Question for Extreme Fiscal Conservatives: What Would Happen If You Got Your Way?

[Infohawk]

What if all safety nets and all income redistribution were really done away with? Do you think that ALL Americans would be able to feed, clothe and house themselves? If not, what would happen to those Americans? Do you think that charities would help ALL of them?

Compared to many on this board I'm fairly fiscally conservative, but I do think the government should guarantee some very basic things like shelter, food and clothing. Shelter could even be a tent and food could even be military rations. For those that don't support even the most basic safety nets, what do you think will happen to the people at the "bottom" of our society?

 

[Jaskalas]

We may need to radically rethink what a safety net is, to make it something affordable. Once we bankrupt this country we'll all find out what that new standard of living is.

If I got 'my' way, then Conservative states would do their thing, and Democrat states would do theirs. We'd have competition and people would move to the state with benefits that they enjoy having. Eventually the failures and the success stories would be self explanatory and everyone could opt to follow the route to success.

My way is pluralism where we live together in harmony, not trying to FORCE the other half of this nation to live the way WE demand of them. My way allows us to move swiftly to learn our lessons, placing only a portion of the nation at risk from new experiments in government.

My way will not happen with the fascists in power, and this nation WILL fall under its own weight. Then we'll be lucky to have any standard of living.

 

[matt0611]

I'm an extreme fiscal conservative, and yeah, I advocate getting rid of pretty much all welfare. I'm not for doing it overnight though, things need to be phased out to let people plan for things. I'm not for throwing people on the street tomorrow.

I give to charity and would give a lot more if I wasn't taxed so heavily and knew that people didn't have government welfare to take care of them. I feel much better and more confident knowing I'm giving it to a charity than I do the government.

I also hold the view that with a smaller government and less interventions and taxes that the economy as a whole would be a lot more productive overall and we'd be more wealthy, there would be more jobs and they would pay more and we'd have less of a need for welfare overall. There also wouldn't be the people who don't really need welfare but take it and abuse the system and ruin it for everyone else. I also believe its more moral for people to help others voluntarily than for the government to come in, take your money forcefully, and redistribute it to others.

Anyway, I know the resident libs will go bonkers at me for saying this. But that's my view on welfare.

 

[her209]

What if your town just got tore apart by a tornado? Should the government step in a provide shelter for you while you rebuild your house and/or find more permanent residence? Or should you rely only on the charities to do so? Should the federal government step in and pay for the clean up if your city/state can't pay for it? What if your city has to drastically raise revenues (taxes) to pay for the clean up?

 

[BoberFett]

What if your town just got tore apart by a tornado? Should the government step in a provide shelter for you while you rebuild your house and/or find more permanent residence? Or should you rely only on the charities to do so? Should the federal government step in and pay for the clean up if your city/state can't pay for it? What if your city has to drastically raise revenues (taxes) to pay for the clean up?

Didn't anybody in that town have insurance?

 

[Infohawk]

But that's my view on welfare.

Just to be clear, do you think that under your reforms nobody would need to be homeless, hungry, dirty? Or do you concede that some people would be fucked anyway?

 

[her209]

Didn't anybody in that town have insurance?

Some do. Some don't. Does homeowners insurance pay for lodging while you're waiting for your house to be rebuilt? Who pays to clean up the debris from the city streets?

 

[marincounty]

The red states would suffer the most, since they are relying on programs paid for by the blue states. That's the problem with most right wing ideas, they have never been thought through by their proponents.

 

[matt0611]

Just to be clear, do you think that under your reforms nobody would need to be homeless, hungry, dirty? Or do you concede that some people would be fucked anyway?

There may be some, yes, but aren't there homeless, hungry, and dirty people now?

Maybe there would be less, perhaps there could be more. I can't say for certain either way.

I think many people today feel like its not there problem, "I pay my taxes, the government will or should take of it". Perhaps if people knew it was only up to them, individuals to decide to help people, maybe that would help offset some? People having more money in their paycheck every month would also help some.

I can't promise there wouldn't be any though, no.

 

[Schadenfroh]

The red states would suffer the most, since they are relying on programs paid for by the blue states. That's the problem with most right wing ideas, they have never been thought through by their proponents.

The bluest areas of my red home state tend to be the most impoverished. Those areas tend to be socially right-wing, fiscally left-wing and they are represented by Democrats. If the federal government allowed states to do as they please in regards to social welfare, I imagine there would be a mass exodus of people from red states to blue states prior to those benefits expiring.

 

[Infohawk]

There may be some, yes, but aren't there homeless, hungry, and dirty people now?

Maybe there would be less, perhaps there could be more. I can't say for certain either way.

I think many people today feel like its not there problem, "I pay my taxes, the government will or should take of it". Perhaps if people knew it was only up to them, individuals to decide to help people, maybe that would help offset some?

I can't promise there wouldn't be any though, no.

Well at least you're honest about it.

There are certainly homeless people now. Some fall through our existing safety nets and that should be addressed. (For example, it always struck me that most public housing is just a benefit for a select group of random people). But most people on the streets are crazy and are basically not taking advantage of the aid that's there.

 

[woolfe9999]

A question for the OP. When you talk of dismantling all "safety nets," are you also referring to SS and Medicare? If so, then an additional question is, what happens to the elderly?

