Thus concludes our public service announcement on misogynistic conspiracy theories.

I am being as critical of 'sperm donars' as I am of any woman. But that doesn't matter cause all you got is strawmen and lies.

Enjoy your United States of Entitlement. At least until the Hubby State goes bankrupt.

Beyond Saving, do you think genetics plays a role in people being poor?  Some people can't help being losers, it's in their genes.  Our genes are out of our control; the genes design our brains, and our brains rule our lives.  We have extremely limited control over the emotional parts of our brains, and no control over most of it.  I'm not discounting the environment by any means, but genetics plays the larger role in our destiny.

I do think it plays a role. Some people are just plain stupid or have dispositions towards substance abuse/depression/psychological disorders which may or may not be genetic and may make it substantially harder for a person to be financially successful. Obviously, someone born with some kind of serious impairment is going to have difficulties in life that I can't relate to. And in many ways I believe our society does an absolutely abysmal job helping those with serious disabilities, mostly because the majority of people operate under the assumption that the government is taking care of them, when it isn't.

I don't think the majority of people currently in our benefit system fit into this category and the woman in this slide show certainly is not. My belief is that the majority of people who are losers (for lack of a better word) are there because they believe that someone else is responsible for their situation. They abuse alcohol and drugs, bounce paycheck to paycheck, have unstable employment etc. because they are constantly told that the rich are "lucky" and therefore believe they can't succeed or simply don't know how to succeed. They sit around bitching about their boss and everyone with more than they have, while doing absolutely nothing to improve their situation. They think someone else is responsible for their problems so therefore, they wait for someone else to fix them when the sad reality is that no fairy god Bama is coming to help.

Being self sufficient, say someone who makes $30-40k a year doesn't require you to be particularly smart or talented. I know some really stupid people who make much higher incomes. I think what we should do as a society is to encourage those who are capable to become successful and self-sufficient, and discourage them from having children until they are. Currently, our society encourages them to have children and go through their life remaining fiscally irresponsible. Our benefit system has become in effect an enabler- which any psychologist will tell you is a bad thing, even though in the short term enabling might seem like the nicer thing to do.  

I don't know if you have ever had someone close to you with a drug problem, but the worst thing you can do is give that person money when they ask. I know, it seems really cruel because you can guarantee that person will swear up and down it is for food. The they really NEED that money just this once. When you give in, they go buy an 8-ball. You didn't help them, you made their situation worse by "helping". What that person really needs is a reality check, they have to hit rock bottom and realize they are at rock bottom and decide for themselves they want to climb up. Only after they have that realization, can you offer them real help and turn their life around.

For those who are truly incapable of caring for themselves I have no problem helping out. However, I believe that private charity is a far more effective and humane way to care for those people than government. People who work private charities tend to be a lot more in touch with what people really need because they are on the front lines everyday. Government bureaucrats that sit in a cubicle making decisions based on paper applications in front of them are simply incapable of having that kind of perspective. Government is by definition bound by laws and regulations written by people who are extremely removed from the situation. A charity can adapt to attempt to serve needs a lot more quickly- they don't need permission of a bureaucrat in DC. I do have to note that large charities can suffer from similar problems, which is why most of my charitable donations go to very small charities with a handful of exceptions. The larger a group of people, the more inefficient it will be and the more resources it will waste.

And the solution in your eyes is to cut taxes (you remember them - the way the country pays for stuff?) on the people and corporations who don't pay them to begin with?  Are you just wanting to make sure the people who don't need entitlements get them? Or is this the old "privatize the profits and socialize the costs" mantra?

I want to put the costs of government services on the people who create the need for them. The current system is ridiculous and unsustainable.

We subisidize land users, water users, polluters, and people that have kids they can't take care of themselves, etc... So over time just exepct that what you reward you'll get more of, what you punish you'll get less. Just common sense.

I don't know why it's so difficult for people to see that current system punishes beneficial behaviors and rewards those that create poverty and environmental damage.

Julia's parents are rewarded for having a daughter they can't afford. Julia is rewarded for not get and education and a job to take care of herself. Obama just wants more dependency on him. He's using women's natural tendency to look for a provider to get their vote.

Why is that when we go into the gociery store, the "fair" price one should pay is based on the cost of producing the product. But with taxes, "fair" is based how much you earn? Not at all based on how much cost your business and lifestyle produce in services.

I don't understand why the cost for any individual or group can't be calculated then given a bill. Businesses do it all the time. Why can't government operate the same.

People want to make lifestyle choices and then pass the costs of these onto other people. That is all politics has become.

Income tax is far from a bill for services rendered.

If you decide no longer to shop at your grociery store, the stores costs go down by a similar amount of your spending cut. The amount of labor needed to service your food consuption goes down by a correlated amount.

If you stop working and go on welfare. The government's costs for delivering services to you go up. This is why we are going bankrupt and income tax is a major reason why. It's highly irrational to have a reverse correlation between cost and benefit.