I'm going to take some heat for this......

As someone who is currently receiving food stamp benefits due to no fault of my own, you can understand that I certainly can't agree with your attitude, which seems largely to be, "Down on your luck? Tough sh!t." They're necessary right now for me to be a productive, functioning member of society.

Florida already proved what the rest of us knew, that the vast majority of people on welfare can't even AFFORD drugs. Doesn't seem to make sense that everyone else's rights should be stripped away due to a very few bad apples.

not only their rights, but the cost to the taxpayers, which the florida plan has so far been a MAJOR bust in terms of that objective.

Whatever YOUR answer is, I happen to think it doesn't.

To be blunt, why are you asking the question if you've already made up your mind?

a) the dollar amount of your income going to welfare is likely less than 5 dollars per month.

b) why? because we are all in this together, and that could be you or your kids someday, just as easily. so we build a system to take care of each other.

c) see my other comments.

The Utopian world you would order everyone to live in looks an awful lot like Afghanistan or North Korea.

The libertarian mantra is:"Don't tread on our right to trample on the rights of others." This could not be more evident in your longest threat, that of silencing free speech. An ideology is not worth having if one can't defend it or it crumbles under slightest scrutiny.

Sigh, I will try and explain this. We have quite a few issues at play here than just the obvious surface problems, people being on welfare and leeching the system is a problem no one can really argue that, we truly need to get them off and independent and begin being productive citizens. But that being said 90% of the unskilled labor force our nation used to command here at home is now abroad in foreign countries.

You see our greed for lower prices on products we consume led us to our own problems today, welfare, debt just about everything. We allowed manufacturers to sell this nations soul, it's manufacturing back bone, we let our leaders make a bad decision that give us a short term gain for a severe long term cost and now complain we pay taxes or have to pay more to help fix it? Not only that, we now sit and scream and throw blame at the poor when the only way out the poor has are service industry jobs that pay unlivable wages, and a for profit education system that if you are not careful will just sack you full of debt and a fake piece of paper because for-profit predatory diploma mills are attacking the poor stealing their only chances at something better. We screw our poor so much and no one see's it, it's sad, it's no wonder so many are stuck on welfare, we have the power to fix it but instead of even recognize the problem and make steps to fix it we play the blame game and of course target the weakest for all our woes.

Only a tiny fraction of your wife's and your own tax dollars go for those pesky hungry people, so rest easy the bulk of government expenses sadly is not in taking care of our own , which is wtf because that's a governments very freaking job, If it was me I would be more concerned with unneeded wars, excessive politician benefits and pay, foreign aid by the billions, and a drug war that cannot ever be won. We have our government literally wasting billions upon billions on nothing more than backroom political pandering BS that the government or us doesn't even need. But sure what ever, spot on nailing the poor out of all that , undeserving ingrates, they need to get a job or an education......oh wait .......nvm

Well said, Pallas.

Studies have repeatedly shown that "social upward mobility" has become a myth. People who are born into poverty have a much greater chance of staying poor than ever before. If we take away everything from scholarships and grants to welfare and food stamps, we're going to end up a third world nation where people are begging in the streets with little hope for bettering themselves.

Being the supposed "greatest nation on earth", I'd like to think we're a bit more civilized than that.

Poor Neale. Mr. Smith's response was quite a devastating one and yet its significance seems to have been completely lost on Neale.

Smith's response, even if he hasn't internalize it, emphasizes one of the many reasons why Libertarianism applied to our current system would release a devastating cruelty on the world. Authoritarianism is not rooted in ideology, not rooted in wealth, or even in State power. Authoritarianism is rooted in the belief that one is superior to another. From that seed do all forms of oppression spring forth and it is when one feels that degradation of another human being is legitimately earned that worst barbarisms known to mankind can be unleashed. The hatred you harbor in your heart, Neale, not only serves the interests of the elite you critique but also fundamentally mirrors their mindset.

After arguing with you many times, I came to the conclusion that I simply lacked the ability to make you understand the above. But now that I see a man you respect fail to invoke even the slightest bit of introspection..... I have come to doubt the idea that you can understand what is wrong with your worldview. Considering this I of course don't expect you to respond in a significant manner to this post. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if you deleted it. Its something I needed to get off my chest....

not only that we spend way to much incarcerating our own, in this supposed land of free the following fact should strike a nerve some were.

4% of all the people in the world are US citizens, 25% of all the prisoners in the world are US citizens

so much money wasted on things I personally find much more reprehensible than helping poor through any kind of welfare.

Pallas,

I often wonder exactly what is going on in terms of incarceration, the US as a percentage of its population has one of the highest incarceration rates in the world, the highest of the developed countries, and yet crime is still extremely high in the US, again, probably the highest in the developed world.

I just wonder why this doesn't get recognized and push society to try and figure out different ways to deal with the problem

I just wonder why this doesn't get recognized and push society to try and figure out different ways to deal with the problem

If you haven't already guessed it all boils down to money. There's gold in them thar prison operations!

private prisons are a relatively new thing though. (actually it creates another dilemma. One of the problems that we have in our economy is that there is very little that we are creating as new businesses that has an export/wealth generation effect. Prison operations just shuffle money around, they don't create new money/wealth).

"private prisons are a relatively new thing though."

No, they're not. Forms of private prison labor have existed in the United States as early as, to my recollection, the Reconstruction era.

"Prison operations just shuffle money around, they don't create new money/wealth"

This isn't accurate either. Private prisons often produce goods which are then sold locally or abroad. Because the labor is that of prisoners, they can be paid next to nothing generating great profit for the operators. It is tantamount to slavery.

The US prison system isn't that difficult to understand. The timeframe of the explosion of the prison population roughly coincides with the expansion of globalization. As the United States faces greater competition in the world market, it has less access to wealth. As that access declines the upper class reduces the amount of wealth available to the middle class. With less wealth comes more poverty and with poverty comes social unrest. Illegalizing things like drugs, which those suffering in poverty often turn to, allows you to round up the poor and avoid social unrest while hiding the problem. This is why the poor are punished for drug use but the rich use it openly. Its not about drugs, its about controlling the population.

Sorry if that was a little brief, my edit time was draining and I got a little panicked. One of the keys to places like China undermining the United States is the fact that they use Capitalist wage slavery more ruthlessly than the US does. In order to stay competitive the United States needs to find a way to cut its operating costs but to do that it would necessarily have to reduce the standard of living for most Americans. Directly doing that would cause unrest, so private prisons filled with the poor is a good means of subsidizing that unbalance. Of course the entire population can't be incarcerated and so you have the expansion of public debt and our current economic crisis to provide a rationalization for the government's attempts to defend American Capitalism by harming the livelihoods of the average, working class schmoe.

Prison operations just shuffle money around, they don't create new money/wealth).

Bingo! Just like our esteemed banking/financial institutions.

Pat,

while I would almost agree with you, the role of the financial institutions is to facilitate the creation of new wealth through economic activity (creating the market for new wealth because of liquidity) and investment. Those are essentially the two main types of financial banks, the retail banks create the economic conditions that facilitate investment and then the investment banks underwrite the investment.

The problem that has occurred more recently is that with the deindustrialization of the United States, along with the increased liquidity through debt, we have created a situation where there is a LOT of money to invest, but nothing to invest in. Hence you start getting investments in what you might want to call speculation, the dot coms, derivatives relating to real estate etc...

While I would agree that our banking/financial system isn't as effective as it could be, I am not sure if that is the fault of those institutions, but more of our society that values the easy dollar rather than longer term investments (which do actually entail more risk because your money is locked up longer term, rather than just being churned over and over again).

My problem overall is that instead of being a system to facilitate the growth of industry and the economy, the financial system has been the 'growth' leader itself. I have often said that the US economy has become hollowed out, and it is this alone that shows exactly how hollowed out our economy really has become.

Wow, libertarianism really is a vile political philosophy.

The endless droning about government authoritarianism is laughable. The biggest authoritarians in the room are the libertarians! They want to change all of society to fit THEIR individual opinions. Little dictators, incapable of compassion for their fellow man.

Wow, libertarianism really is a vile political philosophy.

Yeah, people being free to live their life as they choose is the worst thing ever! /sarc

The endless droning about government authoritarianism is laughable.

I am sorry you feel that way. While some people do seem over the top with regards to government authoritarianism, with all the current laws that have been passed to curtail our freedoms, and those in the works, someone has to say something. (See: Patriot Act, DOMA, Personhood bills, etc...)

The biggest authoritarians in the room are the libertarians! They want to change all of society to fit THEIR individual opinions.

