Provide them with enough resources to not force them into a life of crime, and opportunities for those who are able to become productive members of society to do so.
This has nothing to do with being altruistic or charitable, but acknowledging the fact that there are people who just has nothing to offer to society. Whether they are born incapable, rendered incapable, lazy or otherwise unmotivated, or have skills that are simply obsolete.
We've always had a society where there are individuals who do not contribute. We're always going to have that. We can chose to deal with them as criminals if we want, and confine them to prison or forced labor... but that costs the same as just supplying basic resources outright in the first place. If that even worked I would be all for it. But it doesn't.
In the end I just want to be left alone to live my life in peace. I don't want to be surrounded by people who have basic needs but not means - because that impacts my safety, and frankly my lifestyle. If that implies paying another 5% in taxes, then so be it. I'm either going to write them a check, or I'm going to write a check to someone else to protect me against them. But either way, they're not going to go away.
This is the biggest canard of all time. There are places around this country with more severe poverty than you will ever see in some inner cities. Yet they aren't riddled with people committed to a life of crime. Look at rural Appalachia, Mississippi, and elsewhere.
So what "resources" do the poor need that they don't have today so as to prevent them from becoming habitual criminals? More Obama phones? More TVs? More air conditioning? Relax the food stamp rules so they can buy booze?
Your line of thinking is precisely why we are $20 trillion in debt, with no end in site to deficit spending so that politicians can say "Look, we did something. Now give me your vote."
Show Posts
4 Likes
