RE: Didn't need no welfare state (Was: Re: news...)

From: Billy Brown (
Date: Wed Apr 19 2000 - 10:08:00 MDT

Emlyn (pentacle) wrote:
> I should have said
> - There is always going to be a segment of the population which is "dead
> weight", ie not able OR NOT WILLING to support itself.
> I don't condone this on the part of the unwilling (I am often surrounded
> the unwilling, and they annoy the hell out of me), but I do see it as a
> necessary evil. I don't think the caveats above in any way undermine my
> argument (entirely unoriginal though it is).

I don't see that it is necessary at all. Willing or not, if the alternative
is starvation the slackers will go out and work. The only tricky part is
ensuring that the genuinely incapacitated don't suffer too much in the
process - which is why I favor private charity, with its ability to make
fine-grained judgment calls about who is and is not really incapable of

Billy Brown

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:09:36 MDT