If by change to fit their opinions, you mean free people to do whatever the hell they want as long as it does not harm another, then I guess they want to change. I mean it's pretty stupid to think people should be able to participate in behaviors that have no effect on others right? Guess you think gay people shouldn't be able to get married Tracy? Or abortions should be outlawed? Or that all drugs should be illegal? Etc... Libertarians only want people to be able to choose for themselves.

Little dictators, incapable of compassion for their fellow man.

I think you interpret the fact that they think that compassion should not be mandated by the government to mean they have no compassion themselves. And that would be false.

I am sorry you feel that way. While some people do seem over the top with regards to government authoritarianism, with all the current laws that have been passed to curtail our freedoms, and those in the works, someone has to say something. (See: Patriot Act, DOMA, Personhood bills, etc...)

And yet it is the party that most so called libertarians tend to flock to that passes most of the bills that severely restrict peoples individual rights as indicated in the quote. Man irony is a killer.

Like the Tea Party, Libertarians are the Republican Religious Right in drag.

From a PDF Comment on the Tea Party Movement by Bob Altemeyer.

Libertarians vary in how much the government should do, but staunch libertarianism apparently rejects the role that government can play in righting injustice and social wrong. It seems to say, “If some people get screwed in life because of discrimination against their race or gender or nationality or sexual orientation or whatever, that‟s their tough luck. The government exists to do things like organize fire departments. It has no business interfering with the way society works.”

One can hold this view, but it does not overflow with sympathy, generosity, or a sense of justice. When millions of Americans had no health insurance and other millions were being gouged by the big insurance companies, when so many had been laid off because of a recession caused by greedy, deceitful bankers, when the poor stayed poor while the rich got richer through tax cuts enormously favoring them, the “leave things alone” attitude seems morally bankrupt and very selfish. You often see the Gadsden flag at Tea Party rallies; it‟s the yellow one with the coiled snake in the center. The inscription under the snake does not read, “Don‟t tread on us;” it goes, “Don‟t tread on me.” It‟s an apt symbol for this kind of libertarianism.

If you read postings and comments that argue the Tea Party‟s case on various websites, you will sometimes encounter sentiments like... Poor people are poor, they say, simply because they are lazy. We should not extend unemployment benefits to the people laid off now because it will just encourage them to watch TV instead of looking for work. The poor people who accepted the banks‟ invitation to buy nice houses for their families at low interest rates were “reaching beyond their class” and deserved to lose them. The rich are rich simply because they worked harder than everybody else, and deserve their wealth. Obama is taking money from those who work hard to buy votes from people demanding hand-outs.

These attitudes come right out of the catechism of the other authoritarian personality that research has discovered, the social dominators. Their defining characteristic is opposition to equality. They believe instead in dominance, both personal (if they can pull it off) and in their group dominating other groups. They endorse using intimidation, threats, and power to enrich themselves at the expense of others. This is the natural order of things, they believe. “It is a mistake to interfere with the „law of the jungle,‟ they argue. Some people were meant to dominate others.” “It‟s a dog eat dog world in which the superior people get to the top.”

Such people may want government to stick to running fire departments so they can rise/stay above others unimpeded. Research shows that social dominators are power-hungry, mean, amoral, and even more prejudiced than the authoritarian followers described earlier. They want unfairness throughout society.

Real Facts spare me your platitudes about "personal freedom". The above passage sums up, quite well, the real attitudes of "libertarians". Power-hungry, mean, amoral and prejudiced, just like your queen Ayn Rand. (A queen who by the way wanted nothing to do with the "libertarian" movement).

Source

All kinds of people today call themselves “libertarians,” especially something calling itself the New Right, which consists of hippies, except that they’re anarchists instead of collectivists...The anarchist is the scum of the intellectual world of the left, which has given them up. So the right picks up another leftist discard. That’s the Libertarian movement.

Finally, let's pose a hypothetical question for all of you "libertarians".

By Jewish law a 13 year old boy and a 12 year old girl are considered adults. Adults should be able to use drugs. I should be able to set up shop across the street form the middle school to sell those students drugs.

Real Facts you're a libertarian, right? You should have no problem with the above scenario. Unfortunately for you, the rest of society does.

Real Facts spare me your platitudes about "personal freedom". The above passage sums up, quite well, the real attitudes of "libertarians". Power-hungry, mean, amoral and prejudiced, just like your queen Ayn Rand. (A queen who by the way wanted nothing to do with the "libertarian" movement).

