English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

15 answers

A strange arument i heard once and at first it sounded offensive but underneath it if u look past the arrogance it makes sense and explains a lot of the anti social problems we have in Britain today..... it goes like this... Before the welfare state say 150 years ago, if you were thick, uneducated, lazy, criminal etc your life span was shortened drastically compared to hard working well educated people. You simply died out. You didnt tend to marry or have many children etc. But with the introduction of the welfare state it has enabled a whole generation of lesser intelligent or criminal people survive and procreate. Iam not saying the welfare state is a bad thing or only for thick people. It has done wonderful things and many good hard working people have benefitted from it, BUT facts show the averaging children spawned from university middle class familes is far lower than unemployed council estate layabouts surviving on welfare. We have bred a nation of thick lazy people with tendancies to crime because of a welfare state that has enabled them to survive and breed and generally thick people marry other thick people and have thick children. That partly is why i think there is such a problem in this country. Anyway im sounding like im to the right of Genghis Khan now but there is some truth in this argument but do the benefits outweigh the mess this country has become?

2007-03-21 21:33:38 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

It doesn't matter what country it is. The welfare state has been a way for politicians to buy votes. If you want something done wrong, make it a government program. People who pay nothing in and who are able-bodied get benefits, while the pensions drop and retirement age climbs.

Since people will not willingly save for old age or pay for insurance it is neccessary for the government to require a set portion of income to be set aside to pay for private health insurance and private investment accounts for retirement. For those disabled or unable to work the government could pay the minimum into their insurance and retirement. Some will still be in need, but there is where charities and religious groups are given government incentives to step in. It can be done almost tax-free and stop the buying of votes. It would also put people back in charge of their own lives as they would decide what type of insurance or investment plan they wanted.

The people must demand that their servants, their representatives in government do as they want. You are not electing your masters. Stop voting for masters, elect servants.

2007-03-21 18:36:30 · answer #2 · answered by Taganan 3 · 0 0

State-mandated compassion produces, not love for ones fellow man, but hatred and resentment.

Our broken system did not begin as an attempt to sabotage people's ability to plan for retirement, but it has worked out that way. The politicians who originally planned the system probably had no idea how it would turn out. But today's politicians know the system is rotted, and yet they refuse to make the changes necessary to free the American people from it. Instead, they make it worse.

It's illegal to say to a voter "Here's $100, vote for me." So what do the politicians do? They offer the $100 in the form of Health Care, Social Security, Unemployment Insurance, Food Stamps, tobacco subsidies, grain payments, NEA payments, and jobs programs.

Big Government doesn't work.
Big Government makes things worse, often hurting the very people it is intended to help.
Big Government creates new problems.
Big Government is costly and wasteful.
Big Government diverts money and energy from positive, productive uses.

2007-03-20 21:58:39 · answer #3 · answered by big-brother 3 · 6 0

several years ago people were asked if they would rather privatize their retirement , medicare, etc, many did want it privatized, but, our politicians decided that would limit their under the table kick backs etc so it was never out to the vote , even tho had it been and passed most of our welfare recipients would not be on welfare now generation after generation, yet upon retirement most every one who participated would be getting at least 3 times as much from their retirement than they receive today,

2007-03-20 22:20:55 · answer #4 · answered by james w 3 · 2 0

In the 70's labour preached cradle to grave security.
I am now 63 and I have watched my pension disappear in the last few years after having paid in all my life. Yet I watch more and more young mothers with a bunch of children pushing prams in my local mall.
I have spoken to several of them that are now approaching their 40's and have never worked or paid in to NI. All of these benefits go up yet my pension goes down and my council tax goes up. I agree that the system is no longer working or that the people in Govt. do not care about anything but a cheap vote.

2007-03-20 22:07:39 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 5 0

I agree with Dakota. THe minimum wage doesn't help the poor, but hurts the middle class. It causes inflation, but the middle class wages probably won't keep up. I thought Clinton fixed it, but I recently read that the welfare state has gotten bigger. I heard they just moved into other entitlement programs. I can't wait to hear about the new scams the poor is playing.

2007-03-20 22:01:38 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 4 1

I get benefit as I'm not fit enough to be employed, I paid tax and insurance all my life and it does sicken me how many do claim and are fit for work and have never paid a penny. I know of some through no fault of their own who have to claim and it annoys me that there is a stereotype of ALL who claim as that is not the case. Yesterday I saw on TV an ex soldier who got benefit of 118.00 a fortnight and that mad me angry this man had fought for his country!!!. I do think more should be spent on the benefit system for them to eliminate those who really are the scroungers, there are plenty of them also who claim and also work getting very high benefit, very very wrong. PLEASE do not judge all as we are not all the same, OK will get off my soap box now, it does make me angry.

2007-03-20 22:06:55 · answer #7 · answered by Bernie c 6 · 1 2

I hate welfare and it needs to be totally rethought. I hate medicare to for that matter. Look people if you fail in life and have not been able to accomplish relationships with good people who can help you through trying times than you are going to die. Natural selection weeds out the week, diseased and dumb. We should let nature run its course. If private citizen want to help you people than by all mean call them and leave the rest of the country alone. Please don't try and bring us down with you.

2007-03-20 22:01:09 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3 2

Yes, I totally agree, they take take take and what do we see in return and it's getting worse.

2007-03-20 21:58:33 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

Keep our old folk and sick and disabled and make everyone that is fit work no exemptions.

2007-03-21 10:37:31 · answer #10 · answered by cassidy 4 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers