Where are all the conservative socialists in the West?

submitted by IamCleaver from self.politics

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Canbot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

What is the point in supporting the state if it doesn't support you back as best it can?

Not providing all your wants (spare me the "hur der they are needs") does not mean the state does nothing for you. That is a completely disingenuous argument.

It's the fact that the government always provides a very poor value for the money that is taken which makes for the most compelling argument to limit government as much as possible, not to expand it with infinite welfare programs.

[–]IamCleaver[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

"Not providing all your wants" My state provides me with most of what I believe is my birthright. It could be of higher quality and that is worth trying to achieve, but at least it is something.

"It's the fact that the government always provides a very poor value for the money that is taken which makes for the most compelling argument to limit government as much as possible, not to expand it with infinite welfare programs." That is the most ridiculous argument I have heard. If the state is inefficient at helping people then we shouldn't help people at all? If you were in need, would you rather you were helped inefficiently or not helped at all? The whole point of having a government is to redistribute wealth. Tax the rich, support the poor. It is its primary function, this and law enforcement. Besides, a lot of inefficiencies can be easily removed with better planning.

"very poor value for the money" If you know a better way of redistributing money to the needy I would be glad to hear it.

[–]Canbot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

what I believe is my birthright.

Your birthright is that which your father provides you, and citizenship. That's it.

If the state is inefficient at helping people then we shouldn't help people at all?

That is not the alternative. There are many ways to help people without the states' involvement.

I think the reason people like you turn thier noses up to the alternatives (though I bet you don't realize it and will deny it) is that you have an unrealistic expectation of the states ability to solve problems and make poor people wealthy, healthy, and happy. Compared to that fantasy the alternatives don't hold a candle. But if you only took an unbiased look at what the results have been from all the welfare programs to date you would be devastated by how thoroughly they have all failed.

[–]IamCleaver[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

"Your birthright is that which your father provides you, and citizenship. That's it." Sincerely disagree with that. I was born into the society and it owes me as much as I owe it. A society that owes me nothing is a society that I will not be part of.

First, I don't turn my nose away from private initiatives (charities?). I am all for them as long as they are in addition to and not instead of the state programs. You see, a charity is just that: a charity. It can help you but it forces you to rely on other people's kindness. That is degrading. If I am in need I the help is my right. I shouldn't come begging to some charity. I should be able come proud banging my fist on the table. I am a member of the society and I am in need - it should be the state's duty to help me.