Kinda confused how you get power-hungry from a group of people that want to have the least amount of influence on your life as possible, but whatever helps ya sleep at night.

A good portion of that excerpt taken from one man's opinion is straight up bull@!$%#. Anyone who truly believes that the world should and can be equal has got to be among the most gullible people ever. Some people will always be smarter than others, or faster, or stronger, or be better looking, or have better people skills. These people will succeed. Those who are weaker, will not. Does that mean that all people who succeed are strong? No. Does that mean that all people who fail are weak? No. Just that the likelihood for success rises the stronger you are.

By Jewish law a 13 year old boy and a 12 year old girl are considered adults. Adults should be able to use drugs. I should be able to set up shop across the street form the middle school to sell those students drugs.

Real Facts you're a libertarian, right? You should have no problem with the above scenario. Unfortunately for you, the rest of society does.

And society has a problem with gay people getting married, as shown by results of referendums in CA. And society believed that slavery was just for a large period of time. Good thing we always listen to society huh?

So you're saying you're OK with someone selling drugs to 13 year olds?

No one said everyone is equal, or that everyone should have equal outcomes, that's a little game that you libertarians like to play.

I believe that to whom much has been given, much is expected. You can believe whatever "freedoms" you want.

We can take our visions to the voters and let them decide...oh wait we already have, your side lost, over and over and over.

Citizens like the idea of Social Security, Medicare, etc. They like having clean water regulations and people inspecting our food. Citizens like having well maintained roads and sewage systems. They are happy to send their children to public schools. The list goes on and on.

The idea that you and your libertarian cohorts know better than the rest of society, that YOU should tell us know-nothings that we are living wrong and aren't living "free" is the height of arrogance.

If things are so intolerable for you in the US, I suggest you move. To Somalia, it's a libertarian paradise!

So you're saying you're OK with someone selling drugs to 13 year olds?

Provided they have been educated about the risks associated with drug use, who are we to decide that 13 is too young? I personally disagree with having a set age of maturity, because it differs from state to state, culture to culture, and between countries. I think a more appropriate way would be determine the level of maturity of the individual and base the legality around that. Besides they already buy drugs anyways, at least if it was sold legally there would be regulations regarding the quality of what they get.

No one said everyone is equal, or that everyone should have equal outcomes, that's a little game that you libertarians like to play.

When the excerpt you quote says:

When millions of Americans had no health insurance and other millions were being gouged by the big insurance companies, when so many had been laid off because of a recession caused by greedy, deceitful bankers, when the poor stayed poor while the rich got richer through tax cuts enormously favoring them, the “leave things alone” attitude seems morally bankrupt and very selfish.

The implication is that all of these poor people who have no health insurance and "accepted the bank's invitation to buy nice homes" and were laid off, are poor because of the evilness and inequality of the world.

I believe that to whom much has been given, much is expected. You can believe whatever "freedoms" you want.

What?

We can take our visions to the voters and let them decide...oh wait we already have, your side lost, over and over and over.

Again, I will refer you back to gay marriage in California. You don't quite seem to be grasping that the majority is not always correct.

Citizens like the idea of Social Security, Medicare, etc.

Some do, some don't. Myself, being 25, I would much prefer that I never pay another dime into SS or medicare, and never be able to access those things later on in life.

They like having clean water regulations and people inspecting our food.

Do you understand what libertarians believe in? It's not a giant cluster@!$%# that liberals and conservatives try to make it seem like. If you (as a corporation, or person) directly cause harm to another person, or their livelihood, you are responsible. IE, you pollute the waters, and that kills someone, you get to go to jail for murder, or manslaughter depending on the circumstances I would guess.

Citizens like having well maintained roads and sewage systems.

And libertarians like these things as well. What is your point?

They are happy to send their children to public schools.

Really? Happy about it? Happy about spending a ton of money to get substandard results? Sounds like a sweet deal to me.

The idea that you and your libertarian cohorts know better than the rest of society, that YOU should tell us know-nothings that we are living wrong and aren't living "free" is the height of arrogance.

You still don't get it! I don't want to decide how you live your life, I want you to decide for yourself! I am not sure what else to tell you if you think you are currently living free.

If things are so intolerable for you in the US, I suggest you move. To Somalia, it's a libertarian paradise!

