The original theme of this thread was the cultural and self-esteem damage inflicted by the idea that the world, i.e. your fellow citizen, owes you what you need. The amount of the damage is, all else being equal, probably proportional to the percentage of your life and support that has been turned over to the State and taken away as your own responsibility.
I don't think people are going to develop into unthinking parasites by riding a free bus. But when the housing, food, medical care, and other things are provided as a matter of course, that's different.
In all the programs I have seen to break the poverty cycle, the most successful have been those that put real responsibility for themselves into the hands of the poor. There's a line between "safety net" and "hammock," and in a society where people can vote themselves benefits, it's easily crossed.
Your point on comparing economies is a valid one. My post was oversimplified. However, it is always easier dealing with a small population than a large one when dealing with government services.
Off Topic » in reply to Ok, then I confine myself to general principles
re: general principles
The whole thread (42 posts)
- Poverty in England
- Well, I read it and now I have a headache
- Welfare cultures
- Your ideologically driven thread
- If you fix a problem, what happens to a bureaucracy whose life depends on the existence of that problem?
- Circular Logic
- Welfare cultures
- Dubyuh will show a thing or two to those commie ingrates (n/t)
- Well, I read it and now I have a headache