 |
|
David Floyd
|
|
The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Jan 1970 time: 05:24
|
|
That's what their parents are there for.
And if their parents aren't there, that's the responsibility of their parents, not me. If I wanted to support kids, I'd damn well have kids.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
David Floyd
|
|
The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Jan 1970 time: 05:24
|
|
And further, AS, for the kids who can't support themselves, etc. - if YOU feel bad about it, if YOU feel obligated to help them, then DO SO. Don't waste your time trying to convince me, just do what you think is right - if that means giving them money to feed them, if that means giving your job up so someone else can have it, then do so.
My problem comes in when you try to force me to do the same, whether or not I want to.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Albert Speer
|
|
Puerile Polemic
Mar 1999 time: 00:24
|
|
Berzerker:
i disagree... soon after the creation of the welfare state, we had a period of prosperity and moral strength (the 1950's)... our moral decay does not come from the gov't but from the late 1960's
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Ben Kenobi
|
 |
McGregornobi!
Oct 2002 time: 21:24
|
|
quote:
OK, then quit and free your job up for someone else.
|
That's what I just did. One of the fellows who will be working tomorrow is deaf, but very handy with tools, much more so than I.
I'm positive he will do better than I will at the job, and by quitting I got my boss out of a sticky situation.
quote:
How does this help those people? It doesn't.
|

Everyone I worked with if I meet up with them on the street will probably take me out for a beer, or something.
The fellow who got the job, well, if I do run across him again, he will feel the same way.
And then, when I do get a better job more suited to my talents, then everyone wins, including me.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
David Floyd
|
|
The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Jan 1970 time: 05:24
|
|
quote: Regardless of whether or not a system is based on goverment taxation of savings, it is still a system of entitlements (you are entitled to your own property afterall) and it still requires the work of someone else to make it worth anything. You could have all the money in the world, but if no one's there to work for it, it's meaningless. |
Except that money isn't meaningless - money is a concept that's represented, in the US, by currency. But the concept of money could just as well be represented by something else with enough perceived value to take the place of dollars or yen or deutschmarks.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Albert Speer
|
|
Puerile Polemic
Mar 1999 time: 00:24
|
|
quote: What if we reach a point where we young folks need to pay 101% of our income in order to keep social security going? |
shooting off of Malthus, this couldn't possibly happen... so many non-productive elderly consumers and so few producers would lead to economic ruin.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
David Floyd
|
|
The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Jan 1970 time: 05:24
|
|
AS,
quote: i disagree... soon after the creation of the welfare state, we had a period of prosperity and moral strength (the 1950's)... |
Actually, the post-war prosperity was created by the fact that World War 2 resulted, in part, in the US acquiring over 50% of the world's gold reserves, well over 50% of the world's manufacturing and industry, and around 50% of the world's combined GNP.
The WELFARE STATE was responsible for the prosperity of the 1950s? Give me a break 
BK,
Then if you feel like you received value for your decision, then you made the right one, and that's my point. Do what you feel is right - if quitting your job so someone else can have it makes you feel good, or makes you feel like you did the right thing, then fine. If giving to the poor makes you feel like you did the right thing, fine. Great, even!
The only problem comes in when you try to force me to make similar decisions.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Albert Speer
|
|
Puerile Polemic
Mar 1999 time: 00:24
|
|
damnit, dave and berzerker... look at this, you got me and ben against you when we should be uniting against the dirty communists like chegitz! 
quote: And further, AS, for the kids who can't support themselves, etc. - if YOU feel bad about it, if YOU feel obligated to help them, then DO SO. Don't waste your time trying to convince me, just do what you think is right - if that means giving them money to feed them, if that means giving your job up so someone else can have it, then do so. |
a few good people can't fix all the wrongs... i dont see how you can expect the same people that abuse and neglect their own children to give them money as charity.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
chegitz guevara
|
 |
Ft. Lauderdale, FL Communist Party of Apolyton
Jun 2000 time: 00:24
|
|
quote: Originally posted by David Floyd
Except that money isn't meaningless |
Money only has meaning in a social context. If you're on a desert island, it doesn't matter how rich you are, you gotta do all the work yourself. Furthermore, money can and frequently does lose value, such that fortunes can disappear in the blink of an eye, and those who once were well to do, now are destitute.
No matter what, wealth exists only because we agree as a group to recognize that it exists. When we stop believing that it exists, it ceases to exist. So it doesn't matter whether the mechanism of wealth transfer is via government or savings, it still requires the young to work for the old.
