My original remark was in response to a string of comments, and a question to which that remark was an answer to. If you disagree with my comments for some reason, then provide reasoning for as to why you disagree. I also do not care whether you or left or right, if you think my answer to that question was not useful, well your responses to my answer and your dodge of my question certainly didn't add anything of value to the discussion. Perhaps this post doesn't add to the discussion either, I just feel I should point out to you your unwarranted hypocrisy. -Meta
You've only got rant to offer about capitalism. You haven't bothered to embed your understanding in relevant economic content. You're actually a curse to the left. Be quiet! Shhhhhh
I have a better idea: if someone is on welfare and gets pregnant, her benefits don't increase. There have to be some kind of consequences in order to give people incentives to NOT make bad choices, such as procreating without a way to financially support their children. There should be a lifetime limit, say 5 years. After that, no more welfare. And of course, cut off all welfare to illegal immigrants, even if they are related to Obama. Our welfare system encourages dependency and sloth and needs to be overhauled. We can't force people not to procreate, but by not increasing benefits for welfare mothers who get pregnant, fewer will have more children.
Behavior changes with constraints, not nature. Society shed fudal society, and grew a middle class. Something impossible in your description of humanity, and the economics that result.
Your support for child poverty isn't spiffing, but it is predictable. Note that most developed countries don't entertain your beliefs
I don't self-identify with either the left or the right, my only concern is that which is in regard to the truth, and I have no intention of helping either group if it means withholding or distorting what I believe to be the truth. If you feel that I do not supply sufficient evidence to support my views, then simply tell me which views I should supply evidence for, or do us all a favor and supply it yourself if you know of such evidence. Otherwise, it is you who is ranting here. More unwarranted hypocrisy. I do not understand the reason you do this. -Meta
You just give emotive non-economic prattle that helps the right wing. Its drivel that I expect left, right and centre but despise with a passion
I assure you, my views are not based purely upon emotion. Again, if you want evidence for something, just let me know what it is you want evidence for.
There's no economics involved. I'm not interested in how you've convinced yourself that you have something to say. Achieve something more than the blubbering you've offered and I'll salute you
Allow me to remind you that slavery was abolished in 1865. Even if slavery wasn't abolished, you'd never recoup the costs. You'd have to pay for his housing, meals, medical, supervision, dental care, clothing, transportation (if needed), etc. It would end up costing the government more money in the long run.
I'm not sure I'd want a salute from someone like you. Clearly, there's no way that you could know anything about how I form my views other than by me telling you, and since you seem uninterested in any of my explanations, I suppose you'll voluntarily chose to remain ignorant of those facts. As I said, my comment which you seem to despise was a direct response to what I believe to be legitimate questions from Not Amused. If you believe that my answer was insufficient, then either provide a better one, or ask me to explain myself, don't simply rant about how I dind't include content when you yourself have not done so. If you believe that Not Amused's original question was inappropriate, then take that up with him and not me. -Meta