Ah, the old liberal favorite talking point about libertarians. For about the millionth time, Somalia is not a libertarian paradise, it is essentially an anarchist state controlled by various warlords who murder anyone who opposes them. Considering this violates the basic belief of libertarianism- that what you do must have no ill effect on others- it stands to reason that Somalia is not libertarian at all...

real facts

havent come across you before...but like your style....FR sent..hope you accept. I have a few groups as well...let me know if any interest you.

peace.

You still don't get it! I don't want to decide how you live your life, I want you to decide for yourself!

But you see, me and most of the other people in this country have decided how we want to live our lives. YOU don't like the choices we have made.

Ah, the old liberal favorite talking point about libertarians. For about the millionth time, Somalia is not a libertarian paradise, it is essentially an anarchist state controlled by various warlords who murder anyone who opposes them

Let me remind you of what your queen said,

All kinds of people today call themselves “libertarians,” especially something calling itself the New Right, which consists of hippies, except that they’re anarchists instead of collectivists...The anarchist is the scum of the intellectual world of the left, which has given them up. So the right picks up another leftist discard. That’s the Libertarian movement.

I love this.

If you (as a corporation, or person) directly cause harm to another person, or their livelihood, you are responsible. IE, you pollute the waters, and that kills someone, you get to go to jail for murder, or manslaughter depending on the circumstances I would guess.

You truly seem to have no idea what would happen. Except you already said

Some people will always be smarter than others, or faster, or stronger, or be better looking, or have better people skills. These people will succeed. Those who are weaker, will not. Does that mean that all people who succeed are strong? No. Does that mean that all people who fail are weak? No. Just that the likelihood for success rises the stronger you are.

In your utopia, wealth will equal power. What little restraint corporations and the rich have now will completely vanish. There will be no middle class. We will be playing a giant game of monopoly. The dice will be stacked against you and you will have no advocates. You will be crushed.

The delusion that you and the other libertarians operate under is that if the rules were relaxed your superiority would shine through. You erroneously believe that the penitence that we give to the less fortunate and the regulations that we put on businesses are what's holding you back.

Perhaps as you mature you will come to have a sense of community. Hopefully you will come to understand that we all could use a hand up now and then and that we are all brothers.

Best of luck.

But you see, me and most of the other people in this country have decided how we want to live our lives. YOU don't like the choices we have made.

And in doing so you've also decided how everyone else should live their lives as well...

Let me remind you of what your queen said,

I have never read any of Ayn Rand's books, and certainly do not consider her to be my queen.

In your utopia, wealth will equal power. What little restraint corporations and the rich have now will completely vanish. There will be no middle class. We will be playing a giant game of monopoly. The dice will be stacked against you and you will have no advocates. You will be crushed.

OoOoO! Can you use your crystal ball to find out the winning lottery numbers for me!?

The delusion that you and the other libertarians operate under is that if the rules were relaxed your superiority would shine through. You erroneously believe that the penitence that we give to the less fortunate and the regulations that we put on businesses are what's holding you back.

Well gee, I could drive a cab in NYC to try and make money, but I don't exactly have a couple hundred thousand dollars laying around to obtain a license to operate a cab in the city...

Perhaps as you mature you will come to have a sense of community. Hopefully you will come to understand that we all could use a hand up now and then and that we are all brothers.

And that could be why I choose to donate to charity. Operative sentiment being that it is my choice, not something forced upon me.

Best of luck.

Thank you! Best of luck to you as well!

But you see, me and most of the other people in this country have decided how we want to live our lives. YOU don't like the choices we have made.

But the choices you and others have collectively made involve taking what other people have earned at the point of a gun. That is an unacceptable act of aggression.

First you say

To be honest, I ALSO like them being forced to work for their largesse- cleaning streets, raking leaves on public property, painting public housing, whatever, WHILE wearing Safety Yellow vests emblazoned with "WELFARE RECIPIENT" to let everyone know. When you suck the at the taxpayers' trough, yopu have surrendered your right to nearly ANY privacy. Because I want you OFF the Dole and back supporting yourself. No, it's not particularly Libertarian, but then again, neither is being a leech.

as much as you would like to strip them of their privacy, no one has voluntarily surrendered their rights to privacy.

Then you turn around and state

Respondents name witheld for privacy reasons.

which demonstrates that you understand the value of privacy.

