Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

I am tired of this trendy smashing of the weak

Page 2 of 9 [ 130 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 9  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 35,282
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

10 Jan 2014, 4:15 pm

This is a trend I have been sick of for quite some time. I am attemting to get on disability due to my collection of mental issues and conditions which prevent me from holding any gainful employment. But my idea is to continue being a caring, compassionate person who's willing to help others where possible and I plan to volunteer some of my time at an animal shelter.

The idea you have to be employed to do any good for society is ridiculous....there are still things one can do for the community even if they are unable to work.


_________________
Tis the time to melt the Ice.


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 35,282
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

10 Jan 2014, 4:19 pm

adb wrote:
I have negative feelings toward people who feel that being disadvantaged means they should be entitled to free services. It's a feeling of resentment that what I work to produce is forcefully taken from me in order to provide free services to someone else. I have no issue whatsoever with providing voluntary assistance to other people, but it's infuriating when those same people feel that they are entitled to plunder the fruits of my labor. I have compassion and I have empathy, but they are feelings that convert rapidly to resentment in the face of contempt.

This resentment is not "superiority" or bigotry.



Well if you oppose being taxed, perhaps you should start taking action to abolish taxation....instead of feeling resentment towards the people who benefit from the social safety network this nation has in place. Also though tax money would not have to go into welfare if there was enough private chairity to provide an effective safety network but it so happens there isn't. So it then make it the governments responsibility to use some of the tax revenue to fund welfare.


_________________
Tis the time to melt the Ice.


beneficii
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 May 2005
Age: 42
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,245

10 Jan 2014, 4:27 pm

thinkinginpictures wrote:
adb wrote:
MegaBass wrote:
adb wrote:
I have negative feelings toward people who feel that being disadvantaged means they should be entitled to free services. It's a feeling of resentment that what I work to produce is forcefully taken from me in order to provide free services to someone else. I have no issue whatsoever with providing voluntary assistance to other people, but it's infuriating when those same people feel that they are entitled to plunder the fruits of my labor. I have compassion and I have empathy, but they are feelings that convert rapidly to resentment in the face of contempt.

This resentment is not "superiority" or bigotry.


That IS the scary attitude. So instead you expect them to rot, solves everything I guess, and when you become handicapped the same could happen to you. Then everyone else gets to resent you for feeling 'entitlement' for just wanting to survive.

This is too depressing already. :?

Distaste for being forced to support someone is not equivalent to expecting that he or she should "rot". They are unrelated concepts.

If I become handicapped in a manner that makes me unable to sustain myself, I will express gratitude and appreciation to those who want to help me. I will not feel entitled to support from people who don't want to help me.


That's interesting.

So if your caregivers who give you support express a certain political opinion that you would otherwise disagree with, would you conform to those ideas of your caregivers, in order to
express your deepest gratitude and appreciation? Do you *really* want to become so dependent on other people that you have no say in your own life?

Because that is what happens when people's benefits are closely tied to private matters, instead of public goods which we can "take for granted" in terms of welfare rights.

That IS THE idea of Welfare Rights: To become independent of private charity offers to keep our personal integrity, regardless of disability.


This, too. With no rights, you are left at the whims of your caregivers. This has led to abuse, to LGBT people being forced to correct their identities, to being pressured to join a religion, etc. It would get worse if you had to depend on an entirely private system.


_________________
"You have a responsibility to consider all sides of a problem and a responsibility to make a judgment and a responsibility to care for all involved." --Ian Danskin


TheGoggles
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Oct 2013
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,060

10 Jan 2014, 4:30 pm

adb wrote:
MegaBass wrote:
adb wrote:
I have negative feelings toward people who feel that being disadvantaged means they should be entitled to free services. It's a feeling of resentment that what I work to produce is forcefully taken from me in order to provide free services to someone else. I have no issue whatsoever with providing voluntary assistance to other people, but it's infuriating when those same people feel that they are entitled to plunder the fruits of my labor. I have compassion and I have empathy, but they are feelings that convert rapidly to resentment in the face of contempt.

This resentment is not "superiority" or bigotry.


That IS the scary attitude. So instead you expect them to rot, solves everything I guess, and when you become handicapped the same could happen to you. Then everyone else gets to resent you for feeling 'entitlement' for just wanting to survive.

This is too depressing already. :?

Distaste for being forced to support someone is not equivalent to expecting that he or she should "rot". They are unrelated concepts.

