I simply said that “welfare” means something, and people choose to take it from government because the cost to THEM is cheap, but the cost to society is large. They trade a vote for a ton of resources.

The cost should be dialed up, and since they can’t afford it, they pay by following the rules of the taxpayers funding them. Assisted living for those who need welfare is reasonable and just.

If your next message still assumes I’m trolling, I’m writing you off as “dismissive” and we are not going to have this dialogue. Please engage in good faith.

you’re saying we are footing the bill of mental health now and then making the assumption of the cost at the ballot

Yes we all now the government is too big

I agree on that point

I believe it was Hart that said our rights come with duty. To walk around in a free society where you may make loads of money off of others labor, do you then have a duty to help those that may not be fit to contribute?

H.L.A. Hart.

they do contribute though

specify the subpopulation you’re talking about

So true, but capacity is an issue here.

More so, I’m saying the cost / benefit needs to be balanced.

We’ve gotten ourselves in a situation where the Feudal Lord Democrats steal from the Merchants and give to their Serfs.

The Serfs also function as a form of guerilla army of the Feudal Lords. When the Merchants threaten the relationship between the Lords and Serfs, they sic the serfs on them.

Don’t be confused; this is exactly what is happening across US cities for the last 100 days.

Merchants subsidize the bad behaviors and choices of the Serfs, and it’s done by force.

In a Democracy, all you need is more Serfs than Merchants, and the Feudal Lords win.

(This is why they want as many immigrants and people “in need” as possible)

if you want to improve anything “health” related the theory and research points to universal healthcare

JP, I would say that when speaking about humans, it is insulting to use business school terminology.

If you want resources, you have to give something up. Parasites try to give up the least they can to get as many resources as they can. They sap the system of its resources and offer nothing to replenish it

Humans must not be an ends, but a means in themselves right?

> JP, I would say that when speaking about humans, it is insulting to use business school terminology.
@Malachi so you’re from the school that can’t put a price on a human life 🤦🏻‍♂️

that’s economic reality

Not sure what that has to do with my point.

Charity and caretaking is a wonderful aspect of humanity.

Theft and violence arent

Justice means, you take and you give.

The Democrats want to take without giving anything up

In my opinion human life is priceless. It does come with a type of coercion though. Our covid pandemic is a good example.

It is priceless, which is also why you can’t turn me into slave labor

tell that to car makers

war strategists

the US army

JP
"The Democrats want to take without giving anything up."

What's this mean?

or any economists

If I grow 100 apple trees, I’d happily give 20 of them to my community.

If I grow 100 apple trees and 30 are stolen from me, however, we have a problem. At least, if you ARE going to take my apple trees, leave me something of value in its place.

Soldiers get a lot for their service. It’s a trade.

I agree the obligation is to compensate you fairly. But what if you refuse?

What do I get for funding “clean needles” in SF?

Less dead people.

That’s unclear

That same money can be out toward an assisted living facility so that the mentally ill aren’t shooting up in the streets

i think y'all should hop in the voice chat

Those mentally ill can give up a bit of freedom for that welfare

You getting a ton of notices Cap?

Which voice chat room

Doesn't matter in centre