1. Joined
    23 Nov '11
    Moves
    43943
    13 Oct '14 21:02
    Originally posted by Zahlanzi
    " in the US, there are homeless shelters available to people who need shelter"
    what is the % of coverage? is it 100%? even 90% would be good.

    the thing is you have a lot of homeless people, do they prefer freezing over getting in those shelters?


    "I get the feeling that what you're really arguing for is giving people rent money to choose their own ...[text shortened]... or most ayn rand, no government aid, disciples.

    socialism in this case actually saves money.
    Not all homeless people are mentally ill. Especially since the Great Recession, many have found themselves flung from employment into homelessness.
  2. Joined
    23 Nov '11
    Moves
    43943
    13 Oct '14 21:07
    Originally posted by normbenign
    Socialism may appear in the short run to save money, but the addiction to government aid tends to create new and more expensive programs over time.

    For example the aforementioned Section 8 housing at first seems viable, but the people who pay only a small portion of the cost of renting their home tend to care for it poorly, and the houses often end ...[text shortened]... d have to be demolished. The real costs are often disguised or postponed past being recognized.
    The problem is the United States has socialism, entitlements and handouts to the uber rich. Oil subsidies, farm subsidies, minimum wages that allow businesses to pay their employees so little the tax payer must subsidize their workers which amounts to a handout for the company, the Too big to Fail and Too Rich to Jail precedents that have been set. The list goes on...
  3. Joined
    23 Nov '11
    Moves
    43943
    13 Oct '14 21:12
    Originally posted by normbenign
    Specifically to what are you referring? Government regulations cost oil companies billions of dollars which they pass on to you in the cost of energy you use.

    Whether business of individual, government ought to butt out and let both alone.
    Yes, let's eliminate all the OSHA rules and regs along with the food and Drug Admin. Let the buyer beware! If you buy and ingest bad food and die, your fault. If your car catches fire due to a manufacturing mistake, it's your fault. If you buy medicine and it ends up being lethal snake oil, it's your fault. Eliminating rules and regs works only if we go back to a society where everyone takes care of their basic needs by hunting, planting and/or gathering, sewing their own clothes and building their own shelters.
  4. SubscriberWajoma
    Die Cheeseburger
    Provocation
    Joined
    01 Sep '04
    Moves
    77989
    13 Oct '14 21:36
    Originally posted by Phranny
    Yes, let's eliminate all the OSHA rules and regs along with the food and Drug Admin. Let the buyer beware! If you buy and ingest bad food and die, your fault. If your car catches fire due to a manufacturing mistake, it's your fault. If you buy medicine and it ends up being lethal snake oil, it's your fault. Eliminating rules and regs works only if we go b ...[text shortened]... by hunting, planting and/or gathering, sewing their own clothes and building their own shelters.
    These regulatory organisations should be privatised, if you're a scaredy pants you can pay for the regulation by only purchasing from producers registered with them.
  5. Joined
    23 Nov '11
    Moves
    43943
    13 Oct '14 22:07
    Originally posted by Wajoma
    These regulatory organisations should be privatised, if you're a scaredy pants you can pay for the regulation by only purchasing from producers registered with them.
    How do you think your idea will effect trade? I'm guessing other countries would not be interested in our products. With the diminishing buying power of US citizens, this would be a very bad idea for businesses.
Back to Top

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.I Agree