[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 65 KB, 480x384, welfare[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2539252 No.2539252 [Reply] [Original]

idea

you collect welfare for 7 years.

after that, bam, you're done. no more welfare, forever.

i heard Michigan is pushing for this regulation. i fucking love that idea. if you're unable to an alternative revenue stream after 7 years of welfare, then whats the fucking point?

>> No.2539268

7 years?
What an odd number. Did you stay on welfare for 6.5 years or something?
Anyways, as far as I'm concerned two or three years should be plenty. 7 years is a very long time to be a useless git.

>> No.2539274

That is a fantastic idea. I had to go on welfare for a few months because of a back injury (my EI dried up after only 3 months...but that's another story); the abuse of the welfare system made it very difficult for me to get any assistance at all, and what I received was, frankly, a joke. It hardly covered my car payment, let alone rent, food, and utilities.

>> No.2539279

>>2539252
if you need welfare for 7 years, you're jerking the system, or you've got a problem you are not addressing - depression for instance

>> No.2539284

I would also like to see a program that would help people on welfare to find jobs. If you don't participate, you get no welfare.

>> No.2539288

>>2539284
I'd be surprised if they didn't already do something like that in most countries

>> No.2539301

In the UK they're considering that after 3 years of being on benefits you must do community service if you want them to continue.

Obviously for people who are disabled (and by that I mean super crippled) they don't need to do this.

This would be a good idea if the government stopped making pretty much most of the country redundant. I'm fucking annoyed that having a basic entry level job is now pretty damn difficult to get now. Even working in goddamn MacDonalds is now something you have to jump through hoops for.

>> No.2539311
File: 771 KB, 2796x2796, iotruecolor_galileo_big.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2539311

Am I an asshole for saying this:
Teenage mothers shouldn't be able to get welfare for more than one child. I know a young woman who had a kid when she was 15, and has now gotten knocked up again by a different guy (she is now 20). She doesn't work, and has no intention to, and her first kid (and soon second) was raised on welfare money. This isn't right. I work my ass off and pay a ton of tax, some of which is going to raise her undisciplined kids.

Pic unrelated

>> No.2539314

>>2539252
what you jerks don't comprehend is the effect that unemployment has on the mind of the individual. After a while you're just 'out there'. Unemployable because you've been unemployed. I was once long term unemployed and getting back into work and STAYING there was really hard, because psychologically I was in a different state of mind to everyone else. Oh, not to mention having to put up with everyone elses snobbery. It's easy to GET work, what's hard is keeping it when you're from a background of long term unemployment. The workplace is a competitive environment and people will use your difference against you to get a temporary feel good for themselves, even if it means you loose your position.

>> No.2539317

>>2539284
That's the case in most countries, you ignorant.

>if you're unable to an alternative revenue stream after 7 years of welfare, then whats the fucking point?
The point is to keep beggars from overcrowding the streets. And also to keep people alive and relatively healthy, especially when they have families. And to support the demand for basic goods and their distribution. And numerous other such considerations, that would not be obvious to someone that don't actually think about how society works.

>> No.2539319

>>2539311
>her undisciplined kids
You're overreaching. It's not the kid's fault he was raised on welfare, and being a single mother on welfare doesn't necessarily mean you're incompetent at disciplining children.

Try to examine your own thought processes with the same critical logic and impartiality that you should to other people's assertions.

>> No.2539321

>>2539314
The majority of people hate their jobs.
Get used to it.

>> No.2539325

>>2539314
That's because you live in a shitty country.

Where I'm from, being fired without a good reason is illegal. Filthy capitalists try to go around this by only hiring people for a fixed time, though. That should be made illegal as well.

>> No.2539343

>>2539314
It's fairly hard to get a job if you're unemployed for a long enough time.

Most employers will see their potential employee and think "this guy hasn't been in work for # years. It wouldn't be acceptable to employ such a person". You have to make up bullshit about how you looked for jobs everyday when you were unemployed. Anyone who's been unemployed for over 1 year hasn't been looking for jobs everyday. They get depressed at how they're never going to be unemployed, eat biscuits all day and watch loose women. So you can't get a job because employers turn you down because you've been out of work for so long. It makes no fucking sense.

>> No.2539347

>>2539319
Just to be clear, my post was about a change in welfare policy; my addition of "undisciplined" was really just an expression of my frustration.

>> No.2539352

>>2539325

THIS.

Temp agencies need to be illegal.

>> No.2539360

>>2539352
If you're chronically unemployed temp agencies are often the only ones that will hire you for any amount of time.

>> No.2539362
File: 108 KB, 333x500, 3288910815_7db743028e.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2539362

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDNzrj3X7dQ

>> No.2539364

>>2539301
>It's too hard to get a job
>We need more workers competing in the labour market
>If you still can't find a job you should starve
lawl

>> No.2539378

>>2539311
To be fair it is a bit hard to get the sort of eduction you need for someone to hire you when you've been raising a kid since middle school ended

>> No.2539379

I support OP! Additionally, I hope they use the welfare-exhausted dead to produce cheap nutrients for the people still on welfare.

