Taking Care of the Poor

[Bonzi]

Everyone should take care of themselves, but, for the portion of the population that can't for whatever reason, there should be pooled money for them to have, BUT.... it should be given to them with a bare bones budget of what they would need for shelter and food. They should receive the money WITH a budget of how they SHOULD spend the money, but, obviously, can do with it what they want.

They should be provided an "emergency" fund which can only be used for life threatening emergencies (medical). It would be in the form of a debit or credit card, and, if it is found that it's used for something else, they get cut off from that program.

 

[Snouter]

If a humanoid cannot take care of itself, it needs to be sterilized. What has happened that past 5 decades or so is extremely low IQ idiots getting taxpayer money and all they do is procreate their defective DNA.

 

[Bonzi]

If a humanoid cannot take care of itself, it needs to be sterilized. What has happened that past 5 decades or so is extremely low IQ idiots getting taxpayer money and all they do is procreate their defective DNA.

IF you give them a budget to follow, that shows they can survive with it, if they go over it's their own fault. That being said, instead of giving money, all other efforts should be applied like training etc.

 

[Norman]

If a humanoid cannot take care of itself, it needs to be sterilized. What has happened that past 5 decades or so is extremely low IQ idiots getting taxpayer money and all they do is procreate their defective DNA.

Welfare state is eugenics program that would make Hitler proud. The aim: towards idiocracy.

Study after study shows intelligent people not reproducing, as welfare bums are doing it at their expense.

 

[WillowTree]

Drug test them?

 

[Mac1958]

Within a capitalist system, there will always be people who have an innate, organic, natural capacity for creating wealth. They simply do it well, it's who they are. And most importantly, who they are is an excellent fit for the system under which they operate.

There will also be people who lack that capacity.

The challenge is finding a point of equilibrium that (a) allows for the dynamics & rewards of wealth creation while (b) avoiding the predictable social disruptions that will come with significant wealth inequality.

We'll probably be seeing those social disruptions pretty soon. Our choice.
.

 

[gipper]

Everyone should take care of themselves, but, for the portion of the population that can't for whatever reason, there should be pooled money for them to have, BUT.... it should be given to them with a bare bones budget of what they would need for shelter and food. They should receive the money WITH a budget of how they SHOULD spend the money, but, obviously, can do with it what they want.

They should be provided an "emergency" fund which can only be used for life threatening emergencies (medical). It would be in the form of a debit or credit card, and, if it is found that it's used for something else, they get cut off from that program.

Imagine what this nation could do for the poor and all Americans, if it did not spend trillions on the war machine.

 

[Bonzi]

Drug test them?

There are certainly things that can be done that are NOT cost prohibitive. But it's EASIER to just throw money and food stamps at them.
To simply cut off all programs at this point, well, I'm not sure what would happen - maybe nothing? Maybe a slow cut back on programs, forcing them to either survive or not.

They take the information down so those that are TRULY in need can be determined by the information collected.

 

[Bonzi]

Everyone should take care of themselves, but, for the portion of the population that can't for whatever reason, there should be pooled money for them to have, BUT.... it should be given to them with a bare bones budget of what they would need for shelter and food. They should receive the money WITH a budget of how they SHOULD spend the money, but, obviously, can do with it what they want.

They should be provided an "emergency" fund which can only be used for life threatening emergencies (medical). It would be in the form of a debit or credit card, and, if it is found that it's used for something else, they get cut off from that program.

Imagine what this nation could do for the poor and all Americans, if it did not spend trillions on the war machine.

We'd have a lot of money, but more and more would want a free ride.
Like parents, it's our job to make well and enable people to work. There will always be exceptions, but it's really not that hard to prevent the abuse of the system.

Money saved on military expense should go toward betterment of future generations

 

[NightFox]

Everyone should take care of themselves, but, for the portion of the population that can't for whatever reason, there should be pooled money for them to have, BUT.... it should be given to them with a bare bones budget of what they would need for shelter and food. They should receive the money WITH a budget of how they SHOULD spend the money, but, obviously, can do with it what they want.

They should be provided an "emergency" fund which can only be used for life threatening emergencies (medical). It would be in the form of a debit or credit card, and, if it is found that it's used for something else, they get cut off from that program.

That's pretty much what the welfare state does now, it just provides the poor with a subsistence level existence without providing them with the tools and incentives they need to become financially independent and NOT poor, which is what the goal SHOULD be. The current goal of the welfare state is just to keep the poor alive and buy their votes, in other words keep them poor and voting for the hand that feeds them.

The fact of the matter is that thanks to the current subsistence based configuration of the welfare state we have been and continue to waste enormous amounts of human potential not to mention mountains of money through inefficiency, waste and graft.

