NationStates Jolt Archive

I myself am a firm believer in the welfare state, i believe in 99% income tax and no inheritance for the over 20's ect. Lots of welfare ... Meh whats your opinion? (looks round) VOTE COMMUNISTS CHILDREN!

I myself am a firm believer in the welfare state, i believe in 99% income tax and no inheritance for the over 20's ect. Lots of welfare ... Meh whats your opinion? (looks round) VOTE COMMUNISTS CHILDREN!

Just curious, if you have 99% income tax, why even get paid? What are you gonna do with that 1%? Buy an apple or something? How are you gonna live and help the economy with no money?

Just curious, if you have 99% income tax, why even get paid? What are you gonna do with that 1%? Buy an apple or something? How are you gonna live and help the economy with no money?

Its sort of a joke. I have no humour. indeed, if i could be bothered i would TYPE LIKE THIS... to scare discworld fans. Thats the sort of humour i have.

Welfare is ok, but it really can't compare to actually getting rid of capitalism. Keeping people alive is one thing. What really matters is teaching them how to free themselves. Welfare can't do that. As long as the Left focuses purely on getting a welfare state and not on attacking the underlying system, things won't really change a lot.

I myself am a firm believer in the welfare state, i believe in 99% income tax and no inheritance for the over 20's ect. Lots of welfare ... Meh whats your opinion? (looks round) VOTE COMMUNISTS CHILDREN!
Unrealistic, unworkable, dependency-inducing.

Wealth redistribution is immoral.

If there is a problem, wealth redistribution only treats a symptom, and not the problem.

Welfare is ok, but it really can't compare to actually getting rid of capitalism. Keeping people alive is one thing. What really matters is teaching them how to free themselves. Welfare can't do that. As long as the Left focuses purely on getting a welfare state and not on attacking the underlying system, things won't really change a lot.
Preach!

Welfare is ok.

I had no idea Letila was still around.

Wealth redistribution is immoral.

I wouldn't say that, considering most people's inability to do well for themselves, either from natural disadvantages, or because they've received less opportunities because of where they were born.
However I would tend to agree that wealth re-distribution just treats the symptoms, and not the cause of this problem. To treat the cause we'd have to give everyone the same environment and genetic modification so... idunno

I would say that, considering most people's inability to do well for themselves, either from natural disadvantages, or because they've received less opportunities because of where they were born.

I guess you mean "wouldn't say that."

What about those things that you have listed gives reason to force people to turn over a portion of their own production?

However I would tend to agree that wealth re-distribution just treats the symptoms, and not the cause of this problem. To treat the cause we'd have to give everyone the same environment and genetic modification so... idunno

If there is a problem, it lies in our definition of property.

I had no idea Letila was still around.

Ah yes, I'm still here and still fighting the cappies.

Ah yes, I'm still here and still fighting the cappies.
I thought you were gonna drop out of highschool to make a stand against the system. And run away from home to live in the forest. So. What did Wagner ever do to you?

I thought you were gonna drop out of highschool to make a stand against the system. And run away from home to live in the forest.

Well, by the time I got to that, I had already graduated, and I figured I could do more good staying in society than by hiding in the forest, anyway.

What did Wagner ever do to you?

Well, he did contribute heavily to Nazism, but other than that, not much.

I myself am a firm believer in the welfare state, i believe in 99% income tax and no inheritance for the over 20's ect. Lots of welfare ... Meh whats your opinion? (looks round) VOTE COMMUNISTS CHILDREN!
A little wacko, but welfare is necessary in many cases. If you use it to lie around and watch soaps, then no. But if, like my mom now, are using it to help you while you actively look for a job, then great!

Well, by the time I got to that, I had already graduated, and I figured I could do more good staying in society than by hiding in the forest, anyway.
Ah right. Living in a forest community growing your own veggies wasn't that appealing afterall eh?



Well, he did contribute heavily to Nazism, but other than that, not much.
He didn't contribute anything. He was already dead then. Hitler was also a vegetarian. So you might as well try to rid of those.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10310305&postcount=2

Well, he did contribute heavily to Nazism, but other than that, not much.
Uh ... Richard Wagner, the compser, died in 1883. How in the world could he have contributed to Nazism?? :confused:

While I'm a socialist myself, you have to give people some incentive to work. All basics taken care of, luxuries must be worked for.

Uh ... Richard Wagner, the compser, died in 1883. How in the world could he have contributed to Nazism??

He contributed heavily to nationalist and proto-fascist ideas that Hitler later made into Nazism.