Haven't you posted in the past that you are on disability and if so how does that make you any different than the people you're ranting against?

Because I want you OFF the Dole and back supporting yourself. No, it's not particularly Libertarian, but then again, neither is being a leech

Your argument is bordering on the psychopathic. I can't speak for recipients of benefits for any thing other than unemployment but in order to draw benefits you had to have paid into the system. And for all of the years where you paid in but didn't draw anything out because you didn't need them, those benefits are lost to you - they're not like Cingular roll-over minutes where they accumulate and you have a big pile of money at the end of your career, otherwise one could retire off of them.

I've been working since age 16 and paying into the system the entire time. We're talking about more than 30 years worth of premiums deducted from my check which for the most part went back into the system. So the couple of years though out one's lifetime when the federal government provided emergency extended benefits to cover periods of high unemployment, a claimant in order to be eligible for those benefits had to be working in the year/year and a half leading up to the downturn.

I'm surprised to see this from you because you sound rather bitter along the lines of the poor whites in the south during slavery times who blamed their circumstances and misfortune on the "ni__ers".

Just thought I'd stop back and check if anyone responded to my posts. Sure enough our moderator jumped in. I'm sorry for your loss Neale.

Where to start? How about here.

Huh??!? The penitence? WTF? Do you mean "pittance"? Because we don't give the poor a bunch of "Our Fathers" and "Hail Mary's". This is what happens when people try too hard to sound learned

So spell check got the best of me. Of course I meant pittance. But the more laughable part than my error,

A response from myh publication of this at The Libertarian Enterprise (Neil Smith's E-zine) that actually succeeded in making me agree with Neil and disagree with myself in this particular place-

What's "myh" Neale? Are you trying to sound educated?

And with that Neale perfectly points out typical "libertarian" thinking. It's OK for me, but that other guy, well @!$%# him!

I couldn't have served up a better example Neale, thanks!

Bad spelling again on this one Neale. (I'm sure there must be a reason that it's OK for you to misspell words, but it's not OK for others.)

And a few of your comments are cutting very close to the line I definde above

Were my opinions offensive to you Neale? I didn't call anyone a name. I gave my opinions. At the end of our exchange, I wished Real Facts all the best and I meant it. Again, another PERFECT example of "libertarian" ideals. MY "libertarian" opinions are OK, your, well you need to keep your opinions to yourself.

I don't need to go read up on libertarianism written by "libertarians" Neale. I can see and read all I need to know about "libertarians" right here on Newsvine. My points stand, you have helped define them.

social dominators (what you keep claiming are "libertarians") are power-hungry, mean, amoral, and even more prejudiced than the authoritarian followers described earlier. They want unfairness throughout society.

Have a nice day.

WOW! Very interesting rant.

Neale, you were the one ranting as evidenced here:

First off, The poster of the copied e-mail isn't on welfare, sucking the publit tit. Hence, she has the right of privacy.

Contrary to your personal desires, we ALL have the right to privacy except in certain very specific scenarios primarily in connection with having certain rights stripped due to a criminal violation and conviction. A person isn't required to sign away their right to privacy as a condition to receive benefits, especially not unemployment benefits (I can't speak for the rest of them)

Second, the Right, in my opinion, should be surrendered when you take the public DOLE, NOT when you take what you have been forced at gunpoint to pay for.

But your opinion is neither fact or law.

Third, I have never denied being disabled. And, had I not been forced to PAY for disability insurance I didn't want from the government, I could have afforded to provide my own, cheaper and with better benefits.

So in your opinion being on disability is somehow different that being on the DOLE? (unemployment) Both are systems that you pay into. One (unemployment) you pay into so that you have money available to you when you through no fault of your own are without a job. I don't recall disability having a through no fault of your own requirement if for some reason you get hurt and are unable to work. Therefore per your own definition, since you're on disability wouldn't t that make you one of the _— suckers and leeches you're complaining about? If so, then what are you so pissed about, because all of the mean-spirited, unlawful and unConstitutional things stated below that you want done to others would also apply to you as well.

