The Rise of Disability: What is the Solution?

[_ajax18]

What is the military if not defending people who cannot do it alone funded with forced seizure of property?

Military is a social contract that we entered into out of necessity. It went without saying that everyone had to fight. It's one thing that government (meaning WE) should do. You know this. You're just sore and being facetious at this point.

As much as I know you get off telling off people like me and even people like Graham, why do you insist on making this personal and about me? The explosion of disability entitlements, miserable compensation that they are, is a serious and unsustainable debt problem. You're a very smart man, so why not help offer us a solution instead of picking fights.

[_EAllusion]

Military is a social contract that we entered into out of necessity.

That's not much of an argument. Political theorists who are into social contract theory (I am not) generally think the social contract includes much more than a military out of necessity. The most famous and important social contract theorist of the 20th century, Johnathan Rawls, provides the most influential case for the modern welfare state, the one you oppose, in existence.

It's one thing that government (meaning WE) should do. You know this. You're just sore and being facetious at this point.

I don't know this. I do not in anyway accept that military defense is the one thing the government should do. I believe in a limited social safety net, for instance, that would include government provided support for the disabled. The idea that military is the only legitimate function of the government is a position held by almost no one, so it's downright strange for you to insist that I or anyone else must know that to be the case. Moreover, the argument you used about voluntary choice over your funds to help people is an argument for anarchism, which is an actual political position, not minarchy limited exclusively to military defense. Even Nozick's nightwatchman state allows for more than that. I'm not being sore and facetious. I'm pointing out your incoherence in attempting to defend your argument against state aide to the needy while being strongly pro-military.

[_ajax18]

I believe in a limited social safety net,

Well social safety net expenses are going up, the debt is too high in my opinion, so do you favor higher taxes? Where do you fall on this issue? Do you have a straight answer?

My position is not as extreme as you characterize. Taxes are high enough. Spending cuts need to be made to reduce the debt.

[_moksha]

Speaking of disabilities, you owe it to yourself to check this out: http://promotions.newegg.com/nepro/13-1199/index.html

[_Quasimodo]

Speaking of disabilities, you owe it to yourself to check this out: http://promotions.newegg.com/nepro/13-1199/index.html

Nostalgia! Thanks mosksha!

By the way, I have an Osborn I out in my garage that still works (or did twenty years ago when I last fired it up) that I'll sell to you for a great price. The first portable computer! It weighs less than a sewing machine and comes complete with it's own 5 inch monitor (monochrome). I'm pretty sure that the CP/M 5 inch floppy is still with it.

[_Kevin Graham]

NPR Adds Clarity To Discredited Disability Report

[_ldsfaqs]

The Rise of Disability: What is the Solution?

Take away disability payments and require the people that can actually work to work, require employers that are at the "lower" end of the employment scale to make a certain percentage of their workforce these so-called "disabled" if they apply.

Well over 3/4 of the so-called "disabled" aren't even disabled that I've talked with and known over the years, at least enough to where they can't actually work. Most either have mild to low mental or physical disability, can still move, function, think etc., yet they get their entire food and housing for free.

Tighten the rules to get these free-loaders off the system and we will get back to sustainability in this area.

[_beastie]

The Rise of Disability: What is the Solution?

Take away disability payments and require the people that can actually work to work, require employers that are at the "lower" end of the employment scale to make a certain percentage of their workforce these so-called "disabled" if they apply.

Well over 3/4 of the so-called "disabled" aren't even disabled that I've talked with and known over the years, at least enough to where they can't actually work. Most either have mild to low mental or physical disability, can still move, function, think etc., yet they get their entire food and housing for free.

Tighten the rules to get these free-loaders off the system and we will get back to sustainability in this area.

How much free health care have your children received over the years? Enough to pay for costly surgery?

[_beastie]

This is the new "welfare queen". You'll see desk workers comment that having a bad back doesn't stop THEM from working, so why should it stop anyone else from working? Seriously, what does a back have to do with construction work, anyway?

[_beastie]

How much free health care have your children received over the years? Enough to pay for costly surgery?

I am so sick of the hypocrisy of our posters who have benefited from our social welfare net turning around and criticizing other people who also have benefited from our social welfare net that I'm going to bump this thread into infinity. (or until I forget)