What about those things that you have listed gives reason to force people to turn over a portion of their own production?

Sorry, I don't understand the question

Try 15 - 20% flat income tax. the abolition of the majority of the welfare state, inheritance tax halfed or divided by a third.

Sorry, I don't understand the question

Why does natural misfortune necessity government imposed misfortune?

Why does natural misfortune necessity government imposed misfortune?

Bloody good question.:)

He contributed heavily to nationalist and proto-fascist ideas that Hitler later made into Nazism.
Ahh!

So then, we should dishonor Einstein because his theory of relativity was later used to bomb Hiroshima and Nagasaki, revile Marconi because his telegraph has been used for all sorts of propaganda, and disown any of the thousands over the years who have worked on electricity because the light bulb and television and detenators and batteries and thousands of other products dependent on electricity have been placed to a multitude of nefarious purposes, yes? :)

Good point, Eustrusca. Though Wagner was quite the anti-semite.

Good point, Eustrusca. Though Wagner was quite the anti-semite.
So was the rest of Europe at that time.

Good point, Eustrusca. Though Wagner was quite the anti-semite.
So what?

Good point, Eustrusca. Though Wagner was quite the anti-semite.
I didn't know that. Thanks. He still wrote great music though. :)

How you doin' Bitchybabie? Still hangin' in? :fluffle:

I didn't know that. Thanks. He still wrote great music though. :)

How you doin' Bitchybabie? Still hangin' in? :fluffle:

lmao, "Bitchybabie." :D

The government should provide everyone with two (very basic meals) a day, seven white t-shirts every year, seven white boxers a year, a two-room apartment (one is a bathroom, the other is the sleeping/living room), one set of sheets, one blanket, one roll of toilet paper every week, and healthcare for life.

If you want anything else better than that you have to work for it. If you want to have kids, you have to work for them (no children allowed in state apartments!).

Of course, the government can then regulate curfews for the apartments, what times the apartments open and close, and so forth.

The government charges everyone the appropriate tax rate which can be gotten out of if one donates time to a state construction project (a la Habitat for Humanity), gives 52 rolls of toilet paper, seven white t-shirts, seven white boxers, and a state-approved set of sheeting and blanket to the government (who will then throw them into distribution).

lmao, "Bitchybabie." :D
Heh! Has a nice ring to it, don't it! :D

I didn't know that. Thanks. He still wrote great music though. :)

How you doin' Bitchybabie? Still hangin' in? :fluffle:

Doin' great.:fluffle:
Been busy campaigning for office in my region.
Take care, sexy.

Heh! Has a nice ring to it, don't it! :D

I'm going to walk up to a random girl and call her that. Just for kicks. :p

Doin' great.:fluffle:
Been busy campaigning for office in my region.
Take care, sexy.
Ooo! Ooo! Ooo! Not only did she fluffle me, she called me "sexy!" Woo hoo! WOOT! :D

I'm going to walk up to a random girl and call her that. Just for kicks. :p
Yeah, you do that! LOL! Might get more "kicks" than you bargained for ... as in "ass-kicks!" :D

Yeah, you do that! LOL! Might get more "kicks" than you bargained for ... as in "ass-kicks!" :D

I was thinking "nut kicks." ;)

ANYHOO...let's stop hijacking...

Why does natural misfortune necessity government imposed misfortune?
If done correctly, government imposed misfortune causes less suffering than naturally imposed misfortune.

If everybody requires one $item to live and, by circumstance, you have five, it does you much less harm to take one of your $items and give it to someone who, by circumstance, has none than to let that person die, or worse, to cause them apply force to take not just one of your $items, but all of them. As the government's business is the protection of people, preventing crime from happening by forestalling the desparation that arises when people do not have enough of $item to live certainly fits within their mandate.

That said, welfare should provide the minimum necessary to forestall that state of affairs. Survival level.

Unfortunately private charity is not a reasonable substitute as it is terribly inefficient in that it tends to over-compensate in the the small areas of need that are it's defined focus, and not compensate in any others. This is exacerbated by patterns of donations. People with the most resources typically donate more to charity, but the bulk of their donations do not go to charities that provide basic support, but rather to charities that address cause celebre or non-essential items (art museums etc.)

While government is inefficient in its bureaucracy, it can be watch-dogged by the populace to ensure that it's operations remain transparent and reasonably efficient, and has a mandate of supporting the masses, as derived from the mandate for protection.