If I become handicapped in a manner that makes me unable to sustain myself, I will express gratitude and appreciation to those who want to help me. I will not feel entitled to support from people who don't want to help me.


Why do you assume that only you are capable of gratitude?

What if nobody wants to help you?



thinkinginpictures
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 May 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,310

10 Jan 2014, 4:30 pm

Sweetleaf wrote:
adb wrote:
I have negative feelings toward people who feel that being disadvantaged means they should be entitled to free services. It's a feeling of resentment that what I work to produce is forcefully taken from me in order to provide free services to someone else. I have no issue whatsoever with providing voluntary assistance to other people, but it's infuriating when those same people feel that they are entitled to plunder the fruits of my labor. I have compassion and I have empathy, but they are feelings that convert rapidly to resentment in the face of contempt.

This resentment is not "superiority" or bigotry.



Well if you oppose being taxed, perhaps you should start taking action to abolish taxation....instead of feeling resentment towards the people who benefit from the social safety network this nation has in place. Also though tax money would not have to go into welfare if there was enough private chairity to provide an effective safety network but it so happens there isn't. So it then make it the governments responsibility to use some of the tax revenue to fund welfare.


The problem is not so much that there is "not enough private charity". The problem with charity is the dependence bond it creates between the giver and the reciever, with the reciever being the worst off, who'd become a slave of the one who gives the chairity.

For example, if the charity offer disagree with your political opinions about abortion, or the death penalty or other political issues, the chairity can suddenly disappear.
You have no say in your own life when welfare becomes dependent on charity.

Chairity is a good thing to have, but it needs to be placed on top of the professional, independent or government funded welfare system.



adb
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Aug 2012
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 532

10 Jan 2014, 4:37 pm

thinkinginpictures wrote:
adb wrote:
Distaste for being forced to support someone is not equivalent to expecting that he or she should "rot". They are unrelated concepts.

If I become handicapped in a manner that makes me unable to sustain myself, I will express gratitude and appreciation to those who want to help me. I will not feel entitled to support from people who don't want to help me.


That's interesting.

So if your caregivers who give you support express a certain political opinion that you would otherwise disagree with, would you conform to those ideas of your caregivers, in order to
express your deepest gratitude and appreciation? Do you *really* want to become so dependent on other people that you have no say in your own life?

Because that is what happens when people's benefits are closely tied to private matters, instead of public goods which we can "take for granted" in terms of welfare rights.

That IS THE idea of Welfare Rights: To become independent of private charity offers to keep our personal integrity, regardless of disability.

With private charity, you may have to suck up to individuals in order to survive (sacrificing your "personal integrity"). Or you may not. I've never expected anything from anyone I've supported aside from a little gratitude (e.g. "thank you"). If you're going to die without their support, you're pretty much a slave anyway, much like a child.

With public charity, you are going to get resentment from people being forced to support you. You keep your "personal integrity" at the expense of negative public relations.

You can't have it both ways. People are never going to be happy when being forced to pay for someone else. It's unrealistic to expect otherwise.



Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 35,282
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

10 Jan 2014, 4:38 pm

thinkinginpictures wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
adb wrote:
I have negative feelings toward people who feel that being disadvantaged means they should be entitled to free services. It's a feeling of resentment that what I work to produce is forcefully taken from me in order to provide free services to someone else. I have no issue whatsoever with providing voluntary assistance to other people, but it's infuriating when those same people feel that they are entitled to plunder the fruits of my labor. I have compassion and I have empathy, but they are feelings that convert rapidly to resentment in the face of contempt.

This resentment is not "superiority" or bigotry.



Well if you oppose being taxed, perhaps you should start taking action to abolish taxation....instead of feeling resentment towards the people who benefit from the social safety network this nation has in place. Also though tax money would not have to go into welfare if there was enough private chairity to provide an effective safety network but it so happens there isn't. So it then make it the governments responsibility to use some of the tax revenue to fund welfare.


The problem is not so much that there is "not enough private charity". The problem with charity is the dependence bond it creates between the giver and the reciever, with the reciever being the worst off, who'd become a slave of the one who gives the chairity.

For example, if the charity offer disagree with your political opinions about abortion, or the death penalty or other political issues, the chairity can suddenly disappear.
You have no say in your own life when welfare becomes dependent on charity.

Chairity is a good thing to have, but it needs to be placed on top of the professional, independent or government funded welfare system.