Welfare for the poor and entitlement programs that working people pay into and get back out when they retire are IMO two different things. Many libertarians and conservatives want both gone, but some might have a different view of one as opposed to the other.

 

[a777pilot]

If we stop spending more than we make, there will come a day when it all falls apart. Why do that? Why not just spend what we make and within that restriction, make judgments as to what is really important to spend limited resources on.

Of course if the Progressives are right and government spending is all we really need to do to be successful, happy and free, then I have a plan. Progressives continue to say that the stimulus spending so far has not been nearly enough, so.............

I suggest we give $100 million to every American citizen and all those that just happen to be here, i.e., illegal. This money would be deposited in the citizens SS accounts to be withdrawn as the citizens see fit. There, problem solved. Just in case you are interested the "cost" would be just $32,000 trillion.

It's a logical result of what the President and the Progressive have been calling for in government spending.

Where, you might ask, is all this money coming from for this re-distribution of wealth? That's the easy part, as in all Fed money, it comes from thin air.

 

[Infohawk]

You haven't answered any of my questions.

 

[a777pilot]

If not, what would happen to those Americans?

As in all history, they would cope or they would die.

There I answered your question.

Next.

 

[spidey07]

What if all safety nets and all income redistribution were really done away with? Do you think that ALL Americans would be able to feed, clothe and house themselves? If not, what would happen to those Americans? Do you think that charities would help ALL of them?

Compared to many on this board I'm fairly fiscally conservative, but I do think the government should guarantee some very basic things like shelter, food and clothing. Shelter could even be a tent and food could even be military rations. For those that don't support even the most basic safety nets, what do you think will happen to the people at the "bottom" of our society?

Two options.

1) They would form communes and provide for each other

2) They would rob, pillage and steal from productive members of society and volunteers.

I know the real outcome (hint - it's not #1, specifically because of #2) and that's why I've been stocking up on ammo and food, making sure I live near a water supply. Because it IS coming. I'm fine with providing basic necessitates like we do when a natural disaster hits.

 

[Infohawk]

As in all history, they would cope or they would die.

There I answered your question.

Next.

Does it bother you that people would die?

 

[Infohawk]

Two options.

1) They would form communes and provide for each other

2) They would rob, pillage and steal from productive members of society and volunteers.

I know the real outcome (hint - it's not #1, specifically because of #2) and that's why I've been stocking up on ammo and food, making sure I live near a water supply. Because it IS coming. I'm fine with providing basic necessitates like we do when a natural disaster hits.

So what you're saying is that you want to change American government so that we get ourselves into a situation where people rob, pillage and steal?

 

[spidey07]

So what you're saying is that you want to change American government so that we get ourselves into a situation where people rob, pillage and steal?

I'm a social darwinist, you figure it out. Put them in poor or work camps, but put them to work if they want free stuff from me.

 

[umbrella39]

Two options.

1) They would form communes and provide for each other

2) They would rob, pillage and steal from productive members of society and volunteers.

I know the real outcome (hint - it's not #1, specifically because of #2) and that's why I've been stocking up on ammo and food, making sure I live near a water supply. Because it IS coming.

And there you have it...

This one post says more than the 53,851 leading up to it.

 

[Infohawk]

I'm a social darwinist, you figure it out. Put them in poor or work camps, but put them to work if they want free stuff from me.

So just to be clear when you advocate for policies on this forum it's because you want to bring about a crisis where poor people either try to steal from with force or are put into work camps? That's kind of weird.

 

[umbrella39]

So just to be clear when you advocate for policies on this forum it's because you want to bring about a crisis where poor people either try to steal from with force or are put into work camps? That's kind of weird.

I've always known people like spidey exist but it's nice to put a "face" to it.

He is rather special in that he not only thinks the time is near when the poor/unemployed/homeless will rise up... he welcomes it, wants to put into place policies that would, in his *mind* assure it, and is armed and ready for it... this imaginary war. Weird is not the word that comes to mind.

 

[Lithium381]

I don't disagree with spidey or 777.... although i don't WANT people to die.... if they refuse to help themselves then they will perish. That's the problem with our current system, if you don't want to work you'll do just fine sitting around there is little incentive to be productive for yourself or society as a whole....

 

[Infohawk]

I don't disagree with spidey or 777.... although i don't WANT people to die.... if they refuse to help themselves then they will perish. That's the problem with our current system, if you don't want to work you'll do just fine sitting around there is little incentive to be productive for yourself or society as a whole....

So what you're saying is that every person who is down on their luck in America can get themselves out of that situation with hard work alone and without outside help?

 

[spidey07]

So just to be clear when you advocate for policies on this forum it's because you want to bring about a crisis where poor people either try to steal from with force or are put into work camps? That's kind of weird.

I'm not saying anything of the sort, only that is what would happen if all entitlements were shut off. MIB - a person is smart, but people are dumb scared animals. There is a very large portion of the population that simply couldn't take care of themselves if their life depended on it (and it will), and if it came to that, they would come after me. I'm prepared for that day because it's drawing nearer.

If they are able bodied, they need to work. If they aren't then those that are can take care of them. Gramma can hold the north point at 500 yards with a good scope.