I was thinking "nut kicks." ;)

ANYHOO...let's stop hijacking...
Hehehe! Ouch! That gave me a twinge! :p

Hijacks iz phun, but you're right. [/HIJACK]

While I'm a socialist myself, you have to give people some incentive to work. All basics taken care of, luxuries must be worked for.

Agreed. Personally, I don't think that people should be excluded from education, healthcare and other public services simply because they can't afford it. Someone who can afford to pay for it can pay for the welfare state. The very rich won't miss it. "Government imposed misfortune" is completely exaggerated. A welfare state doesn't mean 100% tax rate in everyone earning more than £100,000.

Agreed. Personally, I don't think that people should be excluded from education, healthcare and other public services simply because they can't afford it. Someone who can afford to pay for it can pay for the welfare state. The very rich won't miss it. "Government imposed misfortune" is completely exaggerated. A welfare state doesn't mean 100% tax rate in everyone earning more than £100,000.
The very rich have their money in Switzerland, the Caymans etc.....

VOTE COMMUNISTS CHILDREN!

Very subtle....:rolleyes:

The very rich have their money in Switzerland, the Caymans etc.....

Whyever not, ensure the grasping hands of the lower hands are opposed.

I didn't know that. Thanks. He still wrote great music though.

True. There's no denying that.

You ever wonder who welfare is supposed to help?

Let me qualifiy my question:

Lets say you and your buddy were walking in a field, and you slipped and fell down a well. You are okay, just about 15 or so feet down in a well that had been carelessly left open, or the top had rotted away. The fact is, you are down a well, and can not easily get out. Now your buddy, he can not help you get out directly (he does not have a rope or a ladder), but he can promise to leave and come back with a rope or a ladder. If your buddy tells you that he will come back and save you with a rope or a ladder, would you try really, really, really hard to get out before he returns?

The answer is, of course, no.

You would wait for him to return, and toss you the rope.




Now, if you had fallen down the well by yourself, you would try really, really hard to get out. You would stack rocks, pull out bricks, scratch, and claw, and free yourself...


The problem with welfare is that life if full of such wells -- car wrecks, medical problems, debt, layoffs, etc, etc, etc, etc... ad nauseum. Some of the wells, if we should be so unlucky to fall down them, such as a serious injury, we can not possibly hope to climb out of on our own. We need help. But many, many of them we can manage on our own. Welfare teaches us that we never need to try to get out on our own, because there will always be someone with a rope to pull you out. So it seems that many, many people sit at the bottom of very shallow wells, not lifting a finger to even try to pull themselves out. They lose the desire to even try to help themselves. In fact, I have seen welfare "victims" that get stuck on flat land, where there is no well.

Face it, welfare breeds apathy, defeatism, self-loath, and self destruction.

/me climbs off his soapbox, turns off the stage lights, and walks out the door.

Agreed. Personally, I don't think that people should be excluded from education, healthcare and other public services simply because they can't afford it. Someone who can afford to pay for it can pay for the welfare state. The very rich won't miss it. "Government imposed misfortune" is completely exaggerated. A welfare state doesn't mean 100% tax rate in everyone earning more than £100,000.
No, but then it is impossible to miss something that you never give up. The "very rich" will just dodge your attempts at taxation. It is the "not very rich", otherwise known as the "middle class", that will get fucked over.

I believe in personal responsibility with welfare existing only as a last resort and only available after you get a job. I support most kinds of welfare, but only if they are truly needed and the person displays at least some responsibility...a welfare state without accountability does nothing more than unfairly and unjustifiably redistribute the wealth of people who worked to create it to those who simply leech off of them and contribute nothing.

I had a girlfriend who was on welfare (housing, food stamps, etc.). She got preg by a psycho who left her (because he had thoughts of killing her and their son). She had enough of it and applied for college tuition. The way she tells it, they tried to talk her out of going to college and eventually working her way out of the spot she was in.
The thing was that the people she had to endure that lived in public housing, the outright fraud she saw being committed by just about all of them, made her realize that she wanted no part of it in her or her sons life. So she struggled through it all and got the hell out of there ASAP. I'll spare you all the details but her story is inspiring and I'm so glad I met them.
So my answer is that it's better to give people a hand and time to set their lives straight than to just abandon them and expect good things to happen. But limitless benefits to people who are freeloading scum to begin with is not something that society should encourage.

(DISCLAIMER: I'm not basing my opinion on her one anecdotal case but before I met her I was against any welfare at all. Now, I'm just aginst corporate welfare.)