WHY WORK ?

It could if it promotes the general welfare.

Our War on Poverty is very expsesive and does not actually correct for market recognizable inefficiencies. We could lower our tax burden by solving for the deleterious effects of a "natural rate of unemployment" at the rock bottom cost of a form of minimum wage that clears our poverty guidelines. Unemployment compensation should compensate labor by bailing them out with socialism and that form of Infrastructure.

Unemployment compensation on an at-will basis conforms more to the principles of Individual Liberty and capitalism's requirement for voluntary social transactions that may result in mutually beneficial trade.

 

It could even if it didn't. But it doesn't. Helping folks out between jobs in one thing, and probably a good idea. Providing folks with a permanent option to not work... that's too costly. On so many levels.





​

 

It's you that I'm losing faith in , sorry !

 

The taxpayer - that's someone who works for the federal government (AND IS REQUIRED TO PAY) and doesn't have to take the civil service examination.
Ronald Reagan

 

For how many generations are we required to take on this BURDEN ?
Welfare rolls increase at a rate of 3% per year .

The danger of a “no consequences” culture is it has a perpetrator and an accomplice. Which are YOU ?

 

You really don't believe in Capitalism where it only takes money to make more money, do you?

- - - Updated - - -

it is ok; you have nothing but fallacies to work with.

- - - Updated - - -

We could be lowering our tax burden through simplification.

 

OK, lets hear the "simplification plan " . My property taxes went up only 2% this year, I have to wait until AFTER the Nov. elections to see how much more that outstanding obamacare is going to increase .

 

Capitalism isn't a religion and it almost always takes more than money to make more money.



​

 

It is as simple as the concept of employment at will can make it.

- - - Updated - - -

Nope; it merely takes capital to make more capital under any form of capitalism.

 

The problem with that is the ones, while they may be working, aren't paying the taxes that fund the very programs from which they draw. I see that as a problem. Some don't.

 

A few questions for you to answer: Why aren't those who think one person deserves another person's money voluntarily supportint them? Why aren't those who think someone out of work should have their relocation/training paid by another person not voluntarily doing it for someone?

It's one thing to ask if someone else is willing to do what you seem to think should be done. As soon as those who have that opinion pool their money together voluntarily and do it, they can start demanding the rest of us be forced to do it.

ded what another person earns

 

While collecting benefits doesn't necessarily mean someone doesn't work, it does mean that someone that is has a portion of what they've earned taken by the government in order to simply hand it to someone else.

 

Many of us have a work ethic and choose to earn what we have rather than it being handed to us. I have no need to stop working and collect welfare. My skills afford me much higher than what welfare offers. However, there are a large number for which the welfare handouts are equal to or greater than what their skills would earn them if they worked. That's why they have no incentive to work. It not only costs them money, it costs them 40+ hours/week in time doing something when they can have handed to them the same amount or more for sitting on their swapping thumbs.

 

YOU have nothing but diversion !!!!!

 

People below the poverty line do pay taxes, but their deductions and credits USUALLY adjust it such that the irs owes them $. But you're right - just because people collect benefits doesn't mean they're not working.

And I'm all for cutting waste, but for the most part it isn't waste.

 

If you can't see waste you live in a remote cabin alone .

" The taxpayer - that's someone who works for the federal government(and get charged) but doesn't have to take the civil service examination."
Ronald Reagan

 

Why do those of the opposing view have no actual solutions or even political philosophies to work with?

Is the concept of employment at will too dificult?

 

more diversion , no real solution !

 

Solutions to what?




​

 

Why work.

Some on the left know Iron Age (subjective moral) values, are not as effective in a modern Information Age.

We have the concept of employment at will, a federal Doctrine that is recognized by the several States, and State laws regarding the same.

Why does the right have such a difficult time with a moral of "goodwill toward men" regarding correcting for an inefficiency of capitalism concerning a natural rate of unemployment?

 

You advocate benefits without work ,choices without consequences.

 

simply more dancing and more diversion .

 

Post limit thread closure. Feel free to start another thread

Shangrila
Moderator