Quote of the Week

"Capitalism is the astounding belief that the most wickedest of men will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest good of everyone.""
-John Maynard Keynes

Sunday 22 March 2015

Welfare: Fair or not?

This is badly written, but bare with me because I am enraged.

As I was stalking a former debate partner of mine on ask.fm, I noticed a extremely long answer. It was the size of one of my typical essays. Compared to regular answers on ask.fm this one was beyond over-the-top. Most questions are a few words, and most answers follow suit, but this one stood out like a sore thumb.

As I zoomed in closer on my phone, I realized realized that there was actually a continuation of the answer on another question. Ask.fm had actually stopped working for the boy who was typing outrageously, at a rapid pace. It had become necessary for him to continue his answer/rant on another question. I'll be perfectly honest - it is very hard to achieve the character cap in an ask.fm answer. But he had managed that and then some. But why should I keep describing the essay to you when you could take a look for yourself!

Naturally, you may not have enough time to read through it all, or you may not want to, so I'll provide my summary of his statement.

Basically, he was asked for an opinion of global warming, if he thinks it's real and what some possible repercussions could be. Now rather than answering that with a simple "yes/no" and going on to briefly discuss the consequences, this boy took the time and effort to rant about the question. Obviously, one cannot write so much about global warming itself unless they are an expert (which I am quite sure he isn't), so he naturally went off on a tangent. And that tangent is what created an unsilenceable urge within me to respond to him the best way I know how - a blog post.

Quickly, let me mention the Nordic countries. You know, the most developed countries in the world? They have the best education systems, are the least corrupt and the most progressive. They are welfare states. But I'll get into that a little later.

His tangent began very soon after he addressed the point at hand and it was majorly about the problem of welfare. It did bring up nuclear Armageddon and space exploration among other things, but it focused majorly on the need for a dictatorship, the need for abolishing welfare and the dire need for being judgemental. At least that is what I got from it. And before I start taking apart his thinking one step at a time, let me remind him publicly that I am owed a hi-five!

Most of the time, I wouldn't pay attention to a rich, entitled douche who stupidly rants about his treacherous life, but in this case, for the simple fact that I like the guy somewhat despite everything, I am inclined to respond.

I won't address the point of nuclear Armageddon. I am honestly not informed enough on the subject and don't care enough to talk about it.

So let's move onto space exploration, and very possibly, the only matter I agree with him on. Space exploration probably is futile. My reasoning differ slightly from his however. I think it would be a little hard to move the world to Mars or whatever, whereas he thinks a retard is going to drop his pet rock on the life control panel, but that's minuscule. It would be very hard to make it independent - I'll give you that, Thomas.

And finally, the good stuff! Firstly, the term "landwhales": that is pure gold. I am completely serious here. I recently watched that British anchor talk about Kelly Clarkson being fat and it made me laugh a lot! I will admit that, if she had used the term "landwhale", I would have laughed even more! So that was great. Would the landwhales have problems with getting to the moon? I doubt it - I would think that such an advanced machine would probably be able to easily accomdate fatties. But nonetheless, McDonald-consuming, flabby fatties talking about "skinny privilege" does annoy me. I mean, you don't get fat unless you are careless and lazy (medical conditions excluded), but that whole thing is for another post. I won't go off on a tangent like my former partner.

Arctic petrol without the suing? Have you completely lost your mind? A system of checks and balances is the building block of any successful thing. So let's talk about why a dictatorship is ineffective. Oh I don't know? Could it be because liberties are oppressed? Let me put it this way: if a dictatorship were in place, where I was the dictator, comments like Thomas's would be prohibited. Not only would I take down his complaint, I would send my men to Thomas's door and I'd have him and his family exiled to a concentration camp, disguised as a remote island. So that wouldn't be very nice. 

But here's the second part: Throughout history, dictatorships have never worked. At some point or another, a revolution takes place and the government is overthrown. Yugoslavia, the UK, Czechoslovakia and so on. How do you like them statistics? Reasons may vary, sure, but the fact stands that they don't work. But back to the arctic petrol. 

If a spill were to happen, and no one were there to criticize and make sure that such a spill does not happen, it would be pretty much equivalent to dropping a small nuclear bomb on that part of the ocean. (Ok, not that bad, but still.) If people didn't criticize the government, they could do whatever they wanted, like export oil from the arctic, which I may add would probably have horrid repercussions on global relations, and lead us into devastation. 

So, some "butthead" sues the government and puts off oil drilling for a few years even, and what is SO bad about that?

Okay, I'm not sure what that whole thing about invasion of group A to group B is, but I'll interpret it as best as I can.