You also have to consider that the poor only receive around 13 cents of every subsidy dollar that gets paid out by government in the U.S., so our welfare state spends far more money subsidizing people that are NOT poor then it does helping people that are ACTUALLY poor. Which has to qualify it as one of the stupidest and most corrupt systems ever designed by mankind.

 

[Norman]

Within a capitalist system, there will always be people who have an innate, organic, natural capacity for creating wealth. They simply do it well, it's who they are. And most importantly, who they are is an excellent fit for the system under which they operate.

There will also be people who lack that capacity.

The challenge is finding a point of equilibrium that (a) allows for the dynamics & rewards of wealth creation while (b) avoiding the predictable social disruptions that will come with significant wealth inequality.

We'll probably be seeing those social disruptions pretty soon. Our choice.
.

Yup, intelligent people are very good at creating civilization and wealth...

Dumb people, not so much. But they are great at voting themselves the money of the intelligent people and reproducing with it. The children will then be raised by a single mom, who will ruin their lives and any creation potential that they had.

So yes, let's just redistribute the money to the dumb. Makes complete sense when they just could COPY what the responsible are doing...

 

[Mac1958]

Within a capitalist system, there will always be people who have an innate, organic, natural capacity for creating wealth. They simply do it well, it's who they are. And most importantly, who they are is an excellent fit for the system under which they operate.

There will also be people who lack that capacity.

The challenge is finding a point of equilibrium that (a) allows for the dynamics & rewards of wealth creation while (b) avoiding the predictable social disruptions that will come with significant wealth inequality.

We'll probably be seeing those social disruptions pretty soon. Our choice.
.

Yup, intelligent people very good at creating civilization and wealth...

Dumb people, not so much. But they are great at voting themselves the money of the intelligent people and reproducing with it. The children will then be raised by a single mom, who will ruin their lives and any creation potential that they had.

So yes, let's just redistribute the money to the dumb. Makes complete sense when they just could COPY what the responsible are doing...

It's not about intelligence, per se.

There are perfectly intelligent people who don't create wealth well, there are less intelligent people who are wealthy.

We know this, right? Did I really need to say that?
.

 

[Norman]

Within a capitalist system, there will always be people who have an innate, organic, natural capacity for creating wealth. They simply do it well, it's who they are. And most importantly, who they are is an excellent fit for the system under which they operate.

There will also be people who lack that capacity.

The challenge is finding a point of equilibrium that (a) allows for the dynamics & rewards of wealth creation while (b) avoiding the predictable social disruptions that will come with significant wealth inequality.

We'll probably be seeing those social disruptions pretty soon. Our choice.
.

Yup, intelligent people very good at creating civilization and wealth...

Dumb people, not so much. But they are great at voting themselves the money of the intelligent people and reproducing with it. The children will then be raised by a single mom, who will ruin their lives and any creation potential that they had.

So yes, let's just redistribute the money to the dumb. Makes complete sense when they just could COPY what the responsible are doing...

It's not about intelligence, per se.

There are perfectly intelligent people who don't create wealth well, there are less intelligent people who are wealthy.

We know this, right? Did I really need to say that?
.

Irrelevant observation. Intelligence IS the best predictor we have. You are making it tautological...

A other good predictor is conscientiousness, but these people that you want the money redistributed aren't exactly great about that, either.

But hey, let them have it all. The intelligent hard working people can just fuck off. I wonder how long it will take to devolve into a 3rd world country...

 

[Bonzi]

Everyone should take care of themselves, but, for the portion of the population that can't for whatever reason, there should be pooled money for them to have, BUT.... it should be given to them with a bare bones budget of what they would need for shelter and food. They should receive the money WITH a budget of how they SHOULD spend the money, but, obviously, can do with it what they want.

They should be provided an "emergency" fund which can only be used for life threatening emergencies (medical). It would be in the form of a debit or credit card, and, if it is found that it's used for something else, they get cut off from that program.

That's pretty much what the welfare state does now, it just provides the poor with a subsistence level existence without providing them with the tools and incentives they need to become financially independent and NOT poor, which is what the goal SHOULD be. The current goal of the welfare state is just to keep the poor alive and buy their votes, in other words keep them poor and voting for the hand that feeds them.

The fact of the matter is that thanks to the current subsistence based configuration of the welfare state we have been and continue to waste enormous amounts of human potential not to mention mountains of money through inefficiency, waste and graft.

You also have to consider that the poor only receive around 13 cents of every subsidy dollar that gets paid out by government in the U.S., so our welfare state spends far more money subsidizing people that are NOT poor then it does helping people that are ACTUALLY poor. Which has to qualify it as one of the stupidest and most corrupt systems ever designed by mankind.

Oh, I agree with that. All efforts should be placed on getting them jobs and/or trained to do them.