Manna! Manna! Manna! Manna! Manna!

>> No.2539382

>>2539360

They are the reason decent, long-term jobs do not exist anymore. Why hire someone when you can exploit people through a temp agencies for cheap and get rid of them with a snap of a finger when you need to?

>> No.2539383

>>2539364
I know right.

I'm not even sure if the community service is the same community work that criminals do.

Imagine that. An old lady who needs benefits to feed her spacker son cleaning up leaves with skallies who tried to rob a petrol station.

>> No.2539393
File: 20 KB, 365x280, 1256950994711.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2539393

A few things everyone fucking forgets in these stupid arguments:

1.) Unemployment doesn't go below about 4% without inflation getting out of control. It's shortsighted to demand everyone gets a job, when there literally aren't enough to go around.

2.) A lot of the people on welfare have children for whom they care. Taking away their only revenue source will jack up childhood starvation rates.

3.) With no source of revenue and no way to buy the necessities, people will steal the necessities. A guy has got to eat. Remember point 1, there just aren't enough jobs to go around. "You might be tempted to say stick them all in jail!" but this is more expensive than the welfare system in the first place.

tl;dr: Modern society is a complicated thing and there are certain societal costs associated with living in a first-world country.

>> No.2539401

>>2539317
I hope that you don't view that as how a good society operates.

In the last few decades, welfare has become so common that when the welfare stops being distributed, the social explosion is going to be devastating. People will die by starvation, the elements, and by each others hands.

Our society is mentally incapable of leaving the system. People don't look friends and family for help any more. They look to the government. Whose fault is that? It is not my responsibility, not your responsibility, not anyones responsibility to help complete strangers. IT IS OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO HELP THE PEOPLE WE KNOW AND LOVE.

Welfare has taken a problem that used to be manageable, covered it up with a blanket, and now when the blanket comes off, all effects of the problem become amplified 100 fold.

>> No.2539403

WHAT THE FUCK HAS THIS GO TO DO WITH SCIENCE?

>> No.2539409

And what about people who are permanently disabled like paraplegics? I guess we should just toss them in a dumpster if they can't find work after 7 years?

They found a paralyzed caveman who lived to old age because a small tribe gave up significant resources to help him. It is an indicator of the first signs of a permanent settlement and civilization. That was thousands of years ago. We have come so much farther and have so much more to spare and yet people are even faster to throw out those less fortunate. What happened to survival of the species as a whole and community? What happened to making life for everyone better? These days it's all just me me me no matter what the cost.

>> No.2539410

>>2539403
You should care because you are never going to have a job.

>> No.2539415

Unemployment is a complex social problem with no 'quick-fixes'.

I was UNDERemployed for 6 years once, now, I have been in the same job for 4 years and I laugh at ever having given myself a hard time for having been unemployed, because now, I'm privy to the insane, idiotic and highly personal ways that the hiring/promotion system works.

It really is not what you know or who you know, but who you are ARE and how you will make the person look who gave you the job in the 1st place.

>> No.2539411

>>2539403
Economic anyalsys could be considered a mathematics-based field, and as this is Science & Math, it fits. Nigger

>> No.2539417

>>2539409
>survival of the species
>allowing inferior genes to survive

Fuck no, screw you.

I'm all for welfare, but people who are disabled from birth shouldn't be allowed to live.

>> No.2539418

>>2539403

Assuming you're a science major, there's a good chance you'll end up on welfare at some point.

>> No.2539424

>>2539401
Fuck the people we know and love. I'm in this for myself.

>> No.2539426

>>2539311
Punish the kid for the stupidity of his mother.

Makes perfect fucking sense.

Retard.

>> No.2539430

>>2539417
Well, most of the electors disagree. If you don't like it, fuck off back to Africa.

>> No.2539435

>>2539417
>people who are disabled from birth shouldn't be allowed to live.

It's called reciprocity and it's what separates us from most other animals.

>survival of the species
>allowing inferior genes to survive

Inferior genes? OK Hitler.

>> No.2539437

>>2539321

Not engineers, mathematicians and physicists.

>> No.2539438
File: 37 KB, 321x312, Observation.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2539438

It turns out the biggest drain on society is the inability to collect adequate taxes from corporations.


Your tax dollar contribution, while important to you, are mere pennies on the whole.

Our welfare system would be an acceptable, bloated, nuisance without any hiccups if the two parties actually decided to hold the rich accountable.

Instead, they have both convinced you that your fellow man is the problem.

>> No.2539440

>>2539417
There have been plenty of disabled people who went onto do great things.

Christ Stephen Hawking is a huge spastic and yet one of the smartest people on the planet.