Why should we pay for roads in less developed places? So that they can indeed develop. Because, think about it: If we make those roads, they can do things and share them, helping all of us. How would you feel if you didn't build the roads and then that remote community discovered a cure for cancer, and then you, the dictator, got cancer? You'd be like "Hey, give me some of that cure, I don't want to wither and die a slow, painful death." And they'd be like "Hey, remember when we wanted roads and you said no? Maybe if we had those we could export our cure and you could get it, but now you won't. Too bad." And naturally you'd be like "No, I'll send my private jet to get some from you, so you won't need the roads - don't worry about it!"And you know what any self-respecting group of folks would say? "We would rather be dead ourselves then give you that cure you need!"

Poor dictator.

Moral of the story: transportation is the most fundamental thing in society. Build roads if you want to live and better everyone. A road will pay for itself eventually. 

Survival of the fittest? Uh, yeah, it's not fair to the less advanced, but we aren't in some video game where the guy with the mega-bronze-annihilator-shield can take down the guy with the biodegradable-peace-shield. There's a reason why men have, for the most part, ceased in having sex with as many women as possible in order to have the widest clan. It's because that's no way to live. 

Oh, your grandchildren will have problems supporting the "freeloaders", eh? What if your privileged grandchildren aren't so privileged and they become the freeloaders? Would it be fun to watch them disintegrate because you fought loudly to not pay for welfare?

Yes. You're money should be going to that landwhale that can't find a job, know why? Because it is your fault that she cannot do so. You, as a dictator, made it so that only those who win the lottery of birth can get a decent education. Those landwhales, who cannot afford to be properly educated, they can't get a job and end up sucking up your dollars. So how about this: instead of just having your money and tax dollars go to your Aryan children's education, have them go to everybody -including the landwhales'- educations. That way, you'll spare your children from having to pay the welfare of that fattie.

The sad thing is that I am only just arriving to what the most appalling part of your essay is. This sentence: "The government should totally be in control of who gets to do what. 

For example, which families get to [have] kids, and which people get to study what, or who gets access to technology".

That is pathetic, for lack of a better word. How entitled can a person feel? How would you decide who gets to have kids? By financial income? Maybe my rich husband is a psycho and, despite his cash, he's going to rape my children and beat me, therefore creating a few new dependant individuals. Either dependant on welfare or anti-depressants or something else. How would you determine who gets access to technology? You don't like that I criticize you, so you take my Internet away, so that I become stupider, more complacent and unable to criticize you. And how do you determine who can study what? Maybe you think that a person will be better at science, so you force them to study medicine, but as a result, you lose an incredible potential author. But maybe nothing is getting through your skull. Maybe you truly are the most ignorant person out there. 

We aren't all equal, but we are all born equal, and it is our government's job to make sure that we all have equal opportunity. The fact is that when you have to save someone from death, you probably aren't going to know them well. And you'll save randomly, as opposed to taking your time and weighing the pros and cons of saving either person. You cannot be so cold and heartless - it's inhuman.

Judging people is indeed necessary, but by their personalities, not by their social standings. I'll skip the rest of the judging.

Why should we not spend more money on the people who are paying the taxes? Simply because they can manage. All citizens are comrades, they are like brothers, and we are all human. If you can thrive on your salary, why would you want more? Is it perhaps because you are a douche? If you can help your neighbour, why wouldn't you? Why do you need, no, why do you want more and more and more? That's what this consumeristic, capitalistic system has done to you. Made you completely oblivious to the needs of the others. And it is that is the worst thing possible - a lack of empathy. 

I'm not trying to preach here. And Thomas will be the first to agree that I am not over-sensitive, but some things are senseless and need to be brought to light. If everybody thought-process was like Thomas's, then where would the world be? Would we progress? Likely not. And it is because our fundamental goal as a society must be progression that we must strike down absurdities like the ones that escaped my friend's mind. School starts tomorrow, and I'll be disappointed if I don't hear a response from you, Thomas.

1 comment:

  1. First off, Tl;Dr most of it

    Second, you're idealistic as fuck, you expect there will always be this standard of living, able to sustain this kind of life for eternity. Thirdly, it currently costs 22,000$ ish per ( pound?kilogram ) that gets into space, so morbidly obese people wouldn't be the choice, especially if the person has medical conditions.
    Also, idk jack shit about nuclear Armageddon, but it sounds cool, and makes sense with Israel and Iran Fucking around.

    Building a multi million dollar highway up north so some people who don't even pay taxes can drive to the better developed areas and protest is bullshit




    Dude fuck it.
    I'm an entitled prick?
    Dude your ideas don't work, you're like an feminazi, thinking money grows on trees, and you can ladle out a few million without any problems.

    Cunt:)

    ReplyDelete

Any thoughts? Want to tell me something? Start a debate and get talking! Comment below!