You are supposed to protect those who can’t take care of themselves, not those who are too lazy/stupid/incompetent to take care of themselves and who have absolutely no chance of ever being useful members of society.
Freedom of speech doesn’t mean freedom to force others to listen to what you want to say. A man standing in a corner holding a sign is free speech. A mob trying to physically disrupt the daily lives of people who have no interest in their nonsense is a crime.
Smoking weed makes you a criminal for the same reasons drinking and driving does. And stealing doesn’t get you a bonus. That’s just BS.
And the difference between a “socialist” policy and one that isn’t is that the socialist policy is designed to benefit those who’d be better off by getting a job while harming those who are actually working for a living (essentially it’s government-sponsored class warfare). While a non-socialist policy is designed to help those who can’t help themselves. For the most part, only children, disabled and the elderly truly qualify for that one.
Well done, you’ve taken the definition of socialism, split it neatly into ‘good stuff’ and ‘bad stuff’, and relabelled half of it as non-socialist. Enjoying your socialist police and fire departments, criminal justice and prison systems, and military? How about your socialist utility infrastructure and road system?
Well done, you’ve taken basic services provided by government and labeled them as socialism. Conservatives and libertarians are not in favor of anarchy or advocate the abolition of government, just government that acts within the limits of the Constitution.
So the definition of a socialist service is one that isn’t CURRENTLY provided by the government? How exactly are these other services different from health care? Many of these services very directly help “those who are too lazy/stupid/incompetent to take care of themselves”, and some of them used to be private enterprises and not be run by the government at all.
I am generally amused that “government-sponsored class warfare” is usually defined as anything the government does that benefits someone other than the speaker.
Healthcare for the poor is declared “government-sponsored class warfare” while huge grants to the oil industry are “economic incentives”. Romney puts down the NAACP for wanting “free stuff from the government” while happily taking a $77,000 tax credit for his wife’s pet horse.
Sadly, not only “conservatives”, use some of this “logic”.
Looks like a lot of this “logic” is used by a lot of people.
Yo anon, didn’t realize you studied naive cock mustard in college.
Implying hivemind.
You are supposed to protect those who can’t take care of themselves, not those who are too lazy/stupid/incompetent to take care of themselves and who have absolutely no chance of ever being useful members of society.
Freedom of speech doesn’t mean freedom to force others to listen to what you want to say. A man standing in a corner holding a sign is free speech. A mob trying to physically disrupt the daily lives of people who have no interest in their nonsense is a crime.
Smoking weed makes you a criminal for the same reasons drinking and driving does. And stealing doesn’t get you a bonus. That’s just BS.
And the difference between a “socialist” policy and one that isn’t is that the socialist policy is designed to benefit those who’d be better off by getting a job while harming those who are actually working for a living (essentially it’s government-sponsored class warfare). While a non-socialist policy is designed to help those who can’t help themselves. For the most part, only children, disabled and the elderly truly qualify for that one.
Well done, you’ve taken the definition of socialism, split it neatly into ‘good stuff’ and ‘bad stuff’, and relabelled half of it as non-socialist. Enjoying your socialist police and fire departments, criminal justice and prison systems, and military? How about your socialist utility infrastructure and road system?
Well done, you’ve taken basic services provided by government and labeled them as socialism. Conservatives and libertarians are not in favor of anarchy or advocate the abolition of government, just government that acts within the limits of the Constitution.
So the definition of a socialist service is one that isn’t CURRENTLY provided by the government? How exactly are these other services different from health care? Many of these services very directly help “those who are too lazy/stupid/incompetent to take care of themselves”, and some of them used to be private enterprises and not be run by the government at all.
I am generally amused that “government-sponsored class warfare” is usually defined as anything the government does that benefits someone other than the speaker.
Healthcare for the poor is declared “government-sponsored class warfare” while huge grants to the oil industry are “economic incentives”. Romney puts down the NAACP for wanting “free stuff from the government” while happily taking a $77,000 tax credit for his wife’s pet horse.