>> No.2539443

>>2539417
YES!!! EUTHENIZE HAWKINS NOW!!!

>> No.2539447

>>2539426
It's not a punishment, it's a disincentive for slutty blonde teenagers. I don't think women should keep babies they can't provide for; it's not fair to put that cost on society.

>> No.2539450

>>2539430
>>2539435
>>2539440
>>2539443

HERP DERP

I really hope at least you are coherent and are not pro-abortion, then.

>> No.2539465
File: 37 KB, 300x420, stephen-hawking-and-his-first-wife-jane-1965.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2539465

>>2539417
I must point out that Hawking wasn't disabled from birth.

>> No.2539468

>>2539450
On the case of pro abortion I say let everyone abort their unborn child. I don't give a fuck. I'd even go as far as letting people killing disabled newborns spartan style if they wanted to.

But to kill EVERY single person who is disabled or considered not included in the master race is a bit too far.

>> No.2539485

>>2539468
And I say that if the child is going to grow up on welfare money, abortion should be decided by the state, hence by law based on the results of pre-natal tests, and not the parent.

>> No.2539490

7 years too generous.

>> No.2539494

>>2539468
>>2539485

And this is why no one lets engineers and math majors make laws.

>> No.2539498

>>2539485
You're asserting that children raised on welfare cannot become productive members of society.

>> No.2539505

>>2539498
No.

I'm asserting that disabled children will never be productive, hence it makes no sense to waste welfare money on raising them. Therefore, since the parent would have no reason to abort it (expecially since she's actually going to get money for it) such a decision should be left in the hand of those who are going to shell out the money.

>> No.2539559

>>2539498
>>2539505
You're forgetting that society would collapse without all those garbage men. It's all well and good having many intelligent people but you need someone to clean up those broken bunsen burners and shit.

>> No.2539570

>>2539559
I'm pretty sure quadriplegics make lousy garbagemen.

>> No.2539730

>>2539570
My regular garbagemen are completely healthy and they can barely pick up my trash.

>> No.2539839

>>2539409
Who decided that the paralyzed caveman was worth saving? The central caveman government? Where did the resources come from that kept him alive? Every caveman on earth?

My point: Locals chose to keep that caveman alive. They choose to make the sacrifices necessary to keep him alive.

>>2539426
I would argue that keeping a disabled child alive is punishment for the child.

>>2539440
Steven Hawkins wasn't born disabled. And when he did become disabled, he didn't rely on government welfare to keep him alive. He pulled his own resources, and I'm assuming that the people close to him didn't leave him to survive all alone.

People need to start thinking with their fucking heads, and not with their hearts. We can't continue basing every single aspect of life on the misfortunes of others. Amazing how hypocritical the sympathizers are... they pretend to care about humanity by bashing the successful aspects, demanding to bring them down a notch to raise the average well being of the unlucky. If you bring down the happiness and successfulness of even a single person, you don't care about humanity at all, you only care about your fucked beliefs.

>> No.2539871

7 year NEETcation?

Where do I sign up?

>> No.2539880

>>2539252
Sure, great idea. What you end up with is an entire horde of unemployed homeless people begging in the streets. A fair number of them are going to resort to theft, which may well involve violence. Then they are arrested and go to jail. Jails are paid for by the taxpayers. In jail, you do not learn to be a better person: you learn to be a better criminal. Eventually they are released from prison back into the world. Not having any more marketable job skills than when they went in, and having the onus of being an ex-convict on them, they are shunned by most employers, and mistrusted by the rest. Many will resort to crime once again, and the cycle repeats. One way or another all of this (law enforcement, criminal justice system, prisons) are paid for by the taxpayers -- who also pay for the welfare system.

The whole idea is nonsensical.

>> No.2539901

>welfare for 7 years
wtf ?! We have welfare for fucking 6 months and I'm from a damned socialist country with free health care and all that shit.
After that you'll get so little that you have to go homeless and beg on the streets if you won't find a job.
Unless you're seriously ill in some way, but doctors are usually pricks so you're lucky if they sign the papers even if you deserve it.

Also, sage.

>> No.2539906

>>2539343
I've been unemployed for more than a year before.
When you have skills you don't take the first job that comes your way regardless of what it pays or what the work is unless you're in danger of becoming homeless. If you prematurely take just any job then you damage your marketability for future jobs because prospective employers look at your work history and ask "why did you go from working in an engineering lab to working in a gas station for 2 years?" and question your credibililty as to whether or not you know what you claim to know.

>> No.2539912

>>2539252

not only do i endorse a lifetime of welfare for all humans all across the globe,

i also support moneyless society as endorsed by zeitgeist movement and venus project , jacque fresco

machines will do the work

fuck you

>> No.2539914

>>2539839
>Steven Hawkins
The troll is strong with this one.

