The problem in Europe - WELFARE

So, in France "the victim" has rebelled against "the parasites". The cow has said "enough is enough" to the ticks. White, middle class, rural folks don't want to pay high taxes to the government, which government then redistributes, to pay welfare to marginalized people, whose only job is to "eat, crap and ****". And the most clever thing they do is to crap out another 5-6 young parasites TO GET MORE WELFARE. A vicious circle. Not to mention many welfare recipients are not Europeans, who are HOSTILE to European culture and Christianity in general.

You know, in ancient Rome there was the same attitude - "bread & circuses". Bread as in welfare, free stuff. We all know how that ended.

It's time to stop this madness. It's time to save Rome from the barbarians again.

STOP WELFARE AND TAXES WILL FALL. STOP SOCIALISM (redistribution) NOW. STOP BREEDING PARASITES! SUPPORT DECENT WORKING PEOPLE, NOT TICKS!

 

The welfare state is a boondoggle!

 

Where ever there's capitalism there needs to be welfare. Otherwise POW a communist revolution takes place.

 

Do you have any supporting studies for this hypothesis? Also if I may what is the alternative that would not lead to revolution?

 

What I said - "bread & circuses". Trowing leftovers to the mob to "shut their mouth".
You might have been a senator in Ancient Rome.

Why are you afraid of revolutions? America had her revolution too.

 

Maybe I should run for senator now. If only it weren't so boring. The House, that's where all the fun is.

But we're not talking about the USA but about Europe.

I would think there aren't that many people living in rural Europe. And those who are there are probably farmers who get government aid themselves.

I don't know about Europe, but here in the USA I think farming is a poor, poverty job.

 

There are plenty of small towns and towns in France. Like Reims for example - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reims
Paris is not (the whole of) France.

 

SOLUTION HAVE EMPLOYERS PAY FULLY LIVEABLE WAGES!!!!

 

You realize that about 2-3 % of the human body mass are "moochers", i.e. bacteria and other microorganisms. In fact, from a pure cell number perspective, they outnumber human cells.

The human body could get rid of them, but there would be a price to pay.

Society could also get rid of people who don't "work". There would be a price to pay for that too, namely that the ones who do work would be much more afraid of losing work. When people are afraid constantly, innovation is less likely. Are you willing to pay a possibly high price just because of your desire to punish a few "moochers", who are basically inconsequential to your economic well being? Remember, you could become a "moocher" too, all it would take is an unfortunate head injury.

 

What a bunch of historical revisionist twaddle. Rome did not fall because of "welfare". Modern civilization is not going bankrupt on the basis of welfare - especially not here in the US.

If you want to support descent working people you have to pay them a reasonable wage on the basis of what that labor is worth.

The problem is that the elite scoop up most of the profits. The problem is that international financiers and national oligarchs run this country.

Then you introduce Christianity at the end which has nothing to do with the problem.

 

The problem is not Socialism, it was and is immigration.

Most of Europeans, before the great migration, worked and still do if they can. Thats how we live. You know for sure that in Nordic states for example, if you stay at home doing nothing you get like a salary in welfare but BUT still everyone works. That is the culture and having this culture enabled generous welfare because why the fck not?

I live in Europe, mid 30s and the only thing I got from governments from the top of my mind is free schooling(up to masters, included) and the roads. That's about it. I worked and made money in a way or another since a teen and never stopped working.

I'll go even further and say that I am very rich, made a fortune from cryptos YET I still work.

 

It's not a secret, many of the so called "migrants" come to Europe to live on welfare. Easy money. And often they are not Christian and have a lot of kids too. Because kids to them means "cash" quite literally. Two birds with one shot.

 

Not being Christian (or some other religion) had nothing to do with the factors that led to the fall of Rome. Rome fell for the same reason a bunch of other economic empires fell ( Spanish and British to name a few others). "Socialism" had nothing to do with it either.

These empires rose due to Technological innovation which led to military superiority which led to economic hegemony. This technology then spreads which increases the cost of projecting power. It is this cost which eventually bankrupts the nation.

For example - The British had the gatling gun (machine gun). With one gunship they could pretty much take over an entire African Nation - fighting back with sticks and stones.

Decades or even centuries later technology has spread. The African nation has the gatling gun. (think of storming a hill defended by machine gun turrets). One gunship will no longer suffice. You have to send an entire armada and you will take heavy casualties. The cost of projecting power has increased.

Eventually the Return on Investment becomes negative and starts to drain the Treasury. Troops in far away lands have to be supplied and the barbarians have better technology and tactics. When they rise up you have to send not just more troops but an army to quell the rebellion and that is super expensive.

