Classes of Welfare Recipients - How to deal with each

[North Occidentia]

Some interesting logic and food for thought:

"'He who will not work, neither shall he eat.' (2 Thessalonians 3:10) . . . But the laws of St. Paul are not merely for the poor. They are for the rich as well . . . But you say, 'I have my paternal inheritance!' Tell me, just because he is poor and was born of a poor family possessing no great wealth, is he therefore worthy to die? . . . You say that the poor do not work, but do you work yourselves? Do you not enjoy in idleness the goods you have unjustly inherited? Do you not exhaust others with labor, while you enjoy in indolence the fruit of their misery?"
-St. John Chrysostom

[KiloMikeAlpha]

Some interesting logic and food for thought:

"'He who will not work, neither shall he eat.' (2 Thessalonians 3:10) . . . But the laws of St. Paul are not merely for the poor. They are for the rich as well . . . But you say, 'I have my paternal inheritance!' Tell me, just because he is poor and was born of a poor family possessing no great wealth, is he therefore worthy to die? . . . You say that the poor do not work, but do you work yourselves? Do you not enjoy in idleness the goods you have unjustly inherited? Do you not exhaust others with labor, while you enjoy in indolence the fruit of their misery?"
-St. John Chrysostom

I am sure quotes like that will fall upon some deaf ears just considering the source.

[UNIverseVERSE]

I am sure quotes like that will fall upon some deaf ears just considering the source.

Why? Sure, most of NSG is of the opinion that public policy shouldn't be decided by the book of some religion, but a fair number of us are also religious.

One thing I do wonder about that Thessalonians quotation is what, specifically, Paul means by work. I suspect the original meaning is closer to 'productive activity' than 'paid employment', even though we now (erroneously) consider the two synonymous. Food for thought, if you will.

[KiloMikeAlpha]

I am sure quotes like that will fall upon some deaf ears just considering the source.

Why? Sure, most of NSG is of the opinion that public policy shouldn't be decided by the book of some religion, but a fair number of us are also religious.

One thing I do wonder about that Thessalonians quotation is what, specifically, Paul means by work. I suspect the original meaning is closer to 'productive activity' than 'paid employment', even though we now (erroneously) consider the two synonymous. Food for thought, if you will.

Take the simplist case: Little house on the Prairie. You were, basically, all alone. You worked, or you starved. One doesnt need to be PAID for work to be productive. There are many societies where people are self sufficient. I think that satisfied Thess. as well.

[Sdaeriji]

Some interesting logic and food for thought:

"'He who will not work, neither shall he eat.' (2 Thessalonians 3:10) . . . But the laws of St. Paul are not merely for the poor. They are for the rich as well . . . But you say, 'I have my paternal inheritance!' Tell me, just because he is poor and was born of a poor family possessing no great wealth, is he therefore worthy to die? . . . You say that the poor do not work, but do you work yourselves? Do you not enjoy in idleness the goods you have unjustly inherited? Do you not exhaust others with labor, while you enjoy in indolence the fruit of their misery?"
-St. John Chrysostom

I am sure quotes like that will fall upon some deaf ears just considering the source.

Why? Do you even understand what John Chrysostom is saying? "The laws of St. Paul are not merely for the poor. They are for the rich as well." "You say that the poor do not work, but do you work yourselves?" It's a condemnation of inherited wealth.

[UNIverseVERSE]

Take the simplist case: Little house on the Prairie. You were, basically, all alone. You worked, or you starved. One doesnt need to be PAID for work to be productive. There are many societies where people are self sufficient. I think that satisfied Thess. as well.

Thank you. Or in a more modern situation, someone who refuses to submit themselves to paid employment might still be a productive and useful member of society, and so shouldn't be allowed to starve. Someone who is down on their luck and needs a hand between jobs is still a useful member of society, and so shouldn't be allowed to starve. Someone who worked their ass off at a business venture that eventually folded is still a useful member of society, and shouldn't be allowed to starve.

And hence the government should provide sufficient support for these people that they may not. QED, Biblical support for government welfare.

Edit: Sdaerji, I thought about mentioning that as well, but felt that most people of a capitalist persusation might find that just a little too radical.

