Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by Gatormb, Dec 19, 2013.
No they can't, unless hookers and drug dealers are taking EBT now.
Considering the fact there are EBT machine salespeople now and nearly every store I see "Now Accepts EBT," it wouldn't surprise me at all.
The government can mitigate certain economic circumstanes (like poverty or temporary unemployment). It can enable people to make good decisions for themselves by not making misfortune cripling, not fully protect them from their bad decisions.
Let's also not forget that government welfare of some kind has been around since the beginning of civilization. It's either pay for that or more troops typically. We can debate how much and who gets it, but the thought of it just going away is pure fantasy.
Sweet (I think)!
Most government benefits are EBT now. SNAP benefits can still only be used on food though. Cash benefit EBT can be used anywhere that accepts it, however. Programs like SNAP limit what can be purchased, other benefits are cash and arent restricted.
First, I'm not attacking you, but I'll try to make paint a logical scenario. I think the best analogy would be that you either pay for that, or more cops to keep them from breaking into your house (or worse) and taking it. I'm sure I'll sound like a dick here, but you either placate the rabble or pay soldiers/police to keep them at bay.
Where there's a will there's a way.
I don't think that's quite true. Prior to the industrial revolution, most "welfare" was informal and less centralized, though certainly the idea of mutual aid was around. The idea of a tax supported safety net is pretty new. Governments certainly have always wanted stability and order, and have achieved that in a varierty of ways. I wouldnt call "bread and circuses" welfare though.
I guess one day we will have our imbedded debit chip and just swipe each other.
Correct, not welfare in the modern sense that we are discussing, but it did exist. The corn dole did exist in Rome and was a constant political topic along the lines of this one. Again, proposition is simple. Placate the rabble or pay troops to keep them at bay. There will always be - short of martial law - some kind of welfare.
Well, at least as long as there are governments, private property and inequality.
Yeah, that Communism thing might work . . . If we can figure out how to remove human nature. Stalin figured it out in a sense, but that's a trade off (Iron Hand of Oppression) I'm not willing to make.
It's not so much about removing human nature as it is about removing scarcity. If you cant remove scarcity, then you need a government to police inevitable conflict.
I think basic human/animal competitiveness is also a major hurdle. But that's a topic for another thread. . . .
Competitiveness is certainly part of the human experience, and there are myriad ways to channel that (like sports). I'm just suggesting downward competition over scarce resources would be a nice thing to get rid off.
I think you (and Marx) are being hopefully optimistic. It's more than sports. It's just the nature of humans/and animals in general, to compete for resources, to get more than the neighbor. It's as simple as wanting a better house, better car, prettier wife, more athletic son, etc. I find it hard to believe you can make that go away sans the iron hand. And even in Stalin's Russia there were winners and losers. High-ranking party bosses no doubt had better lodging, cars, etc. than the Ukrainian potato farmer. If it makes you happy, I think "Objectivism" is a mirror-image fantasy.
I wouldnt say I'm optimistic, that's why I'm a run-of-the-mill liberal who wants to abide by the US Constitution and not a revolutionary Marxist. I won't stop believing a better world is possible though. Capitalism will eventually transform to something else, I just hope is something in which people are better off rather than worse off.
Damn, I got a lot of negative ratings on this thread.