I do see your point there, though I might point out I am not sure all charity would work that way. Last time I was in the hospitial they had a chairity program for people with low to no income and I just had to fill out a form and they covered my bill no strings attatched. But chairity being private in nature does leave it more open to unfair catches and expectations....which is certainly a valid reason for having a state system regulated by the government.


_________________
Tis the time to melt the Ice.


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 35,282
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

10 Jan 2014, 4:44 pm

adb wrote:
thinkinginpictures wrote:
adb wrote:
Distaste for being forced to support someone is not equivalent to expecting that he or she should "rot". They are unrelated concepts.

If I become handicapped in a manner that makes me unable to sustain myself, I will express gratitude and appreciation to those who want to help me. I will not feel entitled to support from people who don't want to help me.


That's interesting.

So if your caregivers who give you support express a certain political opinion that you would otherwise disagree with, would you conform to those ideas of your caregivers, in order to
express your deepest gratitude and appreciation? Do you *really* want to become so dependent on other people that you have no say in your own life?

Because that is what happens when people's benefits are closely tied to private matters, instead of public goods which we can "take for granted" in terms of welfare rights.

That IS THE idea of Welfare Rights: To become independent of private charity offers to keep our personal integrity, regardless of disability.

With private charity, you may have to suck up to individuals in order to survive (sacrificing your "personal integrity"). Or you may not. I've never expected anything from anyone I've supported aside from a little gratitude (e.g. "thank you"). If you're going to die without their support, you're pretty much a slave anyway, much like a child.

With public charity, you are going to get resentment from people being forced to support you. You keep your "personal integrity" at the expense of negative public relations.

You can't have it both ways. People are never going to be happy when being forced to pay for someone else. It's unrealistic to expect otherwise.


Though I might point out some people understand it is nessisary to pay taxes so the government can provide public services including welfare to individuals who need it and don't feel resentment about it at all. But what you think you should be able to live in this society and have access to public services like having the fire department come and put out your burning house if that happened but not have to pay taxes because your resentful that some of the tax money goes into the welfare programs?


_________________
Tis the time to melt the Ice.


adb
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Aug 2012
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 532

10 Jan 2014, 4:49 pm

Sweetleaf wrote:
Well if you oppose being taxed, perhaps you should start taking action to abolish taxation....instead of feeling resentment towards the people who benefit from the social safety network this nation has in place.

My personal resentment has little to do with people receiving benefits from the welfare state. For me, it's more about the attitude that people have -- that they are entitled to support.

Quote:
Also though tax money would not have to go into welfare if there was enough private chairity to provide an effective safety network but it so happens there isn't. So it then make it the governments responsibility to use some of the tax revenue to fund welfare.

I think this is an assumption. "Effective safety network" doesn't really express requirements and I haven't seen empirical data to support whether or not there would be enough private charity.



adb
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Aug 2012
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 532

10 Jan 2014, 4:58 pm

beneficii wrote:
This, too. With no rights, you are left at the whims of your caregivers. This has led to abuse, to LGBT people being forced to correct their identities, to being pressured to join a religion, etc. It would get worse if you had to depend on an entirely private system.

Perhaps, but isn't this just a value issue? To you, protection from that abuse is important. To me, keeping the fruit of my labor is important.

You're willing to take the fruit of my labor in order to protect you from abuse. I'm not happy with that exchange but I live with it. But when someone expresses contempt for my unhappiness with it, I'm going to be less sympathetic to the cause.

Just to be clear, I dislike bigotry. I think LGBT people should be treated the same under the law as everyone else. But that doesn't change how I feel about the redistribution of wealth or people who think they are entitled to what I produce.



adb
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Aug 2012
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 532

10 Jan 2014, 5:03 pm

TheGoggles wrote:
Why do you assume that only you are capable of gratitude?

I made no such assumption or claim.

Quote:
What if nobody wants to help you?

If I'm dependent on help, then I'll die. This is the nature of life. How we lost this concept is beyond me.



beneficii
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 May 2005
Age: 42
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,245

10 Jan 2014, 5:10 pm

adb wrote:
beneficii wrote:
This, too. With no rights, you are left at the whims of your caregivers. This has led to abuse, to LGBT people being forced to correct their identities, to being pressured to join a religion, etc. It would get worse if you had to depend on an entirely private system.

Perhaps, but isn't this just a value issue? To you, protection from that abuse is important. To me, keeping the fruit of my labor is important.

You're willing to take the fruit of my labor in order to protect you from abuse. I'm not happy with that exchange but I live with it. But when someone expresses contempt for my unhappiness with it, I'm going to be less sympathetic to the cause.