 

[Mac1958]

Within a capitalist system, there will always be people who have an innate, organic, natural capacity for creating wealth. They simply do it well, it's who they are. And most importantly, who they are is an excellent fit for the system under which they operate.

There will also be people who lack that capacity.

The challenge is finding a point of equilibrium that (a) allows for the dynamics & rewards of wealth creation while (b) avoiding the predictable social disruptions that will come with significant wealth inequality.

We'll probably be seeing those social disruptions pretty soon. Our choice.
.

Yup, intelligent people very good at creating civilization and wealth...

Dumb people, not so much. But they are great at voting themselves the money of the intelligent people and reproducing with it. The children will then be raised by a single mom, who will ruin their lives and any creation potential that they had.

So yes, let's just redistribute the money to the dumb. Makes complete sense when they just could COPY what the responsible are doing...

It's not about intelligence, per se.

There are perfectly intelligent people who don't create wealth well, there are less intelligent people who are wealthy.

We know this, right? Did I really need to say that?
.

Irrelevant observation. Intelligence IS the best predictor we have. You are making it tautological...

I know how it goes in partisan politics. Nice and simple: If you're on my side, you're smart. If you're not, you're dumb.

I see it here many times every day. I'm not ideological, so that's not how I see life.
.

 

[Norman]

Within a capitalist system, there will always be people who have an innate, organic, natural capacity for creating wealth. They simply do it well, it's who they are. And most importantly, who they are is an excellent fit for the system under which they operate.

There will also be people who lack that capacity.

The challenge is finding a point of equilibrium that (a) allows for the dynamics & rewards of wealth creation while (b) avoiding the predictable social disruptions that will come with significant wealth inequality.

We'll probably be seeing those social disruptions pretty soon. Our choice.
.

Yup, intelligent people very good at creating civilization and wealth...

Dumb people, not so much. But they are great at voting themselves the money of the intelligent people and reproducing with it. The children will then be raised by a single mom, who will ruin their lives and any creation potential that they had.

So yes, let's just redistribute the money to the dumb. Makes complete sense when they just could COPY what the responsible are doing...

It's not about intelligence, per se.

There are perfectly intelligent people who don't create wealth well, there are less intelligent people who are wealthy.

We know this, right? Did I really need to say that?
.

Irrelevant observation. Intelligence IS the best predictor we have. You are making it tautological...

I know how it goes in partisan politics. Nice and simple: If you're on my side, you're smart. If you're not, you're dumb.

I see it here many times every day. I'm not ideological, so that's not how I see life.
.

What the fuck are you talking about?

I am talking about intelligence, measured by IQ test. Not by some political compass test... Are you denying that IQ is the best predictor of success we have?

 

[Mac1958]

Within a capitalist system, there will always be people who have an innate, organic, natural capacity for creating wealth. They simply do it well, it's who they are. And most importantly, who they are is an excellent fit for the system under which they operate.

There will also be people who lack that capacity.

The challenge is finding a point of equilibrium that (a) allows for the dynamics & rewards of wealth creation while (b) avoiding the predictable social disruptions that will come with significant wealth inequality.

We'll probably be seeing those social disruptions pretty soon. Our choice.
.

Yup, intelligent people very good at creating civilization and wealth...

Dumb people, not so much. But they are great at voting themselves the money of the intelligent people and reproducing with it. The children will then be raised by a single mom, who will ruin their lives and any creation potential that they had.

So yes, let's just redistribute the money to the dumb. Makes complete sense when they just could COPY what the responsible are doing...

It's not about intelligence, per se.

There are perfectly intelligent people who don't create wealth well, there are less intelligent people who are wealthy.

We know this, right? Did I really need to say that?
.

Irrelevant observation. Intelligence IS the best predictor we have. You are making it tautological...

I know how it goes in partisan politics. Nice and simple: If you're on my side, you're smart. If you're not, you're dumb.

I see it here many times every day. I'm not ideological, so that's not how I see life.
.

What the fuck are you talking about?

I am talking about intelligence, measured by IQ test. Not by some political compass test...

Great, thanks.
.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Two things that will always be with mankind: War and Poverty.

It is futile and foolhardy to think you will stop either.
In all modern societies, for the most part - Poverty is a Choice.
You choose to work everyday to avoid it, or you choose not to work and you have it.
It is that simple.
Of course there are exceptions, mental illness etc. Those are the ones that we should take care of, not to merely enable the lazy to continue to be lazy.

 

[NightFox]

I know how it goes in partisan politics. Nice and simple: If you're on my side, you're smart. If you're not, you're dumb.
.

Bah..that's not how it goes in my book.

If you're on my side, I question your wisdom; if you're not, I question your morality and if you're a partisan lemming I question your sanity.

 

[Moonglow]

So far the religious rightist and secular rightist do not want to take care of the poor...