Look at Iraq. This was a nation that was sacked during the Gulf war and had an arms embargo in the years prior to the Iraq war. Saddam was fighting back with delapidated 1960's equipment and with a people that did not want to fight. Our Troops walked through the streets of Baghdad without encountering resistance.

YET - battling this pathetic excuse for a military ended up costing Trillions.

In 2000 - Total Military Spending was roughly 300 Billion. After 8 years of Bush spending rose to 900 Billion and over 1 Trillion under Obama.

Had we maintained 2000 level spending (increasing with inflation) - an amount that is way more than is necessary to defend the homeland - we could have diverted 500 Billion/year x 16 years = 8 Trillion dollars to infrastructure, technology, ramping up our economy to compete in the third millennium.

Instead we threw this money down the toilet getting nothing in return - to pad the pockets of the international financiers that own the military industrial complex and the banks.

Interest on the debt is 450 Billion/year .. x 16 years and you can add another 7 Trillion to the total.

That my friend is what bankrupts a nation.

 

The problem with Europe is the same as in America, cultural-marxism and political correctness.

 

That was a nice answer and I appreciate the time it took to write it, Giftedone. Hope this adds some more flavor.

 

Not sure what kind of flavor you were trying to add but this guy is off his rocker. He starts out with some very good stuff in relation to
tactics used by "Communism" to confuse the masses.

His conclusions however are either wrong or off base.

McCarthyism was good ? NO .. it wasn't. His gibberish on race/IQ - never did get to a conclusion on that .. code for White folks are superior perhaps ? No idea why he even brought this up at the end of the day.

Welfare – a way to keep the immigrant population growing as some kind of communist plot ? I was kind of interested in this as welfare is a primary mechanism by which to keep the people subdued - not revolting against the ruling class. The problem is that he does not discuss the fact that the ruling class is not about "Communism" - it is about "Totalitarianism" - big difference.

He links the censorship of discussion of Islamic (Islamist is the proper term) criminality - No Go zones (some random reference ti IQ/race again) to “Communism” Trotskyism. This was interesting as we see this demonization of anyone who disagrees with the PC movement as racists. Similar to the tactics used by Israel – labeling any criticism “anti Semitism”

While it is good and correct to point this out .. the link to Communism/Trotskyism is misguided. This is about "Totalitarianism" not Trotskyism. The elite have learned from past mistakes (but he never mentions the elite or who is behind this stuff)

His conclusion that welfare state is the big problem seemingly the only problem. This nonsense. It is somewhat of a problem but, not even close to being the main problem.

He then closes with the complete BS claim -Crime creates poverty - Poverty does not create crime? This is complete nonsense which is oblivious to history and at the end of the day it is not black vs white

Correct – Collectivism vs individual liberty - enlightenment - move away from superstition towards science and reason.

Marxism not the complete failure as described. Marxism was never implemented as per the vision of Marx for 1. Not that I agree with Marxism but like most philosophies they contain some good and some bad. Marxism has some good insights into the human condition.

Identity politics as a substitute for rational thought ! This I agreed with completely but again - it is where he goes with this that makes no sense.

He then spends 10 minutes in a demonization rant against post modernism, communism and California on the basis of some weird behaviors of Foucault - sado masochistic sexual torture. This was total nonsense and complete fallacious gibberish.

He then finishes by equivocating all French intellectual thought with some group of freaks who got a petition together to legalize pedophilia.

This was beyond painful idiocy.

 

Employers DID pay livable wages and benefits and then in came the immigrants to harvest them.

 

Socialism isn't welfare. It is worker control and ownership of the means of production. Note also that countries with higher welfare generosity also have higher social mobility.

 

The money required for welfare is certainly provided by the "means of production", so the only thing left is whether workers control that. I assume this is the sticking point for you. Quite naturally, if the worker doesn't control it, then we are talking about something else.

That sounds an awful lot like slavery.

 

There's no worker control. Even in apparent social democracy, the 'social wage' typically refers to limited redistribution. Welfare is pitched as a big problem by the right. In reality, its a key ingredient for reproducing capitalist profit.

 

Then you're talking slavery.

 

It seems cruel to make those who can't earn such a wage unemployable. Can't you just let them have the jobs and wage they've already agreed to work for?

 

I love worker owned businesses. My son works for one. But why is this a political topic? If people want to form a worker owned business, or a sole proprietorship, or a corporation, why should I even care?

 

It's a political topic because politics is violence at it's core. Sometimes it can be used for good, but it is inherently evil. This is something that my friends on the left reject, but it's true nonetheless.

 

No, you're talking capitalism.