Replies

This is why "Enlightenment" republics cannot work in the long run. This guy's vote counts as much as anyone else's, as if all opinions were equal in merit and were sacrosanct on account of their being opinions. Hardly anybody attempts to penetrate deeper. In a world like that, the operative principles of a functioning legal system cannot be established, because everything is in flux and the need to "respect" opinions qua opinions creates a relativistic stalemate between opposing interests, preventing any progress from being made. Thankfully the world we live in used to know of something better. Our legal system derived much of its form and structure from the old Christian monarchs, to whom we owe a greater debt than we commonly acknowledge.

One of the problems of an entitlement-rich Republic is that people who are on entitlements are almost always going to vote for politicians who give them more entitlements. It may not be true 100% of the time, but...it is true the majority of the time. That is why Democrats and RINO Republicans like it. It is a built in mechanism to purchase votes.

It also enables what is called a “Tipping Point” where the people getting benefits outstrip the people who work to provide them. Many say we are past that point. We many be.

But I just don’t think is is sustainable any more, if it ever was.

As conservatives, many of us believe in helping those who are really in need of support, elderly and infirm people, people on hard times, etc. but we don’t believe in paying money to people who are fully capable of work but choose not to.

Sometimes there may be a gray area between those who cannot work and those who will not work. But I don’t think it is impossible in a preponderance of the cases who is and who isn’t. There is so much graft and corruption baked into the process, Worker’s Comp is just one of them. There are millions of people on Worker’s Comp who deserve the benefits, but I know from personal experience, that there are people who should not be getting it and are capable of working. And that’s just one example.

If you went to each person getting welfare, food assistance and such, if an impartial person were allowed to review the facts, normal people would be able to tell in many cases who could and could not work. That obviously won’t happen.

And there is no way the country would allow a pro-rated vote value based on how much public money one gets. People paying their taxes in full count as a full vote, and a pro-rated system grading the amount of taxpayer money a given voter gets reduces the value of a vote to less than one vote.

That will never happen, and I don’t think that is how it should be addressed, but we as a country have put people who cast full votes into a situation where a tax-paying citizen’s vote is negated by the votes of several people who don’t pay taxes and take taxpayer money.

I don’t think that is sustainable any more.