Social Justice... Does it really mean the lazy never have to work again?

[Idaho]

if private individuals are footing the bill I feel that they deserve great personal liberties. Have 1 or 100 children. Have 1 or 50 wives. As the individual pays, the individual decides.

If people are being paid by the state, the state should have a say in the lives of the individuals.

Children who go to a loving household are going to be better off that staying with the single mum bumming off benefits.

If people can not handle their own contraception, then the state should step in.

Workhouses? What, like work to get benefits? What is wrong with that? These people failed to get work themselves. As they wish to be supported they should "pay" for this service.

Police intimidation was never mentioned. But no one's ever accused you of rationality...

Police in theory should not be frightening. They are if you are a benefit cheat, are a squatter or are otherwise breaking the law. That is not the fault of the police, but the individual breaking the law.

Poice in theory should not be threatening. They are if you are breaking the law and they are warning you that next time you will be arrested.

(Personal attack removed by Ser Clegane)
You speak from a position of never having had to face any hardship other than tugging your telegraph out of the letter box when it gets jammed.

The idea that it would be better for a child to be taken from it's natural parent and given to some strangers because the mother can't afford to work would be laughable if you weren't serious.

But then what can we expect from someone from a priverlidged background working in a profession which exposes and promotes a patrician uncle-knows-best attitude.

[rory_20_uk]

Bless... typical outrage there.

I imagine I've been a lot closer to the masses you love to talk about that you ever will. I imagine that crusading with words beats the hell out of dirtying your hands and doing something.

I notice no retort, just character assassination.

You say the idea of adoption is terrible. Of course this being your view it requires no further evidence to support - it just is right.

[Kagemusha]

One question.In the US when someone is living on a wellfare,cant the government appoint him to an job?In here if you are long term unemployed person without health restrictions you can be put to work on certain conditions.This is mainly used on people that arent seem to able to get a job themselves.The system works the way that the Government pays the employer some amount of money so the employer can hire the person who they wouldnt hire otherwise becouse it wouldnt be profitable. The person works with the unemployment fee.And that way he or she gains work experience and if the employer sees fit that the person is usefull and profitable he may get a real job with a real pay from that in the long run. I think it is a good way for keeping the people in touch with the working life and to prevent them for isolating themselves from society.

[Ser Clegane]

Most of this discussion has so far been very interesting and civilized

I would appreciate if the discussion could be continued in such a way, instead of resorting to rude personal attacks.

Thanks

[Don Corleone]

No Kagemusha, the US government cannot compel able bodied young men and women to work for their benefits. It's been tried, it's called 'welfare reform' and courts routinely strike it down as cruel and inhumane.

[Kagemusha]

No Kagemusha, the US government cannot compel able bodied young men and women to work for their benefits. It's been tried, it's called 'welfare reform' and courts routinely strike it down as cruel and inhumane.

In that case i can clearly uderstand the frustration around the issue. How i see it,if the government provides for those people in my mind then the Government is their "employer" and no sane employer benefits for keeping its "employees" idle.

[Tribesman]

You say the idea of adoption is terrible. Of course this being your view it requires no further evidence to support - it just is right.
Ah adoption , I thought that when you said the government taking care of contraception for low class scumsucking leeches you meant sterilisation .
But you just mean taking their kids away from the parents and shoving them in a home , thats so much better .

[Idaho]

I just hope Rory is specialising in surgery. I can only imagine his bedside manner

[Tribesman]

Bedside manner ?..."your child has respitory problems associated with bad living conditions , the remedy is for you to get rid of the child"

[Idaho]

Bless... typical outrage there.

I imagine I've been a lot closer to the masses you love to talk about that you ever will. I imagine that crusading with words beats the hell out of dirtying your hands and doing something.

I notice no retort, just character assassination.

You say the idea of adoption is terrible. Of course this being your view it requires no further evidence to support - it just is right.

I am one of the masses mate.

You see people as specimens. Things to be treated, problems to swiftly solve with your devastating doctor's intellect. A borderline sociopathic stance.

I can't debate with you because we don't share the same values. You don't value the humanity of people who are merely a problem, an inconvienience. You don't think people outside of your rugger and quaffing circle have the same value. How can we even begin a discussion on this basis?