[KiloMikeAlpha]

Take the simplist case: Little house on the Prairie. You were, basically, all alone. You worked, or you starved. One doesnt need to be PAID for work to be productive. There are many societies where people are self sufficient. I think that satisfied Thess. as well.

Thank you. Or in a more modern situation, someone who refuses to submit themselves to paid employment might still be a productive and useful member of society, and so shouldn't be allowed to starve. Someone who is down on their luck and needs a hand between jobs is still a useful member of society, and so shouldn't be allowed to starve. Someone who worked their ass off at a business venture that eventually folded is still a useful member of society, and shouldn't be allowed to starve.

And hence the government should provide sufficient support for these people that they may not. QED, Biblical support for government welfare.

Edit: Sdaerji, I thought about mentioning that as well, but felt that most people of a capitalist persusation might find that just a little too radical.

I said I have no problem with govmt welfare for those willing to work but cannot for some other reason. You cannot and will not convince me that I should pay for laziness.

[UNIverseVERSE]

I said I have no problem with govmt welfare for those willing to work but cannot for some other reason. You cannot and will not convince me that I should pay for laziness.

Actually, you've spent at least part of this thread arguing that starvation is an appropriate response for failure in some venture. Need I quote the posts at you?


Furthermore, define 'work' and 'laziness'.

[KiloMikeAlpha]

I said I have no problem with govmt welfare for those willing to work but cannot for some other reason. You cannot and will not convince me that I should pay for laziness.

Actually, you've spent at least part of this thread arguing that starvation is an appropriate response for failure in some venture. Need I quote the posts at you?


Furthermore, define 'work' and 'laziness'.

The onlyt hing I said about starvation IIRC is that it is a powerful motivator. if you can show me a post where I argue that starvation is an appropriate response for failure in some venture, then yes, quote me.

[UNIverseVERSE]

I would say that this

Starvation in fact is a very powerful motivator.

Combined with this

Quite the contrary, if I give you everything you need, why even try?

Implies that no government safety net should be provided, and thus that failure of sufficient magnitude should be met with starvation. Of course, it's slightly tenuous, but I'm fairly confident in that being the general impression most of us derived from your posts.

Again, define 'work' and 'laziness'.

[Tech-gnosis]

But what's the incentive to make them become productive members of society if they know society will always make sure they have a decent standard of living, even if they don't work for it?

Since when have welfare recipients received a "decent" standard of living?

[Tech-gnosis]

Yeah, I dont want to be forced to subsidise those who will not work. Same as I should not be forced into paying the mortgage of my neighbors. If I am feeling charitable, I can volunteer to pay thier mortgage, but I dont want to be forced into it.

Mortgages are subsidized through the tax system so you do, in part, pay for your neighbors mortgage and largely for your more affluent neighbors, the ones who need it less.

[KiloMikeAlpha]

I would say that this

Starvation in fact is a very powerful motivator.

Combined with this

Quite the contrary, if I give you everything you need, why even try?

Implies that no government safety net should be provided, and thus that failure of sufficient magnitude should be met with starvation. Of course, it's slightly tenuous, but I'm fairly confident in that being the general impression most of us derived from your posts.

Again, define 'work' and 'laziness'.

LIke I said starvation is a powerful motivator. If you are starving and yet you still refuse to work, and no one will be your benefactor then die.

The arguement is not about failure. Failure implies trying. If you refuse to try, you die. Hey, I like that, I should make a bumpersticker that says that.

[Sdaeriji]

What qualifies as "trying", precisely?

[UNIverseVERSE]

LIke I said starvation is a powerful motivator. If you are starving and yet you still refuse to work, and no one will be your benefactor then die.

The arguement is not about failure. Failure implies trying. If you refuse to try, you die. Hey, I like that, I should make a bumpersticker that says that.

Again, I ask. Define 'work' and 'laziness'. And, for that matter, 'trying'.

[KiloMikeAlpha]

LIke I said starvation is a powerful motivator. If you are starving and yet you still refuse to work, and no one will be your benefactor then die.