Just to be clear, I dislike bigotry. I think LGBT people should be treated the same under the law as everyone else. But that doesn't change how I feel about the redistribution of wealth or people who think they are entitled to what I produce.


It looks like you've got a tone argument going. You say you didn't like my tone, so you, a privileged person, are considering withdrawing your support for a highly marginalized group.

That's problematic, as shown here:

http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Tone_argument


_________________
"You have a responsibility to consider all sides of a problem and a responsibility to make a judgment and a responsibility to care for all involved." --Ian Danskin


adb
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Aug 2012
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 532

10 Jan 2014, 5:11 pm

Sweetleaf wrote:
Though I might point out some people understand it is nessisary to pay taxes so the government can provide public services including welfare to individuals who need it and don't feel resentment about it at all.

The original post in this thread was expressing frustration with the trend. My response was meant to explain that associated with that trend is a trend in the entitlement attitude that many people on the welfare system are developing.

Quote:
But what you think you should be able to live in this society and have access to public services like having the fire department come and put out your burning house if that happened but not have to pay taxes because your resentful that some of the tax money goes into the welfare programs?

I think that I should be able to elect where my tax money goes. In our current system, I am forced to comply with the wishes of the majority. I'm not really willing to do anything to change it, so I stick with harboring resentment toward people that feel they are entitled to take the fruits of my labor. Being that they feel justified in feeling entitled, it seems perfectly reasonable for me to feel resentment.



beneficii
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 May 2005
Age: 42
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,245

10 Jan 2014, 5:14 pm

adb wrote:
If I'm dependent on help, then I'll die.


This statement makes no sense. It does not follow that if you are dependent on help, then you will die. Of course, everyone will die, but the implication here is that the death is caused by the dependence on help. That does not follow.


_________________
"You have a responsibility to consider all sides of a problem and a responsibility to make a judgment and a responsibility to care for all involved." --Ian Danskin


beneficii
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 May 2005
Age: 42
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,245

10 Jan 2014, 5:18 pm

adb wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
Though I might point out some people understand it is nessisary to pay taxes so the government can provide public services including welfare to individuals who need it and don't feel resentment about it at all.

The original post in this thread was expressing frustration with the trend. My response was meant to explain that associated with that trend is a trend in the entitlement attitude that many people on the welfare system are developing.

Quote:
But what you think you should be able to live in this society and have access to public services like having the fire department come and put out your burning house if that happened but not have to pay taxes because your resentful that some of the tax money goes into the welfare programs?

I think that I should be able to elect where my tax money goes. In our current system, I am forced to comply with the wishes of the majority. I'm not really willing to do anything to change it, so I stick with harboring resentment toward people that feel they are entitled to take the fruits of my labor. Being that they feel justified in feeling entitled, it seems perfectly reasonable for me to feel resentment.


Oh, again, you focus on the attitude of the needy. How does their attitude have anything to do with you?

And no, this is a republic, not a democracy. (In America, at least.) You must comply with the law, however.


_________________
"You have a responsibility to consider all sides of a problem and a responsibility to make a judgment and a responsibility to care for all involved." --Ian Danskin


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 35,282
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

10 Jan 2014, 5:18 pm

adb wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
Well if you oppose being taxed, perhaps you should start taking action to abolish taxation....instead of feeling resentment towards the people who benefit from the social safety network this nation has in place.

My personal resentment has little to do with people receiving benefits from the welfare state. For me, it's more about the attitude that people have -- that they are entitled to support.

Quote:
Also though tax money would not have to go into welfare if there was enough private chairity to provide an effective safety network but it so happens there isn't. So it then make it the governments responsibility to use some of the tax revenue to fund welfare.

I think this is an assumption. "Effective safety network" doesn't really express requirements and I haven't seen empirical data to support whether or not there would be enough private charity.


I suppose I have a hard time seeing the flaw in feeling entitled to support....I mean I think someone who is unable to make ends meet is being reasonable if they feel entitled to some support from the system. After all this is not a third world nation and we have programs to help the poor.......why shouldn't they feel entitled to use those programs? Also there are those individuals who have worked and payed taxes and then still end up on the street.....shouldn't they feel entitled to recieve some of the help they paid into with their taxes?

Also I will admit I cannot say with full certainty that there would not be enough private chairity....but from what I've seen and read and such it appears there is a necessity for a government funded welfare system, though it could certainly be improved.


_________________
Tis the time to melt the Ice.