Neil- I understand your objections. However, if people want to suck the public trough for their existence, they have no right to privacy at all. I want them subjected to the government analprobings for cholesterol levels, drugs, alchohol and tobacco, prohibited from purchasing lottery tickets, have airtight regulation on the types of food their food stamps can purchase, hell, I want a government @!$%# telling them what clothes their kids can wear. I want them denied cable, internet, air conditioning, and cellular phones. I want their heating systems regulated and locked in to 65 degrees fahrenheit. I want them made so @!$%#ing miserable that they finally decide to get off their lazy asses and get to work supporting themselves and their kids.

To be honest, I ALSO like them being forced to work for their largesse- cleaning streets, raking leaves on public property, painting public housing, whatever, WHILE wearing Safety Yellow vests emblazoned with "WELFARE RECIPIENT" to let everyone know. When you suck the at the taxpayers' trough, yopu have surrendered your right to nearly ANY privacy. Because I want you OFF the Dole and back supporting yourself. No, it's not particularly Libertarian, but then again, neither is being a leech.

What I don't get is why you're acting as if all of these people are personally taking food out of the mouths of your children and forcing your wife to work harder. I dont' have any children but I'm sure that some of the taxes taken from me go to help pay for schools and other necessities for someone else's children, but I certainly don't begrudge them that. If I'm following your "logic" correctly, maybe I should?

Fourth, do I look like an idiot to you? If you think I'm going to be forced at gunpoint to pay for something, and my wife is forced at gunpoint to do so as well, that I am not going to try to get my investment back, you are crazy.

I have no idea what you look like, neither figuretively or genuinely, but it appears something is a mis

Fifth, I have repeatedly said I'll cheerfully stop receiveng the paltry sum I get in return for never taking another cent from us. And finally, Given the chance to get out of the system, I'd take it EVEN if I were forced to PAY for the privilege.

I don't know what that means. "They" won't allow you to do that?

Oh, and currently, I have refused MediCare, food stamps, "free" job training, and welfare, all of which I ALSO qualify for, and the government keeps trying to shove down my throat, while working to improve my physical wellbeing to the point where I can get off Disability, as well.

I understand not wanting to have to go to the government for help especially when they want a ton of information on you in exchange for what is sometimes relatively little in return. Is it at all possible that accepting some of the help could help expedite your recovery if your injury is one from which you can recover and help out with your wife having to work too much?

Lastly I think maybe the reason some people think unemployment is considered welfare is because in the United States Code which contains the collective laws of the United States (at the federal level), there is a chapter (7A) entitled 'Temporary unemployment compensation program' under Title 42 which is called 'The public health and welfare' (not to be confused with Chapter 42 which is 'Narcotic addict rehabilitation')

Really Neale, you can't see the irony?

Wow, libertarianism really is a vile political philosophy

Stated as a fact, not an opinion. A pretty nasty one.

Explain this.

You see, that's the difference between Libertarians and the rest of you. WE have NO PROBLEM with you guys taxing yourselves to pass out freebies to losers.

So every person who receives any type of government assistance is a loser? You just stated that as a fact, and I find it to be a VERY nasty one.

And from reading the other posts in this seed, it would seem that YOU are receiving government assistance.

UN-@!$%#ING-BELIEVABLE!

So again we come back to the typical "libertarian" position; it's OK for me, but not for those people! You just keep digging Neale, keep digging.

If you are really being burdened and persecuted so much here in the USA, if us poor wretches are causing you so much injustice, if the powers that be are enslaving you (that's really rich coming from someone receiving benefits from the government, not to mention very offensive to people who were actual slaves) you always have the option to LEAVE.

Of course you won't. You like clean water and safe food. You like driving on paved roads. You enjoy having police protection. The list of benefits to living in the US is long and large. YOU simply don't want to PAY for those benefits.

And that is why "libertarianism" is such a joke.

One last thing. The first line of the constitution that you "libertarians" claim to love so much reads:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Pay special attention to the first three words. We the People. That means everyone Neale, not just you.

Neale, you have every right to express your opinion. I also have every right to express my opinion. My original post (#1.18) came before your conversion post.

I feel pretty safe in saying we will never see eye to eye on a large number of issues.

I can tell you this, I will argue for your right to express your opinion anywhere in this country. I hope you would extend me the same courtesy.

As far as the newsvine community, I NEVER work to collapse anyone's posts or seeds and I am greatly offended by anyone who does collapse posts or seeds because of simple disagreements.

I wish you the best and I hope you find healing and peace. Take care.

"I care not, Sir, for what you say, but I shall fight to the death for your right to say it."

I think we have found a point of agreement! Regards.