>> No.2539985

>>2539906
AH

But that is my problem. 3 years on the dole and I admit it's my fault I'm unemployed. I don't apply for many jobs. I just don't want to work in a fast food joint or as a cashier. I'll take soul crushing data entry jobs or warehouse jobs over those jobs. I understand I have to do stuff I don't want to do to get ahead in life but it's just those jobs I do not want.

I will say volunteer work is surprisingly hard to get into. I had a volunteer job for a few months but I only had 2 weeks of actual work done because there was no interest in said job. It took me ages just to get that volunteer job

>> No.2540000

>>2539252
7 years seems long as fuck, but is this all in one go (continuously) or throughout your lifetime?

It makes sense if this is the "lifetime total" of welfare you can get, because it accounts for a person losing their job (twice) and having 3.5 years to get another (twice).

...

Come to think of it, that's still long as fuck, but at least thye're putting a goddamn limit on it.

>> No.2540005

>>2539985
This is the greatest flaw in our generation, thinking they deserve anything without working shit jobs to achieve it.

Seriously, fuck you, no one's going to make you the CFO of Microsoft simply because your lazy ass wants it.

Working at McDonald's can go on a resume. Hell, any customer service can go on a resume for the goddamn FBI and US Marshals, let alone any other job.

But what're you going to put now? "Hurrr I'm a lazy bitch on welfare for 3 years">

>> No.2540028

it's time to stop beating around the bush.

5% of white people are on welfare, 30% of blacks are on welfare, and 13% of hispanics are on welfare.

Now just look at the population trends per race.

Welfare promotes poverty

>> No.2540029

>>2539279
The years are cumulative, so they give you seven in total

If you have a few problems, for example depression, followed by a drug problem later in life, followed by getting laid off even later

>> No.2540030

So you cut the welfare off, and then what?
Those people don't just disappear, and now they're desperate.

>>2539284

They already do that in Canada.
You need to prove you're actively looking for a job, and they may occasionally ask you to do some work like roadside or park cleanup that you must then do.

>> No.2540035

>>2539301
you got a job a mcdonalds?

WOE DUDE YOUR SO FUCKING LUCKY!!

they turned me down because i didn't have enough experience and wasn't suited for the role.

fucking shit man,

>> No.2540038

>>2540005
I'll work shit jobs just not as a cashier or flipping burgers.

Anything other than that will do.

>> No.2540040

Why do we care so much about welfare? It doesn't cost nearly as much as the military does. Let's cut that first, THEN worry about the smaller costs.

>> No.2540043

>>2540030
Survival of the fittest.

A population of lazy welfare fucks wouldn't last very long. In a generation or two, the message would be sent that your survival is in your own hands.

>> No.2540051

>>2540043
What do you mean they wouldn't last very long? They'd break into your house and kill you, then take your shit. They'd last longer than you would.

This kind of situation is why we have welfare in the first place. Not having mobs of the hungry poor is what makes us a first-world country.

>> No.2540059

>>2540040
Face it, welfare promotes poverty.

Research has shown that for every 1 point a persons IQ drops, that person makes $1,000 less per year.

25 million welfare fucks having an average IQ 20 points lower than the average working citizen equates to ($1,000 x 20 IQ points x 25,000,000 people) = $500 billion economic output ANNUALLY

fuck military spending, welfare costs america more than just the check in the mail.

>> No.2540067

>>2540051
many options here

sick the military on them
own a gun and defend yourself from aggressive scum

if they were smart, they would figure out a way to stop having 10 kids apiece, and eventually there would be enough to go around for everybody.

>> No.2540068

Both me (19) and my mother (40) are on disability. The way it works, is every four years there is a review to see if you still qualify for disability payments. There are two supports: Income support, and employment support.
In the duration of receiving income support, you must either do community service work, be actively looking for jobs, be attending therapy, in school or training.
With our combined government handout, we receive just enough to live in a government community apartment, pay bills, and get a little food.
We're both under a hundred pounds, and relatively malnourished, despite a budget. Without the support, we'd be living on the streets.
So, just to tell you, there are types of welfare that require you to get off your ass and do something about it, or you get kicked off.

>> No.2540072

>>2540059

But you see, unlike your hypothetical "cost to the economy," we can actually measure how much we waste on the military. Plus, your whole premise is stupid. Earning 100k and spending 10k isn't the same as earning 90k and not spending anything. You can't lose what you never had in the first place.

Plus, welfare is kind of why we have countries in the first place. People don't want to starve when they fuck up with their money. If they wanted that to be the case, they'd go live in the woods somewhere.

>> No.2540081

I have to say, I really like OP's (and Michigan's, but haven't read in to it yet) idea. The only problem is allt he gray area in between

And..just to put it out there, I'm not sure how much people get in welfare, so feel free to correct me.

But what about the single parent already working two minimum wage jobs, what happens to him/her after 7 years of working and working and working and not being able to save up for much because the money goes in to feeding the kid(s)?

