mr dave |
06-24-2009 05:28 PM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by JayJamJah
(Post 689806)
Bottom Line to me:
I can still get what I want and help others get what they want without telling anyone else what they can or can't do. Socialism is a bully. It says I (the government) know better then you and can do everything (slight hyperbole) better then you. I am not okay with that and neither are a lot of Americans, particularly those like me who have come from very humble beginnings. I've never felt like there was anything realistic I could not accomplish if I was patient and disciplined enough and though I have certainly fallen short of some of my goals I never felt like it was because the system held me back, it was because someone else out performed or outworked me.
Again it's about motivation & options to me:
I have less money, I have fewer options and if the more money I make, the higher I am taxed on each dollar, the less likely I am to work to my full potential.
Now I do respect the altruistic nature of the opposing view. Putting the basic needs of everyone about the freedom of choice of the few or at least lesser population. But I don't feel like that's necessary, I don't believe everyone deserves to be treated equal though. I think the rules should be the same for everyone, but those who abuse the system should not be a burden to those who enhance it.
I hate to sound heartless and I hope I don't:
Of course not all people on welfare or government assistance abuse the system. But many do. Sure not all wealthy people are generous and hard working, but many are, a much greater percentage then I've heard anyone here acknowledge.
|
i'm totally with you on this :clap: ESPECIALLY in regards to true self-discipline.
on the other hand i AM heartless, especially when it comes to government assistance. there are some people who legitimately need it and that's fine, there are plenty of others who see it akin to an allowance just like the one they were 'supposed' to be getting from their parents so they can enjoy partying like they did when they were teenagers for as long as possible.
an active social life is not a fundamental human necessity. when i worked customer service for an american credit card company it always astounded me when we'd get monthly 'budget' breakdowns as to why this person couldn't make the minimum payment on their credit card. i only ever remember seeing a single budget (ONE) that had the individual living at a lower quality than myself (in 3 years at that job). everyone else had at least 1 car (if not 2 or 3), multiple phones, and basic cable, along with allowances for going out for meals once or twice a month.
so no... i'm not in favour of providing those 'needy' people with a chunk of my wealth (i've also been seeing the current north american economic downturn coming for about 5 years because of this attitude).
yes it would be nice if we could all live in some hippie technicolour dreamworld where everyone looks out for everyone else and we're all just one big happy family that lives happily ever after and no one has to grow old and die and everyone can be 17 forever and do what they want whenever they want.
the reality of the situation is, everyone get old, tired, and dead. as i get older and more tired i'm less inclined to give a hand out to someone who just wants to screw around for as long as possible. the government is not a babysitter.
|