Yes. The people who made that money have every right to do what they please with it in terms of giving it away when they die. The government has no right to it. In fact, I'd call inheritance taxes theft.
Again, the person who made the money at some point did so and who they marry is their choice.
That's fine too. You, I, or anybody else is free to do with their own money what they want with it
The problem comes when the government forcibly takes someone's money and then uses it not for the common good of all, but to prop up someone in particular.
Doing meaningful work that returns both pay to the person doing it and is beneficial to society, however marginally.
Yes. Prostitution is generally illegal because of other issues it creates, not because it's done for money.
If they were unwilling to work when it was offered and they were capable, yes. For the mentally ill and otherwise genuinely handicapped, we should have care in an institutionalized setting for them where they can be taken care of properly. Those are not the person's fault. Note: Stupid, illiterate, lazy, and mendacious are NOT handicaps. They are self-inflicted.
I'm willing to bet a majority would vote for it. "Workfare" isn't a new idea. In fact, Clinton signed a bill requiring that into law when he was president.
I see no reason to coddle the undeserving and unwilling.
Anecdote is not evidence.
Stupid is a leading cause of people being in prison. It's a leading cause of crime.
I would not advocate for make-work. Work should be productive regardless of how menial it may appear.
Lazy long ago in terms of a job often got you beaten or killed by your peers if not your overseers.
If that's the case we should just by woodchippers and toss them in. Much cheaper than keeping them around.
I don't agree with it.
No problem. That is what this board should be about after all.
New jobs and things to do are nearly continuously invented. There was a Twilight Zone episode, among other science fiction, that looked at that issue. A big part of the problem now is that there are almost onerous labor laws that make employment of the marginally productive difficult or impossible to do.
For example, about twenty years ago, Progressives in Arizona managed to get a higher minimum wage on the ballot and it passed. The wage was also tied to the cost of living index meaning it went up each year incrementally. The law they wrote had no room for exceptions. Everybody got the wage who worked at minimum wage.
One of the issues that immediately cropped up was there were a number of companies that employed the handicapped and severely handicapped doing simple tasks like stuffing envelopes or simple assembly of something they could manage. This included people who were blind, wheelchair bound, limited mobility, or having restrictions on what they could do with their hands. These businesses were previously exempted from minimum wage as they wouldn't otherwise be profitable. Most employed their workers part time and accommodated their schedules of things like medical care and the like. The workers often felt a real satisfaction in having something to do and making a contribution to society.
The new minimum wage law, which the advocates said would raise these worker's wages found instead that the companies went out of business and terminated all of their employees. They simply couldn't pay them what was demanded by law and make even a small profit, which was all they previously made.
My position is that we should be trying to maximize the utilization of people in our society for its betterment. We should not coddle or tolerate those who choose to be lazy and / or stupid. We should NOT encourage an Idiocracy. Socialism encourages an Idiocracy.