What about the disabled to live on their own, but with an attending nurse...and have to pay that nurse as well? I know they can get jobs, of course, but the market is very limited for them. Low wage desk positions, at most.

Am I misunderstanding OP's description of welfare or what? Because while it'll help keep control of the people that take advantage of it, it'll fuck over a LOT of other people who are in more permanent positions of not-so-financially stable

>> No.2540083

>>2540067
So now you've got the military murdering civilians, civilians murdering each other, and people starving.

Or you know, we could just force the rich to hand out some of their cash.

Christ, you're dumb.

>> No.2540084

>>2540068
Just think. If the system wasn't abused, you and your mother could probably receive 2x as much as you currently recieve, and the system would cost less than it does today.

But instead you must share what little is available with dirtbags and shitheads. You can thank your fellow citizens for shitting out babies like a pez dispenser while knowing full well they are financially unable to do so.

>> No.2540089

>>2540084
Or if the rich just handed out 2x as much money. That's a whole lot easier than somehow making humans not take advantage of things.

>> No.2540091

ITT: racists

>> No.2540095

>>2540083
military doesn't need to murder them all. starvation will solve that problem

military only needs to murder the violent scum that think they deserve things because they exist.

have fun pretending that successful people dumping their fruits over your ghetto will solve anything. must be nice living in fantasy land.

>> No.2540096

>>2540067
So you'd rather bear the expense of maintaining a secure home compound, bodyguards, and a police state than paying for welfare.

Says alot about your priorities.

>> No.2540099

>>2540083
>force the rich to hand out some of their cash
Wow you are an evil person. So steal from one group because they're "rich".

You know, you're rich compared to everyone in Africa, how about you work the job you currently do, and we take 95% of your earnings and give it to people in Africa.

You're such an absolute piece of shit. Class-warfare is the most disgusting thing in the world.

What you're REALLY saying is "Take from someone else and give to me."

You're a thief. Nothing more. Fuck off.

>> No.2540103

>>2540091
can't ignore facts brother.

i could pretend that race plays no role in life, but i prefer to live in the real world.

>> No.2540111

>>2540095
Works for europe, and they've got a smaller GDP per capita than we do. So uh, yeah, it does work. Not really a fantasy, sorry you hate poor people for whatever reason.

You're really bizarre.

>> No.2540112

Welfare is stupid by design. That money should be spent re-training individuals and getting them self-sustainable. Free dole is just throwing away valuable tax dollars.

>> No.2540114

>>2540096
Now your talking. Instead of handing out cash to the undeserving, we can pay people to do jobs, like protecting the population from scum.

>> No.2540118

>>2540084
Yes, that makes me mad, especially because I'm in school, and my mother is doing vocational training and community work.
Hell, if I ever reproduce, it'll be when I'm *NOT* on welfare, and am financially stable. Anything else is just ridiculous.

>> No.2540121

>>2540111
LOL

I bet it works in Europe. I'm sure the welfare society of Europe live happy lives, hand in hand with the people they steal money from.

>> No.2540127

how about this? you collect welfare for ZERO fucking years, because we don't have any money to give to people who don't work

ZERO

>> No.2540128

Sociologist here

Most people don't collect aid year after year. It's usually a shorter thing than that.

Also, won't work. Go study some urban sociology.

>> No.2540135

>>2540112
Often (for example, now) people are on welfare because there are fewer jobs than there are people. How do you suppose someone should get retrained for a job if there are no jobs left to be retrained for?

This is kind of something we've got to deal with as a country, because automation has really reduced the amount of jobs that are actually needed. Our current solution is to hire a shitload of managers and service industry people who just do make-work, but as we can see with the current economy, this isn't a long-term solution.

Eventually we'll have to start handing out money, because there's just not going to be that much work left to be done.

>> No.2540138

I'VE GOT IT

The reason so many people are on welfare is because of how job titles have been renamed to make them sound more fancier than they really are.

I've glanced through job lists thinking "what the fuck is this job? Oh it's a garbage man job. Why not fucking say that instead of calling it REFUGE COMMUNITY SPECIALIST"

>> No.2540141

>>2540099
Take your faux righteous indignation and shove it up your ass. 95% of a billionaires income still leaves the billionaire filthy fucking rich. 95% of average Joes income means average Joe dies in the street.

The two are not remotely comparable.

Oh and if forcing someone to pay to support society is "theft" then standing by and doing nothing while people starve when you can save them is "murder".

I'd rather be a "thief" than a "murderer".

>> No.2540144

>>2540059

>Research has shown that for every 1 point a persons IQ drops, that person makes $1,000 less per year.

This is entirely due to the fact that IQ is the most valuable form of intelligence in a capitalist society.

>> No.2540145

If job shortages are the problem, why not rip out automated machinery from all the factories? Ban it. Ban the unions as well.

Everything used to be built on assembly lines in the past, and things were NOT so expensive that they could not be afforded.

