Denmark guy !jJEom8Ii3E started this discussion 10 years ago#48,749
Long time ago, when it came to the survival of tribes, the successful tribes took care of their newborn and pregnant women.
Now we are no longer a tribe but a civilization and therefore it's time civilization took care of their future citizens. The fact that any help from the state is seen as aid or welfare rather than rightful compensation, proves it's a taboo for a civilization to do just that.
Bitching about welfare is 100% reasonable when women remain oblivious to the fact that the state needs them to get pregnant for its survival. All the taxpayers in the world came from a pregnant woman.
I'm not a socialist but a capitalist, and it turns out the state and civilization itself has been mooching of families that reproduce.
brie !K97EToNZCM replied with this 10 years ago, 6 minutes later, 27 minutes after the original post[^][v]#635,790
@previous (Denmark guy !jJEom8Ii3E)
Holism indicates that you cannot have one without the other.
Denmark guy !jJEom8Ii3E (OP) replied with this 10 years ago, 3 minutes later, 31 minutes after the original post[^][v]#635,791
Sheila LaBoof joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 8 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#635,799
The words "aid" and "welfare" prior to current usage merely meant help and wellbeing. Today the same words (welfare at least) evoke negative feeling, as though they mean undeserved waste of money on parasites who would be better dead. The OP's usage of the words was in that negative sense, as if they always meant in the negative sense. They aren't supposed to be taken to mean in the negative sense in the first place. It won't matter if you call it by another name such as rightful compensation or poverty-squalor mitigation, if people automatically believe that any such granted money is undeserved waste of money on parasites who would be better dead, then there's no name that will change their mind.
Denmark guy !jJEom8Ii3E (OP) replied with this 10 years ago, 16 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#635,802
I disagree with this. Aid and welfare might have different meanings to people but never was the name reflective of its rightful nature, compensation.
I would compare it to salaries being called "help" and then wonder why employers pay so little of it. The nature of it is in the name, it's not something deserving but a act of kindness from the boss.
If people lived of from "help" which actually are their salaries, others would think of them as parasites too.
kook !!mCVqftDha joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#635,803
@previous (Denmark guy !jJEom8Ii3E)
What about places where there an an excess of children?
Big Daddy derek !Uvm54ORbmo joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 5 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#635,804
@OP
The current population level is, in fact, unsustainable, and people should be encouraged to breed less. Thanks.
kook !!mCVqftDha replied with this 10 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#635,805
That's a very good question. If we (the human race) ever find ourselves in a situation where there are too many people, then the focus should be to overcome those obstacles rather than some plan of permanent population control where the population must never reach a certain point.
You know, we didn't become a great species because we gave up on obstacles, we advanced because we had to.
kook !!mCVqftDha replied with this 10 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#635,808
@previous (Denmark guy !jJEom8Ii3E)
So you think a better idea would be to somehow figure out where to cram extra people, instead of reducing the birthrate? That's pretty crazy
Sheila LaBoof replied with this 10 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#635,809
@635,804 (Big Daddy derek !Uvm54ORbmo)
I think some genius economists need to come up with ways for wealth of nations to be sustained, maybe even grown, while populations decrease. Because currently, they always talk with fearful dread that a country might actual have its population decline, as that must inevitably mean a worse economy and horror and despair. How the fuck anyone who understands the math of exponential growth could not foresee the impossibility of having the mass of humanity exceed the mass of the universe is beyond me.
Denmark guy !jJEom8Ii3E (OP) replied with this 10 years ago, 17 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^][v]#635,814
That's wishful thinking, that society can be sustained even as it decrease in size.
There is no example where the economic growth of a nation decreased yet without horrible consequences. That's what a population decrease means.
kook !!mCVqftDha replied with this 10 years ago, 12 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^][v]#635,817
@previous (Denmark guy !jJEom8Ii3E)
My parents were poor and and I already wish that I had never been born.
Sheila LaBoof replied with this 10 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^][v]#635,819
@635,814 (Denmark guy !jJEom8Ii3E)
Then you have told me that we must grow until we collapse in a terrible spasm of agony. Because infinite growth is simply not a physical possibility. There's a Nobel Prize in it for whoever might navigate us out of the paradox.
Denmark guy !jJEom8Ii3E (OP) replied with this 10 years ago, 12 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^][v]#635,823
We can disagree if or if not the human race should reproduce even though elon musk is on my side. But people who do reproduce should not be punished for it in a way as if their child is not a benefit for society.
Sheila LaBoof replied with this 10 years ago, 4 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^][v]#635,824
@previous (Denmark guy !jJEom8Ii3E)
That's fine. I'm curious what Musk said about it though?
Denmark guy !jJEom8Ii3E (OP) replied with this 10 years ago, 4 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^][v]#635,826
Don't you fucking dare hate yourself you son of a bitch. I could ask you why you hate yourself but it's like asking a pedo why he is a pedo, it's still wrong no matter what.
Don't hate yourself, seriously, it's your duty to not hate yourself and whatever bullshit excuses you come up with to escape that duty, is bullshit.
Anonymous I joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 8 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^][v]#635,851
I'm not sure how this is meant to be complaint about the feminists, but I am almost certain that it is. Becuase they are your nemesis in life.
(Edited 14 seconds later.)
kook !!mCVqftDha replied with this 10 years ago, 2 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^][v]#635,852
@635,850 (Denmark guy !jJEom8Ii3E)
I don't think you can talk someone out of self hate.
Denmark guy !jJEom8Ii3E (OP) replied with this 10 years ago, 11 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^][v]#635,857