winscape 2215

I'm fairly sure that it will be difficult to muster political support for the idea of leaving children to fend for themselves.

And I'm not even sure it can be defended on practical grounds. Some of the children will probably just not survive. I guess you could call that cleaning up the gene pool. But some of them will probably be smart enough .... Feral humans? Do you think they will turn into adults who will be good additions to the society in which they live? I'm very skeptical. Some of them might turn out fine. I think others will not.

What was that line of D. P. Moynihan's about children raised without fathers? something about "Lord of the Flies"? Wouldn't children who raise themselves be worse?

Because in the places where it seems to be working fairly well, it's been adulterated to some extent with principles you're calling communism?

Sorry, flame bait. Communism didn't seem to work too well in real world, agreed, though I have heard it said that what was tried in the USSR was probably not exactly what Karl Marx had in mind. Maybe what he had in mind wouldn't have worked either.

Anyway, yes, I would agree that efforts to provide support for people who cannot support themselves usually have some bad consequences. What I would argue is that failing to even try to provide such support is worse.

As for taking away from the productive members of society to give to the unproductive .... I would argue that the correlation between having a lot of money and being productive is shaky at best.

Trying to keep the left-leaning ranting to a minimum here ....

-- B. L. Mbuttingill ObDisclaimer: I don't speak for my employers; they return the favor.