“If everyone followed these rules, there’d be a lot less “needy” in the first place.”
But not everyone follows those rules. Do they get what is coming to them?
Don’t get me wrong, I agree with you in principles. It is just that in practical terms, what you say is cold hearted.
Cold hearted? If you look at it from a liberal point of view, perhaps.
The problem we’re seeing today is that there is no incentive pressure to follow those rules.
Heck, if you don’t work and take care of yourself, you just go down to the welfare office and get a check.
So, considering this, do you think we’ll have MORE or LESS “needy” if there are no consequences for behaving in a way that makes you “needy”?
The needy should be taken care of in exactly the manner that I described, VOLUNTARILY by those who have made the decisions to be secure. And there SHOULD be stigma involved in having to accept this charity.
As I stated, if there are no consequences for bad decisions, there will be more of those bad decisions.