Finland - No Homeless

[DBTrek]

Quote number one was in response to your ad hominem fallacy post that what I say is irrelevant because I am a disabled veteran, and presumably one of the "leeches" you want to kill off. Why doubt you include the posts beneath the comments they actually were in response to?

Normally we all blow off your stupid lies on this forum because we're used to it, but today, let's make you own them. Let's look at the three posts following the one I just cited and see where I called you "a disabled vet and a leech I want to kill off":

And here we see that neocons, libertarians, and liberals are basically the same thing.

Speaking of non-contributors, there’s another post from StA. We’re all much wiser for it, eh? Another profound insight that will surely prove valuable to us all.

Yeah, we should gas disabled veterans too. But I am sure you love dogs and have some great vegan recipes too.

Hmmmmm. Doesn't look like I ever called you a leech, a disabled vet, or said I wanted to kill you off. Amazing. I know I'm shocked. I'm sure everyone else is as well.

My non-contributor remark was aimed at your non-contribution of "and here we see that neocons, libertarians, and liberals are basically the same thing", which is an inadequate and pointless response to everything I said. While I can see how that could be open to misunderstanding, it certainly *is not* open to an interpretation of "killing off disabled vet leeches". That's just your cultural Marxist victim-conditioning kicking in.

[Speaker to Animals]

Keep trying to claw your way out of that hole that you dug for yourself, I suppose.

It's pretty obvious you are treading water after staking out a shitty position. Then, instead of just owning up to it, you painted everybody criticizing you as wanting to "coddle" degenerates or whatever.

You don't really show any interest in engaging with what people actually have to say. If you just want to make shit up all the time, why don't you invent an imaginary poster instead, and just constantly respond to him.

[DBTrek]

Keep trying to deflect the attention away from your white knighting of grifters, fraudsters, and abusers and towards imaginary things no one ever said instead.

My position is fine. You only think requiring capable community members to give back to the societies they benefit from is a shaky position because your mind is poisoned.

[Speaker to Animals]

Dude, you haven't criticized a damned thing I wrote.

You keep attacking me like I want to throw money at the homeless. You obviously don't even read what people post before responding.

[Speaker to Animals]

As I have pointed out several times now, the "homeless" are not even a problem in and of themselves. It's not homelessness that you are talking about here, but drug addicts and the mentally ill. Most homeless people are not recognizable as such. You probably could walk past Nukedog on the street and have no idea. Most homeless people actually work jobs. Lots of them live like that because they want to. Others live like that because your neocon buddies like Sowell loved to flood American jobs with fucking immigrants and illegals, glutting the labor market, and driving wages down to the poverty line.

I'd rather just address the immigration and jobs issue directly, and send the mentally ill street people you are really talking about to mental health institutions where they belong. Drug addicts should get rehabilitation and some kind of vocational training to start over. That's about all the money I want to throw at them, and it doesn't involve putting a dime directly in their hands.

[Martin Hash]

This argument exists because most people have too high an opinion of the capabilities of other people - not me, I have lots of experience with people who simply cannot make competent decisions for themselves, and there's a LOT of them, some huge percentage of the population, perhaps half. Unless you think that incompetent people should be left to their own devices whatever the outcome, then your society better plan to be the caretakers.

p.s. There's also a huge Free Rider problem where Libertarians expect somebody else to take care of dumbasses out of a moral obligation or charity or something?

[DBTrek]

Likewise I believe in a social safety net for the disabled, children, elderly, and victims of disaster. Hard drug addicts are on their own, as are the voluntarily homeless, ex cons, and illegals. Let’s help Americans who are in a bind due to circumstances beyond their control, and waste not a penny on those seeking relief from their own decisions.

Friends and family are there to bail out bad decision makers. The government should not be.

[Speaker to Animals]

I'd rather just put them in a mental health institution. Society has to pay for them one way or another. Reagan just sloughed the cost off to society in general by shutting down the asylums. Now society pays for it through the increased crime, environmental damage, and overall shittiness of having mentally-ill street people and drug addicts all over the cities.

Instead of talking about them as the "homeless", just speak of drug addicts and insane people. That's the visible homeless people you see on the streets for the most part. Most of the homeless are not a problem other than the more general problem of stopping the demographic invasion of our country and continued glutting of labor markets, which drives many people to temporary homelessness (though you wouldn't really know it just by looking at them).

[DBTrek]

This argument exists because most people have too high an opinion of the capabilities of other people - not me, I have lots of experience with people who simply cannot make competent decisions for themselves, and there's a LOT of them, some huge percentage of the population, perhaps half. Unless you think that incompetent people should be left to their own devices whatever the outcome, then your society better plan to be the caretakers.

As much as I disagree with much of your economics and politics, I like this post. My experience is simply different from yours. But, if I held the same view on the competency of our citizenry as you do, I’d agree with your point. The reasoning is sound.

[jediuser598]

This argument exists because most people have too high an opinion of the capabilities of other people - not me, I have lots of experience with people who simply cannot make competent decisions for themselves, and there's a LOT of them, some huge percentage of the population, perhaps half. Unless you think that incompetent people should be left to their own devices whatever the outcome, then your society better plan to be the caretakers.

p.s. There's also a huge Free Rider problem where Libertarians expect somebody else to take care of dumbasses out of a moral obligation or charity or something?

If people made competent decisions, the economy would crash. They wouldn't spend all that money on brand new cars, go out and eat 5 nights a week, spend tons of money on an iphone or android phone, wouldn't take mortgages they can never hope to pay off. People making competent decisions for themselves would be bad for this country, this country lives off of their idiocy, and advertises directly to them for them to "hey, go spend your money here, or spend your money there!"

I mean shit, look at the lottery. There's a shit ton of people paying extra taxes, willingly.