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.
Why Many "Conservatives" or Republicans Often Oppose Welfare
IF they really oppose welfare, WHY don't they speak up against things like the billion$ sent to Israel that get funneled back to the MIC as corporate welfare or the $12B Trump proposes paying farmers as a bail-out for the problem he created?
Israel doesn't produce pregnant women that don't bother raising their own kids.
It's not true. If you are born with an IQ of 80, you have a tough row to hoe no matter how hard you work. You will probably fail despite your best efforts. At some point you realize the futility and give up.
Oh, stop making sense. Common sense has no place in this forum.
And as a taxpayer, and someone who works in social services, I understand that there are going to be people who abuse privileges. There is no system or organization in the world where this doesn't happen.
But how do we reduce the likelihood of abuse? The people who are shouting "end welfare!" aren't coming up with any reasonable solutions or alternatives.
How do you go about that? Got any viable logistics?
Good point.
We tried that in the U.S., too, for more than a century. It didn't work. It wasn't adequate. People still starved and died from illness. Hence, the modern safety net.
Anyone who has a better idea, by all means share it. Share it with your U.S. reps and senators, too! Don't keep such good news to yourselves.
For those who are on welfare,
1. They forfeit their right to vote until the money is paid back in full with interest
2. Any children born will be immediately put up for adoption
3. Pay them to have sterilization
Fairness is a conservative notion. Seeing people who appear to be partying like you might without having to work or pay for it.
Empathy is liberal. Seeing people who look to be disadvantaged through no fault of their own. And without the means to party or pay like you can.
No doubt others can improve on or even refute these statements.
What an interesting dichotomy. While nominally a liberal (still registered Democrat with many "liberal" views) many of my political positions are more conservative.
Perhaps a moderate finds a role for both empathy and fairness.
For example, both attributes are needed for immigration policy. There should be fairness (to those Americans negatively impacted by immigration with an understanding that relatively (no one I know believes in absolute) "open" borders are not economically viable). But then also fairness when fashioning various policies that reflects an understanding that forces that drive immigration are, in part, US-created (agriculture under NAFTA, drug issues).
Once policies are devised, some empathy then for those negatively impacted by them - perhaps by funding various programs to improve in-country security in some Central American countries ... or even by understanding that many simply seek better lives for their children. No need to open the door maybe but then there's bound to be some bleeding when a very rich country shares borders with those much poorer.
The top 30% of the people pay almost all the taxes but receive virtually no benefits while the bottom 50% pay no taxes but rake in virtually all the benefits.
Tell that to Jared Kushner who hasn't paid a penny in taxes between 2009 to 2016 on his net worth of 324 million dollars.
The uber wealthy use tax loop holes that are completely legal to do and many don't pay a dime.
You're absolutely right and people that don't want to confront the problem honestly are cowards. Because the "solution" isn't to undertake the care and feeding of the lower quintile of the population. The challenge is how do we eliminate this aspect of human variability?
So whether the solution lies in genetic engineering, or simply the suppression of this population (through sterilization as you mention, or simply neglecting it), is moot. We either must fix it or live with the consequences. Now obviously some solutions involve a degree of suffering that most people would see as cruel or callous, so if you eliminate those you must by necessity choose the lesser of several "evils".
for compassion.
If people were rational about this issue, instead of being emotional and ideological, we could come to a quick consensus of expedient and "least cruel" actions and solve this issue within a few generations.
As usual though, the screamers and cowards will probably derail any such attempt.
Because some of things you suggest are Unconstitutional and since it would be the state that would manage this, it also sounds communist.
Why Many "Conservatives" or Republicans Often Oppose Welfare
IF they really oppose welfare, WHY don't they speak up against things like the billion$ sent to Israel that get funneled back to the MIC as corporate welfare or the $12B Trump proposes paying farmers as a bail-out for the problem he created?
Precisely. Sure you can oppose how a specific welfare program is structured (or any government policy) as wasteful or nonproductive. But in a broader sense ... well, Hoonose just said it:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoonose
Because when you study modern money you learn that taxes are there more to control what people and businesses do than raise revenue to run the federal gov't. If we the people and our elected officials decide to promote this or that program, then we might end up with favorable tax preferences.
It is extremely challenging to strike a good balance between helping people who have fallen on hard times and supporting people who refuse to work for years or even generations. The best outcome is always to have the maximum number of Americans working and making a good income for themselves.
I like your reasoned, coherent explanation. But the truest, most basic reason that "Conservatives" tend to oppose welfare is their greed. Their main focus is accumulating wealth (via lower taxes, weakened business regulation, low wages to employees, etc.) and they can't bear anything getting in the way. Many, like Trump, spout a delusional self-aggrandizing narrative of making it all on their own merits (we now see more clearly than ever how this is a total lie on Trump's part), and they use that as an excuse. That's what they do - they "conserve."
You're right that the examples you mention are grating, but Conservatives use that as an excuse. They could agitate for massive funding for education and jobs programs, but they don't.
Israel doesn't produce pregnant women that don't bother raising their own kids.
Israel has Universal Healthcare.
We build them weapons and then give them our own money to buy them.
You would think the Anti Welfare crowd would be demanding we end all monetary support for them since we are subsidizing their healthcare.
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.
