Quote:
Originally Posted by maskedmelon
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
I love free stuff
|
It's not free. Someone else pays for it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by maskedmelon
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
1. Is it wise to indefinitely care for those who are unable or unwilling to care for themselves? I guess the more basic question here is, "Are all individuals equally beneficial to society?" If not, why is it reasonable to subsidized less desirable outcomes?
|
No. People aren't equal. A crackhead on the street is less valuable than someone selling me a service I want.
It is unreasonable to subsidize less desirable outcomes. Why incentivize less desirable outcomes? People in a society shouldn't be forced to subsidize degenerates. Subsidizing degenerates only incentivizes their behavior and dependence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by maskedmelon
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
2. How is it less selfish to take something for nothing than it is to refuse to give something for nothing?
|
It's not about refusing to give. It's a matter of whether to legalizing theft. Also, why does selfishness matter in this context? That's not relevant to the issue. Selfishness is not immoral, if that's what you're getting at.
Quote:
Originally Posted by maskedmelon
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
And before somebody cleverly points out that babies are unable to care for themselves, I'll try not to be stupid if you will do the same ^^
|
The problem with welfare isn't that it does legitimately helps some people. The problem is it incentivizes
degenerate behavior on other peoples dime, rather than being productive and saving for your own retirement/emergencies/etc.
In a low trust society (e.g. society with severe multiculturalism), the negatives outweigh the positives.