I've been finding out lately that a disturbing number of you are conservatives/Tory supporters of some stripe or another. Being somewhat of a flaming red socialist myself, I'm interested in how you guys justify the belief that the rich ought to get richer and the poor ought to fend for themselves that seems to be the Tory standpoint to me...
Page Summary
Style Credit
- Base style: Abstractia by
- Theme: Dark Carnival by
Expand Cut Tags
No cut tags
no subject
Date: 2004-09-17 05:00 pm (UTC)From:How about the flip-side of that, then? Assuming it's optional to have to have a job one considers distasteful and an income will be guaranteed anyway, then: a) how bad a fit does a job have to be before one doesn't need to work? b) what incentive is there for anyone to work? c) who will do the messy jobs like repairing flooded sewers or working in a slaughterhouse? d) if the solution is to pay more money for unpleasant jobs then how will the resulting catastrophic inflation be dealt with? e) how much should the remaining workforce - which is too small to pay for the existing social security regime due to an aging population - pay to people who choose not to work despite being capable?
FWIW, my answer is "yes, they should be forced to get a job". If someone's conscious choices, as opposed to accidents or illness, make them unable or unwilling to earn an income then the rest of the nation does not owe them one. Which, I guess, puts me quite far to the right on this particular issue. I'm all for the government helping people who need it, but not for all those who want it.
no subject
Date: 2004-09-18 01:55 pm (UTC)From:no subject
Date: 2004-09-21 08:37 am (UTC)From: