/politics/ - News & Politics

Welfare would only exist to help those that are disabled and cannot work. I would personally replace it with a form of workfare and use the able bodies that sit at home all day for public works, such as infrastructure. I would also study if there's currently a sort of Beautiful Ones effect in our society, like in Japan, where there's simply not enough work to go around. Also, obesity would not be an excuse to collect welfare. If someone makes the decision to harm themselves and society like that, then they make the decision to starve rather than keep themselves healthy enough to contribute.

Welfare should help those temporarily displaced from work, or unable to work for mental or physical reasons. It should not be a way of life.

Welfare should either be one of two things.

1) Universal Basic Income, no strings attached if living in a statist world. Just give everyone $10,000 cash and eliminate all other forms of welfare including social security.

2) No welfare at all. Let private charity and neighbors help the poor/each other to form stronger community bonds to prevent degeneracy. E.G. The same as #1 just without the paycheck.

>>5357

As for your questions...

Disabled people who cannot work would be screwed without UBI if they didn't have family/friends. On the flip side, medical costs would be far cheaper so they could live like Hotwheels easily if they had a skill.

First would be to eliminate in kind programs (paid for housing, food, etc.), and replace them with flat cash settlements that everyone is aware of. Next would be to publicly shame those who wasted their cash and push for private charity. Social Security would become an optional contract for those under 50 that you can opt out of, and there would be a strong push to start up retirement plans and AIP (automatic investment plan) accounts. Meanwhile I'd eliminate the department of education since all they do is fuck shit up/churn out young democrats. Lastly I'd establish a PUBI, and based on results, either keep or eliminate welfare entirely.

Be aware that millions of people are lazy cunts that should have learned a valuable skill instead of relying on the gubment. These same people have more children than anyone else. Take their children into foster care and offer them a one-time $5,000 to have a vasectomy. Problem solves itself in two generations, dindus will nuffin regardless. People rely on each other instead of government. Boom.

No public works. Fuck your public works.

>>5344

>Would welfare exist at all?

Preferably, welfare would be handled by private charities, churches, etc. However, this being unrealistic, Universal Basic Income seems to be the best approach. The main thing is to not deficit spend in my perfect world, so a lot depends on that. Maybe Have Universal Basic Income work as sort of dividends based on the profit of the country that year.

>What role would welfare play?

Welfare would be a way to get back on your feet. A trampoline, not a hammock. Though in the UBI approach, obviously it's just automatic.

>Valid reasons?

In UBI, everyone gets the check.

>Disabled that cannot work?

Ideally taken in by relatives, a church, etc.

>Transition

Well, preferably we restore a monarch, who does what he needs to (monarchs are naturally more long-term thinkers than democratic politicians)

>Other support methods?

Again, depends on the budget. The most important thing in my perfect society is reducing statism to keep from a complete collapse under the weight of the bureaucracy and mob rule.

>>5344

I'd rather that welfare doesn't exist at all , and that private charities take its place.

If i couldn't have that I would like Milton Friedman's idea of negative income tax.

I very much fear the growth of the welfare state , because it fosters dependency at eats away at the productive elements of society.

>>5358

>Disabled people who cannot work would be screwed without UBI if they didn't have family/friends.

>if they didn't have family/friends.

And who doesn't have family?

Oh wait, I forgot that the West worked hard to destroy family values.

Wouldn't be needed in a perfect modern society.

In a post scarcity society its neither here nor there if there is welfare or not.

>>5369

>And who doesn't have family?

>Oh wait, I forgot that the West worked hard to destroy family values.

My mother is a drug addict and my father is in his 80s, my half brothers don't want anything to do with me because im my mothers spawn, my sister still loves me but shes as poor as I am and would be homeless if not for her boyfriend.

>>5369

Exactly. Welfare has essentially replaced family ties and neighborly relations.

>>5369

If you're crippled, retarded, or autistic, your family will slowly die off and you won't make many friends willing to support you financially.

Of course, only people legitimately in that state should be able to get state aid.

>>5399

Support you financially, no, but if you're so crippled that you can't even into IT or foreign language translation, you probably don't have much of a life worth living anyways.

>>5402

Ah a hard-line eugenicuck.

I'm sure Stephen Hawking would have died young in your ideal society and we'd have a much more blinkered view on astrophysics right now.

>>5404

The standard bleeding heart liberal...

Stephen Hawking would've been taken care of by his parents most likely until he reached adulthood. Not to mention for every Stephen, there's five more who are thrown in jail from not having to work, or grow lazy on your welfare system. And another doctor/scientist/entrepreneur who fails to develop better technology because of your universal healthcare ideals down pricing their potential profit.

>>5406

By the way, Universal healthcare tends to eliminate incentive to improve medical technology, while partially covered/subsidized safety nets actually just raise the price for everyone else. In case you weren't aware.

>>5344

UBI as others said, make it 10k/year or something like that. Abolish capitalism

>>5404

>Stephen Hawking is irreplaceable and if he didn't write shit down, nobody would

>>5404

>I'm sure Stephen Hawking would have died young in your ideal society

ayy lmao Stephen Hawking wasn't diagnosed with his disease until his late 20s