Should the US stop all social programs?

Question

and let everyone fend for themselves? Whatever happen to survival of the fittest? Now we are the fittest supporting weak POS.

If you have a kid that you can't support...give it up for adoption. Let someone who CAN take care of it...not let you have a free ride at the taxpayers expense.

If you come here illegally...NOTHING!!! Because there isn't anything.

Let those that ARE responsible and productive have what they earn INSTEAD of taking what they have away.

So, let's do away with all this feel good horse and let people man up and take care of themselves.

Except for the elderly...we owe them. Too bad citizens now don't have the work eithics they did.

Answer 1

Oh no.. are you one of those that approve the concept of low skills low wages, high skills high wages? (yeah...she is).
The only welfare recipients should be the elderly and those totally incapable of any degree of productive labor, not those that can't find a free babysitter, or those so spun on drugs and alcohol that they appear infirm to the welfare or SS examiner. Called Tough Love.... heal thyself... Yatta yatta...
It worked quite well 50 years ago, there were no starved corpses in the streets, and the "poor" were at least allowed the dignitiy of a shanty town (most other countries do...shhhh) , so they didn't have to sleep on park benches or under freeway bridges... In the 30's 40's and 50's they threw a sack of potatoes on the porch... Here...smoke these... Nobody never starved... and work was a number one motivator... oh my...oh my.. (hey Susan...kin we git married or sumpthin?)

Answer 2

NO WE SHOULDN'T STOP ALL SOCIAL PROGRAMS!
have you bothered to check out what is included under social programs??

one of those programs is called...anti-terror.
but if we did exactly what you suggested, crime would go through the roof, and i hope you remember that when you get a bill for privatized police and fire fighters. and when you are watching a car jacker drive away with your car and your kids in the back seat, remember...you got what you wanted.

without social programs we would all have to buy our groceries on a bull market because there would be nothing controlling the prices of food, keeping them down.
there would be no farm subsidies, and you would be paying $250 for a turkey on thanksgiving day.
every small problem in the economy would be a big risk of depression, and the list goes on and on and on.

what you are asking for is either anarchy, or martial law. because without social programs you'll either have chaos or have to control the people with army tanks on every street corner.

what it really sounds like you are saying, is that you enjoy terrorism, and you want to increase it, by making sure the poor really have nothing to live for!