You always get more of what you subsidize and less of what you don't so all social safety nets do is get people to stop working and thinking for themselves and getting on the government teat rather than getting out of bed at a reasonable hour in the morning and working for a living. Why work when nanny government will support you?
Everything you've said here is pure fantasy and conjecture. The exact kind of conjecture that comes from narcissistic privileged wealthy men, who probably don't even know that store-brand cereal is a real thing.
As someone who has been there, let me tell you this: For a sane person, living on welfare is not a choice, it's a last resort.
Unless you're lucky enough to have family or friends that will give you a room, you live in a tiny townhouse/apartment/unit/flat in a shitty area outside town. You have barely enough money to rent that shitbox or pay board. You get to use a minimal amount of electricity, and buy store-brand basic foods to feed yourself. You can't afford to eat out or buy things to entertain yourself. No way you can own and operate a car. You don't live, you simply exist.
If you genuinely believe anybody would choose welfare over having a job and decent quality of life, you need your head examined.
This isn't an argument for welfare to pay out more, by the way. I'm simply saying that the "living it up on welfare" fantasy is just that. An image conjured by the privileged to justify their callous attitudes.
A prisoner is entitled to four meals, a roof, and a bed. A free person should have at least that and his dignity, when he loses his job for reasons beyond his control.
VogonsDrivers.com | Link | News Thread