a direct result of a LACK of a social-Darwinist attitude. The welfare-dependent are kept housed, fed, and clothed by artificial means in direct contrast to the Darwinist theory of survival of the fittest. The consequence, of course, is that the welfare-dependent class is growing at a rate higher than that of the population who is forced to pay to artificially support them.
You should have had access to better than that. I'm truly sorry that happened to you. There is honestly no reason whatsoever that you should have been trapped in a subpar school. The fact that such continues to happen should be a national matter of shame.
It would have been great to go to a private school. And this isn't just about me. This is also about other kids who got lost in the system. There were kids who did make the best of it, and did do alright. However, one thing that is sad is that many kids just get lost in it. Certain talents go unnoticed because of the way the public schools sometimes work. I know that in my high school, it was the worst in the county. I went there because I lived in that district. The talented who made the best grades, some of them have left that county, never to return. The few that I know who return are coming back to be teachers.
It should be considered a matter of national shame. However, there is a big gap between the best and worst of the school system. Those who have the money to go to better schools will go elsewhere. Those who don't will languish. And then there is my family. Middle class, but bought a house in an area because it was cheaper. Didn't know what we were getting into.
In fact, it's not. The growth of the welfare-dependent class is a direct result of a LACK of a social-Darwinist attitude. The welfare-dependent are kept housed, fed, and clothed by artificial means in direct contrast to the Darwinist theory of survival of the fittest. The consequence, of course, is that the welfare-dependent class is growing at a rate higher than that of the population who is forced to pay to artificially support them.
In Europe they are not considered taxes, which again shows that our systems are too different to be compared.
The system might not be social-Darwinist, but what I said is that in my view most Americans are social-Darwinist. Would be interesting to do a poll asking who wants to end welfare. I bet a whole lot of Americans would say yes.
And that attitude has lead to a situation that forced politics to react. I am not sure they reacted the right way, but they had to react, after all no civilized country can sit back and watch a significant percentage of its population drift into poverty, maybe even starve. That would lead to unrest and crime and what not.
I'm not sure about "most Americans." But there is certainly a very vocal, very powerful minority in the US that has abdicated any moral sense of obligation to their fellow citizens.
There is a big difference between a voluntary sense of obligation , as in the form of charitable donations or helping a friend or family member in need and the involuntary confiscation of a quarter of my income by the government to use as they see fit. Which is why Conservatives consistently donate much more to charity than Liberals do. Conservatives believe in helping their fellow man but they don't believe it's the governments job to play Robin Hood because it takes away the free will of the giver to decide for themselves who to help. That's not even taking into account how much of our taxes are just wasted by government red tape etc. And no one is stopping you from voluntarily paying more taxes if you can't think of anything better to do with your money than handing it over to the federal bureaucracy.........just don't expect me to be as stupid as you are in the name of "fairness"
If so... Europeans are paying even more regressive taxes, as such are considered taxes in the U.S.
Quote:
The system might not be social-Darwinist, but what I said is that in my view most Americans are social-Darwinist. Would be interesting to do a poll asking who wants to end welfare. I bet a whole lot of Americans would say yes.
And that attitude has lead to a situation that forced politics to react.
And as usual, the federal government is making a bad situation even worse. Hence, the Obama Admin's growing welfare population.
There is a big difference between a voluntary sense of obligation , as in the form of charitable donations or helping a friend or family member in need and the involuntary confiscation of a quarter of my income by the government to use as they see fit. Which is why Conservatives consistently donate much more to charity than Liberals do. Conservatives believe in helping their fellow man but they don't believe it's the governments job to play Robin Hood because it takes away the free will of the giver to decide for themselves who to help. That's not even taking into account how much of our taxes are just wasted by government red tape etc. And no one is stopping you from voluntarily paying more taxes if you can't think of anything better to do with your money than handing it over to the federal bureaucracy.........just don't expect me to be as stupid as you are in the name of "fairness"
There is a big difference between a voluntary sense of obligation , as in the form of charitable donations or helping a friend or family member in need and the involuntary confiscation of a quarter of my income by the government to use as they see fit. Which is why Conservatives consistently donate much more to charity than Liberals do. Conservatives believe in helping their fellow man but they don't believe it's the governments job to play Robin Hood because it takes away the free will of the giver to decide for themselves who to help. That's not even taking into account how much of our taxes are just wasted by government red tape etc. And no one is stopping you from voluntarily paying more taxes if you can't think of anything better to do with your money than handing it over to the federal bureaucracy.........just don't expect me to be as stupid as you are in the name of "fairness"
The US seems to be inefficient. A lot of money is wasted in health care and the military as well.
Donating is nice, I like to donate. But the organizations receiving donations can't provide a systematic, reliable solution that covers all of society.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
