Would You Choose More Money or Less Hours?

[Martin Hash]

All Hash Plan policies work out from the basic assumption that we are a Liberty Nation & people are responsible for themselves. If you cannot manage your own affairs, for whatever reason, then the rest of us MAY offer you charity, keeping in mind that a nation that undermines work-ethic is not long for this earth. Conversely, people on the receiving end of our benevolence have their own liberty issues, so there is some kind of balancing act that maximizes liberty all-round. I've offered my suggestions in this area before, none of which involved free money.

[Okeefenokee]

Yeah, that's the end welfare position. I get it, but it doesn't seem realistic right now. Thinking more realistically about a change that could actually happen, you can take the stance that welfare probably can't be gotten rid of right now, but it can be changed, seeing as how we've already accepted it as reality.

Even in liberty nations, there are taxes, and those taxes go towards purposes that serve others, but not necessarily the tax payer directly. People who don't have children still pay property taxes to fund schools. If you hypothetically can't end public schools, but the money going to them is being spent poorly, it would make sense to go for a plan to make that system better, if you can't end it entirely.

Perfect is the enemy of good, and all that.

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

Well, all my friends that majored in Exploring Intersectionality Through Interpretive Dance aren't exactly optimists these days... but they are just being sticks in the mud over America's re-greatification.

Very interesting... During my lifetime, as a country we have continually been moving to the left, socially anyway, and the Conservative narrative of "things are getting worse" was from the right. It never occurred to me that the roles have been reversed, even though I always add the caveat to my Liberty vs. Socialist explanation that anyone can be conservative.

Plus, I'm assuming all your woo-woo friends are socialists, if not Marxists, that's also something I never experienced in my lifetime.

As someone who was reared up between the autumn twilight of the gen-x slacker ethos and the inchoate quivering of SJWery, I feel like I was destined by fate to be a liberal pessimist.

I think we might use the term socialist differently, but I don't think I know any Marxists, as such. I do know some cry-babies though... but I don't know what they think about economics.

[Martin Hash]

Even in liberty nations, there are taxes, and those taxes go towards purposes that serve others, but not necessarily the tax payer directly. People who don't have children still pay property taxes to fund schools. If you hypothetically can't end public schools, but the money going to them is being spent poorly, it would make sense to go for a plan to make that system better, if you can't end it entirely.

A society exists to perpetuate itself: funding children is part of that. So is maintaining the environment, enforcing contracts, social security, safety & healthcare, but a Liberty nation does not use fairness as a measure, it attempts to give the most liberty to the most people. Given any society issue, I can use the lens of liberty to deduce a solution. Marxists use the lens of equal outcome, and socialists are of the opinion that they can predict the future.

As far as Welfare is concerned, minor adjustments here & there, mostly to change the emphasis back to liberty, is all that is in order. Remember, I'm a Liberalist (Classical Liberal) in the Democratic Party, so me & Republicans part ways about taxes: they're all about establishing their own dynasties, where I'm aiming to maximizing overall liberty. And I part ways with The Left because I want redistribution to go from the 1% to the top quarter of the population, the people that pull everyone else along, while the Lefties stress equality of outcome for everyone.

p.s. If you've read my stuff before, you know I want to completely overhaul how education is done. First, it is NOT one of the 5 essentials that government should provide, though it should pay for. Total Charter Schools, and by that I mean anything goes that works.

[Okeefenokee]

I think I gave Hanarchy his first avatar.

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

I think I gave Hanarchy his first avatar.

You sure did. I laugh at that picture every time I look at it.

I got one last Christmas present before epiphany!

[Okeefenokee]

I need to find a new one.

[Ex-California]

Yeah, that's the end welfare position. I get it, but it doesn't seem realistic right now. Thinking more realistically about a change that could actually happen, you can take the stance that welfare probably can't be gotten rid of right now, but it can be changed, seeing as how we've already accepted it as reality.

Even in liberty nations, there are taxes, and those taxes go towards purposes that serve others, but not necessarily the tax payer directly. People who don't have children still pay property taxes to fund schools. If you hypothetically can't end public schools, but the money going to them is being spent poorly, it would make sense to go for a plan to make that system better, if you can't end it entirely.

Perfect is the enemy of good, and all that.

I pay a lot towards corpo-imperialist foreign wars and I don't support those either. Its part of the nature of taxes

[SuburbanFarmer]

All Hash Plan policies work out from the basic assumption that we are a Liberty Nation & people are responsible for themselves. If you cannot manage your own affairs, for whatever reason, then the rest of us MAY offer you charity, keeping in mind that a nation that undermines work-ethic is not long for this earth. Conversely, people on the receiving end of our benevolence have their own liberty issues, so there is some kind of balancing act that maximizes liberty all-round. I've offered my suggestions in this area before, none of which involved free money.

Why would you assume that citizens of a democracy would stay any more engaged and empowered than citizens of a socialist or communist regime?

Same lazy, corrupt humans, different framework around it.

[Martin Hash]

Why would you assume that citizens of a democracy would stay any more engaged and empowered than citizens of a socialist or communist regime?

Same lazy, corrupt humans, different framework around it.

Yeah, but we have a Liberty constitution so the autopilot tends that direction. Many a socialist pipedream gets kabashed in The Courts.

p.s. Socialists are a democracy too.