>> No.2540146

>>2540135
Part of the problem, indeed.

People need to read:
William Julius Wilson
Massey and Denton
Elijah Anderson

>> No.2540149

>>2540144
Bell Curve I assume? That book has been panned left and right. IQ can be an indicator of things, but it's not the causal factor.

>> No.2540153

>>2540145
Unions help the poor for the most part

>> No.2540155

>>2540138
You know what?

....I agree.

A couple of years ago, I would have taken any job I could get that paid above minimum wage. The reason I skipped over several was because they sounded too fancy and I figured it was something I wasn't qualified for.

Fucked up.

>> No.2540156

>>2540135
Public works, government funding of research and small business loans are far better methods in alleviating unemployment than free money to the poor.

Welfare has proved it accomplishes nothing and only makes the poor more dependent.

>> No.2540160

>>2540043
>Survival of the fittest.

I'm not sure that means what you think it means. Your job and income is meaningless if some desperate n‌igger fucking kills you for your wallet in a parking lot. And no, that gun probably won't save you.

>>2540067

This shit is more expensive and personally dangerous than just funding welfare. Not to mention using the military against a countries citizens is entirely indefensible, not least of which because they would not stop at the homeless.

>> No.2540162

>>2540121

Uh, they do?
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/lif_hap_net-lifestyle-happiness-net

Also, taking money from the rich isn't stealing. If anything it's reparations, because they're the ones who stole it from everyone else in the first place. We shouldn't be obligated to respect their weird obsession with making their dollar-count go up, because it tends to actively hurt others. Rights are determined by the majority, and I think we've decided that there's no right to "the sweat of your own brow," no matter how much Ayn Rand thinks there is.

>> No.2540165

>>2540141
Cut me a break. You're admitting that people shouldn't be treated equally based on income, so why should the rich give a fuck about the poor? You don't care about them, thus they will never care about you.

Also, if you see someone starving the streets and it upsets you, why don't YOU fucking feed him? You know, instead of leaving him on the street to die while you go write a letter to your congressman or some shit.

>> No.2540169

I find it interesting that people forget that they are animals.

If I could kill off a ton a people just so I could have a increased quality life I would do so. This has nothing to do with being insane or delusional. It's the way the world works.

We see it in "nature" The alpha male gets all the girls and is successful. He might even kill beta males so he can spread his genes.

You know that guy who is CEO of some big company? Do you think he really gives a fuck about someone who is poor? No because he doesn't benefit him but that poor guy might even be taking some of his taxes.

The reality is YOU DON'T CARE about people you don't know/love/met ect... Think about some guy who lives exactly 5 miles away from you. If he were to die it would have no affect on your life. However let's say your neighbor dies it will have an affect on you IF you knew them.

Darwinism is Evolution and we're slowing it down and maybe even stopping in it some cases which overall slows down the progress of the human species.

If we let Darwinism do it's job we wouldn't have to worry about someone living a horrible life because it would prevent it.

I hate morality. Thanks /sci/ for opening my eyes.

>> No.2540174

>>2540156
>makes people more dependent
[citation needed]

You think they like being on welfare? The culture of poverty argument is flawed in that it ignores structural factors, assumes homogeneity, and assumes the poor and non-poor are mutually exclusive in their mindset and behaviors.

>> No.2540175

>>2540155
Same here.

I'm afraid I'll apply for a job that's well above my reach and fuck up my life because I didn't know what to do but it turned out to be shelf stacking. Fuck sake. I'll take a shelf stacking job over using tax payer money

>> No.2540176

>>2540169
What's your home address? I want to improve my quality of life.

>> No.2540182

>>2540067
>own a gun

The poor will also have guns, and they'll have the drop on you. Also it doesn't matter that they can't afford guns because they will steal them.

>>2540095
>starvation will solve that problem

They're not going to sit around and wait to die. They're ALL going to turn violent when things get desperate enough.

>> No.2540189

>>2540156
I don't think you'll find any prowelfare people who are opposed to any of those things. I certainly don't.

The problem is for some of the anti-welfare people those solutions are not solutions at all as those programs still require you to pay taxes to support them. To these people the very concept of taxation itself is wrong.

>> No.2540192

>>2540165
It's not about rights or morals. The poor are the majority. We outnumber you (the rich), so if you quit paying us, we'll take your money against your will. What are you going to do about it? Your obsession with money isn't worth more to us than our health and happiness.

>> No.2540204
File: 214 KB, 200x220, Face - 12.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2540204

>On the internet
>Owns a computer and can pay for internet connection
>Probably lives in mom's basement or at college
>Bitching about poor people
>mfw

>> No.2540213

>>2540176

What a predictable response, even if you were serious I don't think you'd want to kill me. I for one work and provide for my family. Have you ever heard of priorities?

How about you go find the address of some crack dealer or murderer and kill him? That way instead of killing someone who doesn't affect society in a negative way you can kill someone who does.

