01-30-2018, 03:36 PM
(01-30-2018, 01:54 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Exactly.
Another point that a lot of people refuse to admit is that there are a lot of people with a lot of money who never tried either.
When you take all of this into account it is hard to start basing social policy on who tries compared to who doesn't try.
Not that hard. Do the people with a lot of money who didn't try need a social safety net? Social programs are not meant for the fortunate but rather the unfortunate. The try vs try not argument doesn't pertain to success only what we have deemed for this conversation "failure". If you were successful without trying then you cast no burden to society, it is not "my job" to support you if you have money. If you failed while trying then I believe we as a society should support you. If you failed without ever trying then you made a conscious decision to be defeated in which case that decision was yours to be a burden on society and therefor no longer societies responsibility to support you.
This is why I prefer systems in which those receiving benefits are required to do things like community service and similar activities if they are unable to work. I would even go so far as saying I'd be okay if they simply pursued additional education opportunities so that one day maybe they could contribute in other ways through advancements in science, art, or entrepreneurship.