One method, however, has proved far more efficient than the other, and that's why no one will ever be able to attack Social Security directly. It has proven successful results. Sucks to be you if your retirement plan goes bankrupt just before you retire (but at least the government is there to pick up the peices and you won't be forced to work until death or beg on the streets for food). Fortunately society is far more humane than libertarians would have it.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
David Floyd
|
|
The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Jan 1970 time: 05:24
|
|
quote: a few good people can't fix all the wrongs... |
That's certainly true, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't try. The few people you CAN help will appreciate any help you can give them.
quote: i dont see how you can expect the same people that abuse and neglect their own children to give them money as charity. |
That's my point. I don't "expect" anyone to give to charity. That's the whole point of charity - giving voluntarily of your own free will.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Albert Speer
|
|
Puerile Polemic
Mar 1999 time: 00:24
|
|
quote: Actually, the post-war prosperity was created by the fact that World War 2 resulted, in part, in the US acquiring over 50% of the world's gold reserves, well over 50% of the world's manufacturing and industry, and around 50% of the world's combined GNP.
The WELFARE STATE was responsible for the prosperity of the 1950s? Give me a break |
BLAH? HUH? WHAT?
where'd you get that from... i was just pointing out that the welfare state didn't cause moral decay... we had moral decay in the 20's before the welfare state and we had great moral strength in the 50's with the welfare state... the 1960's was the cause of moral decay, not the welfare state.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Albert Speer
|
|
Puerile Polemic
Mar 1999 time: 00:24
|
|
quote: That's my point. I don't "expect" anyone to give to charity. That's the whole point of charity - giving voluntarily of your own free will. |
missed my point entirely...
we live in a society filled with neglectful and abusive 'parents'... those people would never even think about giving away money to help children as they abuse their own kids.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
David Floyd
|
|
The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Jan 1970 time: 05:24
|
|
quote: Money only has meaning in a social context. If you're on a desert island, it doesn't matter how rich you are, you gotta do all the work yourself. Furthermore, money can and frequently does lose value, such that fortunes can disappear in the blink of an eye, and those who once were well to do, now are destitute. |
Naturally - the CONCEPT of money rests on perceived value. I already made that point (or agreed with you, if you made that point).
quote: No matter what, wealth exists only because we agree as a group to recognize that it exists. When we stop believing that it exists, it ceases to exist. So it doesn't matter whether the mechanism of wealth transfer is via government or savings, it still requires the young to work for the old. |
The problem is, no one is ever going to stop believing in the concept of money. In a world of limited resources, having no concept of money just doesn't compute. It's like saying 2+2=5. Money is always a factor, whether it's in the form of gold bars, sheep and cows, dollars, or grass. Of course money is only relevant when there is more than one person, but that doesn't invalidate my point. Until you find a way to freely provide unlimited resources, then money WILL exist, because it is a concept tied, in part, to the reality of a world of limited resources.
quote: One method, however, has proved far more efficient than the other, and that's why no one will ever be able to attack Social Security directly. It has proven successful results. |
Well, what are those results? It has resulted in a system of quickly accumulating debt, it has resulted in a situation in which eventually the top of the pyramid will have more people than the bottom. And yes, it has also resulted in giving old people money - that point has never been contested by me. If your only wish is to make sure old people have money, then sure, Social Security works (for now, which is the point of the thread).
Of course, someone of us question the means to your end, which is where the debate comes in - if I choose to opt out of this pyramid scheme, I should have to be worried about men with guns coming to take me to jail and assess all kinds of penalties and fines.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
David Floyd
|
|
The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Jan 1970 time: 05:24
|
|
AS,
quote: where'd you get that from... i was just pointing out that the welfare state didn't cause moral decay... we had moral decay in the 20's before the welfare state and we had great moral strength in the 50's with the welfare state... the 1960's was the cause of moral decay, not the welfare state. |
Your original post linked the welfare state to prosperity in the 1950s.
"soon after the creation of the welfare state, we had a period of prosperity and moral strength (the 1950's)..."
While that is true, it is not accurate to link US economic prosperity in that era to the welfare state.
BK,
quote: Oh I wouldn't dream of forcing you to help someone out just because it is the right thing to do. |
But that's exactly what you do when you support and vote for government social programs. You force me to help others.
AS,
quote: we live in a society filled with neglectful and abusive 'parents'... those people would never even think about giving away money to help children as they abuse their own kids. |
I don't know what fantasy world you live in, but the vast majority of parents are not "neglectful and abusive". If yours were, I'm sorry, but most parents are not.
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:24. Apolyton Time is 00:24. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|