>> No.2540206

>>2540169

What a predictable response, even if you were serious I don't think you'd want to kill me. I for one work and provide for my family. Have you ever heard of priorities?

How about you go find the address of some crack dealer or murderer and kill him? That way instead of killing someone who doesn't affect society in a negative way you can kill someone who does.

>> No.2540215

>>2540028
>citation needed

>> No.2540216

>>2540189
Taxation=theft types are myopic ideologues who are entrenched in their prescribed thought. It is of little utility to argue with them.

What I am more interested in is actually dealing with the problem. As I stated, well designed public programs that give a hand up instead of a hand out, work best in alleviating poverty. Allowing for chronic welfare is a horrible misdirection of valuable resources that could be used to actually deal with the root problem of poverty.

>> No.2540217
File: 121 KB, 480x375, 1288507054973.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2540217

>>2539417

Yeah, I have to say I agree on this; Looking at it from an abstract ethical standpoint (that's right feminists, I said it) it does more harm to let a disabled child to come into the world than to just skip to the next random set of genes and have a fully functioning human.

In other words, abort all defective fetuses.

Why is this an uncomfortable idea for some people?

>> No.2540218

>>2540182
LOL nice point

welfare is nothing more than blackmail payments to people that would otherwise go out and kill everyone

>> No.2540222

7 year comes from the amount in taxes they believe a normal person pays towards the welfare system if they work all their lives, so they believe that 7 years is the safety net allowed to each person.

regardless, i think that it's still way too long. You know that some people will still be able to jerk the system around to get more money for no work. They'll basically say that either they get welfare or their children suffer. then you take away their children and send them to prison. now the prisons are full, and you have assloads of children without parents who have to be taken care of by the government anyways.

I believe we can fix the system by saying, welfare for 1 year, and if you don't take care of your children and the government has to take care of them, you get locked up and have to work doing manual labor for the government until they turn 18. And if you don't work, then they pack on more penalties until you're int here for life. plain and simple plan, because these stupid fucks in our nation who take advantage of the welfare system by using children don't deserve to be part of society anyways, and they won't learn unless you throw serious shit at them, that's just how stupid they are.

>> No.2540224

>>2540165
>You're admitting that people shouldn't be treated equally based on income, so why should the rich give a fuck about the poor

Glad you admit class warfare is a reality and not just "the most disgusting thing in the world".

>Also, if you see someone starving the streets and it upsets you, why don't YOU fucking feed him
>implying I don't donate food and volunteer at a soul kitchen.

>> No.2540226

ITT: armchair social scientists

>> No.2540230

>>2540213
Hey man, it's a jungle just like you said. I am an animal and I want to kill you for your loot and sexy family.

Unless you think my morality should take into account you provide for a family. But if I remember correctly, you hate morality.

>> No.2540231

>>2540192
LOL, the poor do not outnumber the rich. Because in the eyes of the poor, lower middle class is considered rich, and they will not side with you.

Anyone living a comfortable live on their own merits will not side with you, and you will find yourself in someones house you broke into and get pistol whipped by 4 people.

>> No.2540234

While job searching I found out you need experience for the following jobs:

Burger King cashier
Software QA
Call centre/customer support
Data entry

Are you fucking kidding me? Those are entry level jobs. Like the name implies those are jobs designed for anyone without experience or skills to work and people wonder why so many people are on welfare.

>> No.2540247

>>2540230

Why are you being so ignorant?

We live in a society that has morals so we HAVE to follow them. But we can still reduce the morality of our society though. We're not going to turn into a jungle obviously. Abortion is immoral yet it benefits our economy and society. But being able to kill each other would make our society not work derp.

>> No.2540248

>>2540230
Please go on. I am interested to learn more about the mentality of mentally handicapped people.

>> No.2540252

>>2540216
The problem is that requires work and people HATE work.
They'd rather throw money at a problem and hope it goes away or at best throw together a half-assed one size fits all "solution" then call it day and at worse do nothing and hope the problem goes away on it's own.

>> No.2540266

>>2540222

trips speaks the truth, keep preachin' brother.

>> No.2540269

>>2540247
Social Darwinism is the rule of the jungle, which you openly professed.

You also professed that people do not care about others and should not care because we are self interested animals. So what is to stop me from killing you for personal gain?

You clearly have not thought this through.

>> No.2540281

>>2540252
What? No they don't.
People hate being meaningless. They love jobs that make them feel meaningful.

>> No.2540282

>>2540234

wrong, i worked at a call center during the summer (they didn't know i would quit so soon), and i've never had experience of any kind doing that kind of thing. YOu basically just take a simple computer test to demonstrate your communication and typing skills to them and based on those results and my interview i got hired the same day. Seriously, no entry level job "requires" experience or any shit liek that, quit making excuses for yourself.