The arguement is not about failure. Failure implies trying. If you refuse to try, you die. Hey, I like that, I should make a bumpersticker that says that.

Again, I ask. Define 'work' and 'laziness'. And, for that matter, 'trying'.

Fine, I am an advocate of definitions. If you'd like to refute the definitions, we can discuss and alter them if necessary.

work - Not the scientific definition of Power applied over time. But offering something of value for something of value in return.
Making a quilt and trading it for bread is working. Going to an office, coding up a program, and trading it for a paycheck is working. Dancing in the street and trading it for coins is working. Pickpocketing is not working, it is stealing. Both sides must volunteer the thing of value.

Laziness - Wanting something and not willing to give back in kind.
Trying - Attempting something and not succeeding.
Succeeding - Meeting a certain set of goals.

[UNIverseVERSE]

work - Not the scientific definition of Power applied over time. But offering something of value for something of value in return.
Making a quilt and trading it for bread is working. Going to an office, coding up a program, and trading it for a paycheck is working. Dancing in the street and trading it for coins is working. Pickpocketing is not working, it is stealing. Both sides must volunteer the thing of value.

My minimum definition of work is forced labor, that is, compulsory production. Both elements are essential. Work is production enforced by economic or political means, by the carrot or the stick. (The carrot is just the stick by other means.) But not all creation is work. Work is never done for its own sake, it's done on account of some product or output that the worker (or, more often, somebody else) gets out of it.

To quote the previously mentioned essay again.

Laziness - Wanting something and not willing to give back in kind.

Really? I'd have gone for something closer to "minimising time spent doing things"

Trying - Attempting something and not succeeding.

How much of an attempt do you need to make?

Succeeding - Meeting a certain set of goals.

How close do you need to be to the goals to succeed? What if one's goal is not paid employment?

[Dumb Ideologies]

Welfare claimants are the unwanted child that refuses to accept abortion and then proceeds to suck on the government teat until the state is dry and HARDWORKING FAMILIES have to suffer a tax burden that literally crushes them like biscuits under rhinoceroses. File alongside immigrants, homosexuals, gypsies, and Jews. DELETE! DELETE!

[KiloMikeAlpha]

work - Not the scientific definition of Power applied over time. But offering something of value for something of value in return.
Making a quilt and trading it for bread is working. Going to an office, coding up a program, and trading it for a paycheck is working. Dancing in the street and trading it for coins is working. Pickpocketing is not working, it is stealing. Both sides must volunteer the thing of value.

My minimum definition of work is forced labor, that is, compulsory production. Both elements are essential. Work is production enforced by economic or political means, by the carrot or the stick. (The carrot is just the stick by other means.) But not all creation is work. Work is never done for its own sake, it's done on account of some product or output that the worker (or, more often, somebody else) gets out of it.

OK this is kind of vague to me. Please give me examples of what would be work and what would not be work in todays society.

Laziness - Wanting something and not willing to give back in kind.

Really? I'd have gone for something closer to "minimising time spent doing things"

I'd call that optimizing. Many inventions have been invented in order to minimize time spent. Am I lazy because I use wheels? I am not too sure.

Trying - Attempting something and not succeeding.

How much of an attempt do you need to make?

Good question. That is open for debate.

Succeeding - Meeting a certain set of goals.

How close do you need to be to the goals to succeed? What if one's goal is not paid employment?

Well by definition, I think 100% is success, the rest is failure. As to not being paid, fine, I said that is not a requirement. Bartering is fine. Stealing is not.

[KiloMikeAlpha]

Heh.

[Phenia]

If you are starving and yet you still refuse to work, and no one will be your benefactor then die.

Yeah, I think I read that in the Bible or something.

[KiloMikeAlpha]

[No Names Left Damn It]

NO U!

[Lunatic Goofballs]

Welfare claimants are the unwanted child that refuses to accept abortion and then proceeds to suck on the government teat until the state is dry and HARDWORKING FAMILIES have to suffer a tax burden that literally crushes them like biscuits under rhinoceroses. File alongside immigrants, homosexuals, gypsies, and Jews. DELETE! DELETE!

I blame the rhinoceroses. *nod*