So then why have welfare in the first place?

It's a waste

@MinecraftMemer because it's good for re-election

So you're suggesting elections are the problems?

I prefer job fairs over welfare

Elections are a problem yes

Temporarily anyways

Democracy is dangerous to competent statecraft because it forces every political decision to be lowered to a level of stupidity that the masses can understand.

If welfare is intrinsic to democracies, then it would be logical to have a different style of government.

In that case, we would have monarchies.

I disagree

Monarchies are almost never concerned about their nation

I would say quite the opposite.

Nationalism is incompatible with monarchies

Nationalism did not exist during the age of monarchs

This is history

Monarchies are probably the MOST concerned for the long term welfare of citizens.

You need a strong, but empathetic, temporary dictatorship

Why not a permanent monarch?

Or an oligarchy of 3-4

Have you ever read Hans-Hermann Hoppe?

Because monarchies are prone to hereditary corruption

My ideal monarchy would be a non hereditary internally elected one

Hereditary rule is precisely why monarchies is so effective and efficient.

With heavy requirements

Hereditary rule is disgusting

What do you think would happen in America with a parliament

It encourages monarchs (unlike democrats, who only worry about elections) to invest in the future of the country.

@WEBENGi we have a parliament dipshit

It's called Congress

They're not that different

Just different titles

And the upper chamber is elected as well

Hereditary rule is the only insurance that rulers will care about the future.

There are distinct differences.

@MinecraftMemer it's also prone to low IQ leaders

And inbreeding

@WEBENGi not so major they are unrecognizable ftomt each other

And in that case, they would have their nation (i.e. property) lose value.

And we would be dominated by smart, competent leaders.

Monarchies are just a no go for me anymore