>> No.2540290

Less welfare = more stupid niggers on the street = crime rates skyrocket

enjoy your stolen TVs, bro

>> No.2540291

>>2540269
The difference between him and you is this:

Human do not care about the majority of other people. For example, a couple black kids in Africa died of starvation and aids while I was typing this message. Did you shed any tears? I think not.

You counter this logic by denying it and equating it to actions that fall outside of human nature, aka emotion based actions.

>> No.2540294

>>2540282
I'm serious. At least half the call centre jobs I looked at said "requires previous call centre experience".

At one point getting call centre jobs used to be the most accessible job in the UK now it got handed over to call centres in India. In the last year I've only spoken to one person who wasn't Indian at a call centre. It's ridiculous.

>> No.2540296

>>2540290
point proven again

niggers collect welfare as a blackmail payment, as it's obvious that if they don't receive payment, people will get murdered.

>> No.2540300

>>2540281

because one isolated incident where you got lucky fairly represents the entire job market.

But yeah, getting a job isn't that hard if you know what you're doing. Don't apply to fast food/major retailers because they get dozens of applications a week and pay shit.

>> No.2540307

>>2540291
Ah yes, Stalin's infamous quote of "One death is a tragedy, a million is a statistic." Apathy about the poor is one thing, but I am more concerned with his logic here:

>If I could kill off a ton a people just so I could have a increased quality life I would do so.

A big leap from 'who cares about the poor' to 'i will kill for my own gain.'

>> No.2540325

>>2540269

If you kill me, you'll go to prison.

But I never said "We should be able to kill eachother" which is what you assumed. I just meant that morality should be reduced, morality can scale, for example stealing is not worse then killing someone. Do you agree?

If there is a logical reason to do something then we should do it but there usually isn't a logical reason to go kill someone. Killing a retarded baby would benefit a lot of people since their tax dollars don't go towards it. However killing someone who isn't retarded might make the economy worse.

>> No.2540337

>>2540325
>Killing a retarded baby would benefit a lot of people since their tax dollars don't go towards it

why don't you kill yourself then

>> No.2540341

>>2540307

No ones cares(the "love" version not the "they affect my life version") about the poor people so if we were to kill them off, our quality of life would increase because less of our taxes would go towards their welfare cheques.

This also applies to people with genetic diseases, we don't care about them yet our tax money goes towards them. If they were all to die then less of our tax money would go towards their medical bills.

I'm from Canada btw so eliminating people with genetic diseases would lower my taxes more then an american (i'm guessing)

>> No.2540346

>>2540325
>But I never said "We should be able to kill eachother"

You're right. You said: "If I could kill off a ton a people just so I could have a increased quality life I would do so."

>> No.2540355

>>2540325
>If you kill me, you'll go to prison.

Not if I evade the authorities thus naturally selecting my genes for greater likelihood of propagation.

Ain't Social Darwinism great?

>> No.2540360

WTF is wrong with people?

If the end result of something doesn't move us closer to a utopia, then why the fuck do we continue doing it?

Isn't the point of everything to eventually have a Utopian world where none of these problems exist?

>> No.2540361

>>2540337

Good one troll,

because i'm not a retard maybe?

I don't need hundreds of dollars paid to someone to take care of me when that person who takes care of retards could be working a job that actually makes an positive impact.

I can actually work and benefit the economy and society, not just draw and smile all day.

>> No.2540371

>>2540361
I am a drafter, my benefit to the economy and society IS to draw and smile all day!

>> No.2540372

>>2540099
Taking 95% of even 100,000 leaves the person with 5,000.

Taking 95% of 1,000,000 leaves the person with 50,000. Most of the richest people in america have WELL over 1,000,000.

Also, class warfare isn't asking the richest people to help the poorest people from starving to death while still maintaining a huge mountain of their wealth. Class warfare is convincing the poorest people that they will someday be wealthy enough that they shouldn't get a fair chance now because one day they will have all that money.

No one WANTS to have their money taken by the government. Thing is, some people realize that it's necessary to have a functioning society where people aren't starving in the street.

>> No.2540393

I dont think there should be any welfare at all. It is clearly a failure, and private charity is much more effective. Ask any proponent of welfare if they, themselves, have voluntarily donated their own money to government welfare because they are pleased with the results.

>> No.2540394

>>2540346

If I could kill a lot of people who do not benefit society(people with genetic diseases, people who live off welfare) and prevent them from being born and living and get away with it thus making society better for those without diseases I would do it.

>> No.2541089
File: 4 KB, 210x168, Troll.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2541089

There is some serious trolling in this thread and you are falling for it.

>> No.2541125

>>2539284
>would help people on welfare to find jobs.
That and
>If you're on welfare and you haven't already got a job, you're forced to do at least 15 hours/week of charity/social work (help in homeless shelter, in example) or you're not getting the next month chek, little fucker.

I haven read the whole thread and maybe this idea was adress, whatever.