Quote from: Mometaskers on November 23, 2019, 02:24:27 AM

Quote from: deisik on November 22, 2019, 10:59:12 AM

Quote from: Mometaskers on November 22, 2019, 10:27:19 AM

snip

The point of government supporting "the parasites" (as you put it) is in fact to keep them contained
… I mean it may be cheaper to pay off them than to cope later with the negative consequences they will otherwise produce (like crime, drugs, diseases, and so on)

Unfortunately the government is not even doing a good job with bribing them. You'd think they've already mastered the art of bribery at this point, ha! Grin

Give someone free food and he'll come back for seconds. Take for example welfare money being given for every kid a single mother have. It's got the point you have women bluntly making it their dream to just live off the welfare and not work. And they and their kids will remain money sinks forever, how likely are kids going to escape that set up.

So eventually you'd havr MORE people that are engaged in a parasitic lifestyle while the number of responsible people decrease (since they'll likely avoid having too many kids)

Okay, let's agree that's an interesting experiment

Then it is worth studying from every possible angle, right? Let's assume the mother is kind of doomed. That's actually a plausible assumption, at least on my own personal level. I know a couple of women who have 3 children, and I'm sure that the government support for them played an important role in their decision to have more children (though it is not for life where I live). Long story short, they are lazy by nature

So they are essentially producers of human resources. But I can't agree that their kids will be like their mothers. First, if they are boys, there is no way they will be supported as their mothers were. But even if they are girls, their future is still uncertain as it is mostly defined by their environment and how they are raised up. And the daughters are likely to despise deep inside such way of living ("parasitism")