Population question for right wing libertarians...
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
27-04-2012, 10:08 AM
RE: Population question for right wing libertarians...
(17-04-2012 10:52 PM)reverendjeremiah Wrote:  ...what do you do when the homeless rate approaches 30% without a welfare system?
Note: left wing anarchists have this problem covered. (feel free to ask)
Hmmmm.....Not really sure that the homeless rate has ever gotten that high. That's also a level that's in flux, so homeless or poor today does not necessarily mean homeless or poor forever.

Also not really sure what a 'left wing anarchist' is as it almost seems a contradiction in terms.

"IN THRUST WE TRUST"

"We were conservative Jews and that meant we obeyed God's Commandments until His rules became a royal pain in the ass."

- Joel Chastnoff, The 188th Crybaby Brigade
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-04-2012, 07:46 PM
RE: Population question for right wing libertarians...
You can't solve poverty by building houses. And you sure as hell can't solve poverty by getting rid of the government. Poverty is a much much larger issue then just put them in homes.

As a right wing libertarian I truly believe that you reap what you sow. If you choose to stay on welfare and food stamps then your life should be hard, you should live in poverty. BUT, if you choose to better yourself, get an education etc.. then you deserve that better job, that better life. I HATE the idea of everyone being equal I really do, this communist idea of equality that everybody earns the same, owns the same etc.. Because the reality is that not everybody is the same. If I go to university, get my degree, then I expect to be earning more then some high school drop out street sweeper. I bettered myself, I made good decisions and now I should reap what I sowed in the form of much higher wages.

Maybe it's my narcissistic personality disorder and not being able to relate well to people but I see this idea of building homes for all the homeless as.. well... jealousy. That is the word every time I think of when I hear on the radio or news people complain about well off people. Jealousy. Rather then pull them down to your level, you should strive to reach theirs.

Now I'm not for no welfare, I believe countries require welfare HOWEVER I believe welfare provides a specific purpose and from what I constantly see and read it is not fulfilling that purpose in the States. I believe welfare is only for transaction. If you lost your job for whatever, you get a SMALL unemployment benefit until you can find employment again. And by small I mean enough to cover bills and essential food, that's it. I would also suggest the States adopt the same as what we are about to get here, where the welfare places (we call it WINS here) take on your bills and pay them for you. You only receive vouchers that can be used for certain food (so no cigarettes or alcohol) and petrol vouchers. Correct me if the States already works like this.
The other welfare benefit I would support is parental support, where you get a small amount per child.

The idea of welfare is help people who are in hard places and to get them threw, get them jobs etc.. So the welfare should be designed for such a purpose. That means more control and less money.

Now before you rant on about how I'm not homeless and don't know what it's like to be poor I will have you know that I am 20, I come from a very poor background and I have always had to work crap jobs my entire life. Because I worked hard I have been able to purpose a brand new motorcycle, I am currently putting myself threw university and I own a rather nice computer I built. So I do know what it is like to come from a welfare dependent family and I know that it can be beat.

[Image: 3cdac7eec8f6b059070d9df56f50a7ae.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: