Entitlement mentality

[Rob Roy]

Nope. I know exactly what a libertarian is, thank you.

There are different schools of libertarianism. What we have here in the US are Libertarian conservatives. In essence, they are what the fiscal and social conservatives USED to be, before they swallowed the crazy pill that sent a great number of self-described "republicans" running for their lives. The only real differences between libertarians and social conservative counterparts is they typically favor gay rights, drug law reform, and aren't as anti-abortion as the social conservatives.

Every developed nation on earth has taxes, dude. If you don't like it, I think there's a shuttle on its way to the moon this evening.

Hate to burst your bubble but some of my friends are among the very first Libertarians, not this new wave of pseudo, me too "Libertarians".

Your description of a libertarian should include a reference to the non aggression principle. Alot of people neglect this vital part when thinking they are libertarian or when they think they know what libertarianism is.
Libertarians do not endorse using force pre-emptively like conservatives and liberals do to make others comply with their wishes. You espouse a good deal of what I consider feel good Liberal stuff, but you really endorse using the force of government to MAKE others comply. I believe that's the wrong approach to achieve freedom.

Concerning taxes, yes they are omnipresent, that doesn't make them just. If I don't like something I'll choose not to participate, while respecting your right to do the same. I guess that philosophy is one you have a problem with? Respecting another beings right not to participate is vital to freedom. Are you saying the only freedom to do that would be out of this world?

Would that shuttle to the moon be funded with taxes extracted involuntarily ? Besides, I wouldn't dream of making you pay for my trip to the moon either.



Can't go to the moon

 

[doobnVA]

Hate to burst your bubble but some of my friends are among the very first Libertarians, not this new wave of pseudo, me too "Libertarians".

Your description of a libertarian should include a reference to the non aggression principle. Alot of people neglect this vital part when thinking they are libertarian or when they think they know what libertarianism is.
Libertarians do not endorse using force pre-emptively like conservatives and liberals do to make others comply with their wishes. You espouse a good deal of what I consider feel good Liberal stuff, but you really endorse using the force of government to MAKE others comply. I believe that's the wrong approach to achieve freedom.

Concerning taxes, yes they are omnipresent, that doesn't make them just. If I don't like something I'll choose not to participate, while respecting your right to do the same. I guess that philosophy is one you have a problem with? Respecting another beings right not to participate is vital to freedom. Are you saying the only freedom to do that would be out of this world?

Would that shuttle to the moon be funded with taxes extracted involuntarily ? Besides, I wouldn't dream of making you pay for my trip to the moon either.



Can't go to the moon

There's no "force". I don't know where you get this notion.

If you want to be part of society, you pay taxes. Don't want to pay? Okay, go to jail. It's pretty fucking simple.

Nobody is FORCING you to pay, but the alternative to paying is being cut off from society. Them's the rules.

You're free to make your own choice in the matter. Nobody is putting a gun to your head to make you pay taxes. You aren't that important.

 

[undertheice]

There's no "force". I don't know where you get this notion.

If you want to be part of society, you pay taxes. Don't want to pay? Okay, go to jail. It's pretty fucking simple.

Nobody is FORCING you to pay, but the alternative to paying is being cut off from society. Them's the rules.

You're free to make your own choice in the matter. Nobody is putting a gun to your head to make you pay taxes. You aren't that important.

your simplistic approach to the world is really starting to bug the shit out of me. is the threat of incarceration not the use of force? is the coercion of a segment of the population to pay for the needs of all a form of force? i guess you just don't get it. wealth is not always money, force is not always a gun to the head and our representatives don't always represent us.

though i'd agree that taxation is a necessary way to pay for an infrastructure that enables our society to survive and grow, the insistence of government on micromanaging the lives of its citizens has taken us far beyond the bounds of the rational to border on the fantastic. there will always be those who fail and, so long as government keeps bailing them out, there will always be those who continue to fail on the taxpayer's dime while government takes a healthy chunk out of the middle. when will we decide enough is enough? the minarchist views of libertarianism say that enough was enough long ago and the bias so many have against anything that does not include a big government answer is getting a bit old.

i can understand the hatred that many feel toward a party that has recently been faulted for its overzealous pursuit of introducing the american way to people around the world, but it has gotten childish and it's time to put away childish things. the decision should be made whether we are adults, responsible for our failures as well as our successes and capable of determining our own destinies, or children, insistent upon blaming our woes on some scapegoat and waiting impatiently for mommy to pop out her teat and give us our daily ration.

 

[Rob Roy]

doobnVA , Your twisted "there is no force" argument is rather perplexing. There is force, it's all around. Sending a person to jail that hasn't harmed anyone is undeniably an application of force by government.

Let's see if we can identify our areas of agreement / disagreement

You realize a person "should" own their body correct? You are an advocate for pot legalization. We seem to be agreed there, right? I applaud you for "getting it" on this level anyhow.

You disagree that a person should own "their" property and the fruit of their labor by virtue of your endorsement of income taxes and property taxes. Property taxes are obtained through coercion, if you don't pay your house is taken from you. Your saying a person has a choice whether or not to pay would be valid if not for the confiscation part. You see nobody really "owns" their home if it can be taken. Extortion is a word that you seem uncomfortable applying to the government, why? Is extortion not the right term?

What level of taxation do you find unacceptable before you declare it slavery/ extortion? 25% ? 35% ? 60%? 80%? 99%?

I believe if I use something I'm obligated to pay for it, if I don't use it, I'm not. I believe no other person or group of persons calling themselves government may obligate for me nor may I obligate for others. When this group of other people, known as government attempt to obligate me against my will if they don't use force to take my home or put me in jail for disobeying their "rules" what mechanism, if not "force" are they using?

A question or two for you.

When a person harms nobody, takes nothing from anybody should they be left alone by other individuals? By government? My answer to both questions is emphatically yes. What is your answer? Are you a proponent of freedom or control? I think YOUR posts have already told me where you are at.

 

[JustAnotherFriedDay]

It seems these days that more and more people are developing an entitlement mentality never before seen in the US. I was wondering why when so many before them have worked so hard and have scrimped and saved their entire lives to give their children a better life, so many these days feel so entitled.

The best answer I can think of comes from the notion that when people are used to having something and then that something is cut off, people tend to go ape shit, for lack of a better term. For example, if you give a child a toy and take it away the child will through a tantrum. But, if the child never had the toy to begin with it is a different story.

Now consider that our parents generation was the most prosperous in history and we are the first generation that can plan to earn less than their parents. Combine the two and you have a perfect recipe for this type of thinking. Now, as never before we have children raised with a relatively high standard of living growing up and having to make a downward move when they leave home.

The problem with an entitlement mentality is that it makes a person particularly unattractive to prospective employers. This is because people with entitlement mentalities tend to see life as a deck staked against them. They feel that life is unfair, everyone else is responsible for their adversity and that others, including their employers, are taking advantage of them.

In short, people with an inflated sense of entitlement are pre-disgruntled employees. Ask any employer and they will tell you that one of the single most damaging thing to their business is a disgruntled employee. One of the worst things about a DE is that they are highly effective in spreading their poor employee moral to other employees causing a substantial loss of production, poor attendance and perhaps worst of all employee theft. In fact, employee moral is the single largest determinant of employee theft. When an employee feels he is treated unfairly, its time to keep an extra vigilant eye on that employee as theft becomes much more likely. Often people who steal like to rationalize their actions and being "taken advantage of" makes for a great rationalization. Now that I think about it, the whole concept of the unfair society created by the evils of Capitalism is largely such a rationalization only of collective theft rather than theft on an individual level.

When broken down, it should be easy to see how having an entitlement mentality is antithetical toward finding more lucrative employment. Perhaps it is this and not "society" that is mainly responsible for the adversity of many people. Perhaps if people would lose this toxic way of thinking and develop a better attitude towards life and the marketplace of skills people would find their situations improving.

As an employer I have seen employees come and go and one lesson I have learned is that people are where they are in life for a reason. Those with a strong work ethic and a good attitude tend to go far where as those with poor attitudes who feel that the world owes them a living tend to go nowhere. The former make for great employees, they bring value to my business and therefore wind up earning more, the latter are to be avoided like the plague.

Entitlement mentality, also known as narcissism. I agree, there seems to be an increasing amount of people with this mentality.

 

[CrackerJax]

In the end, the weak minded ppl in a true democracy will implode the society.

This is why the founding fathers created a REPUBLIC, not a democracy.

 

[doobnVA]

"republic" and "democracy" are not mutually exclusive. They describe two completely unrelated aspects.

Republic refers to the sovereignty of a nation, while democracy refers to the system of government.

We are a republic AND a democracy.

You can also have a nation ruled by a monarchy, that is democratic (a democratic monarchy).

 

[Babs34]

i currently live in a town of about 12,000 where 55% of people are on some kind of assistance. that statistic is from the public school in town and is tracked for reimbersment from different govt entities. i am a business man and several of my friends have businesses from contracting, pizza shop, trash collection and several others.

i know, i know...get to the point! the unemployement rate for my county is currently 10.2% which is way way low balled because of the folks getting assistance. they dont look for work. realistically our unemployment rate is around 25-30%. anyway, my point. whenever any of the community business's need workers, they have a hard time finding someone to fill the position. a recent job opening was posted at the public school for 2 maintenance persons, experience prefered but not required, for a very competetive wage. there were 6 applicants. 6!! you would have thought that there should be 500 people lined up around the corner to apply for these jobs but when you throw in welfare, ssi, workmens comp, wic, 93 weeks of unemployment (fill in additional govt handouts in this space)...why would someone want to get out of bed and have to actually do something.

handouts are killing our inner cities. it has basically destroyed the black family in urban america. i recently read a statistic that said the black poverty rate is higher now in inner cities than it was pre 1964 great society days. that should startle people. libs think they are helping people, but they are killing motivation. i am all for lending a helping hand to those who need it, but the state of our govt handout programs is quickly killing the entreprenurial spirit that makes free people so productive. instead of people being slaves to the slave owner, they are slaves to the govt. this isnt rocket science. we have centuries of historical case studies but politicians refuse to see it. i hope things change back, but i dont see the political gumpshin to start taking handouts away.

the old saying holds true, if you want more of something, subsidize it.

This all goes back to what was earlier quoted by Green Cross--" give a man a fish, and he eats for a day; teach a man to fish, and he eats for a lifetime"
"These people" are taught NOTHING. They are given little, if any, opportunity to make something of themselves.
They are taught to cling to the safety net that the government offers them......they are TRULY TRAPPED.
There positively is a way to get people out of subsidized living. Rather than make it feasible, the gov't is content with paying for living a miserable existence for a lifetime.
People don't understand that most often, these people are not living this way because it's easy....it's ALL THEY KNOW. And because of that, it's all their children and future generations are ever acquainted with.

 

[Radiate]

A question or two for you.

When a person harms nobody, takes nothing from anybody should they be left alone by other individuals? By government? My answer to both questions is emphatically yes. What is your answer? Are you a proponent of freedom or control?

I know you weren't asking me, but I'll chime in anyways.....

If a person harms no one and takes nothing from anyone, then yes they should be left alone. However, I'm willing to bet every soul among us has used the services provided by the government, and thusly taxes are to be paid. To use such services and not pay taxes is theft, much like illegal immigrants who go to the ER and get medical care, skip on the bill, and then not pay taxes, effectively placing the burden on the people who do pay taxes.

If the libertarians ban themselves from every single service funded by taxpayer dollars, they might have an actual argument. Until then, the whole "I'm not doing anything to anyone, leave me alone" bit is a load of crap. I'd be all for the libertarians moving away and doing there own thing in their own state. That'd be completely acceptable to me (hell, I'd even join you if it worked out). Seeing as how pretty much all of the land on the planet is already claimed, I doubt that's gonna happen though.

I also have to ask, what will take the place of the services provided by the government? Several of the services the government provides isn't just trivial shit. Many of them are standards of living such as uniform roads, building codes, food standards, water quality, etc. etc. etc. I don't like the idea of private companies taking over some of these things, as a companies only motivation is profit. Private prisons come to mind.


And Rob, how can your friends be some of the very first libertarians? Classical liberalism, essentially the same idea, dates back to the 19th century. How old are you man!?!?

 

[Radiate]

This all goes back to what was earlier quoted by Green Cross--" give a man a fish, and he eats for a day; teach a man to fish, and he eats for a lifetime"
"These people" are taught NOTHING. They are given little, if any, opportunity to make something of themselves.
They are taught to cling to the safety net that the government offers them......they are TRULY TRAPPED.
There positively is a way to get people out of subsidized living. Rather than make it feasible, the gov't is content with paying for living a miserable existence for a lifetime.
People don't understand that most often, these people are not living this way because it's easy....it's ALL THEY KNOW. And because of that, it's all their children and future generations are ever acquainted with.

"It's all they know" is a very flimsy excuse. It's their damn fault they continue to live these meager lives. These people aren't trapped. This isn't America circa the 1700's, where it was illegal for the slaves to educate themselves. Public libraries are in every city. The government provides loans for the financially challenged to go to college, and you don't even have to pay some of them back. Knowledge is not kept secret from anyone, but the book isn't going to magically open up and beam knowledge into your fucking brain, you actually have to put forth some effort and read it.

"give a man a fish, and he eats for a day; teach a man to fish, and he eats for a lifetime" is really not the correct saying to describe this situation. In the real world, it's more like "If the man wants to eat fish he better get off his ass and TEACH HIMSELF how to fish". After all, you can't expect a teacher to be there to hold your hand all the time. To expect such is an entitlement mentality.

Personal responsibility: it's so rare we should back our currency on it.

 

[Iron Lion Zion]

You're self-absorbed, self-important, and condescending to anyone who doesn't share your very narrow set of beliefs.

"Maybe you should read a book instead of watching so much television. It's obviously rotting whatever brain you may have once possessed."

"Like I said, try reading a book and watching less television. You might actually learn something for a change. I'd start with the dictionary, if I were you. Look up "liberty" first."

"Maybe both of you should read a dictionary."

"I bet you two were SUPER in English class. NOT!"

"You people are hopelessly stupid... Did anyone here even finish high school?"
- Courtesy of You

Just wanted to point these out after your previous statement... continue with ya'll's conversation.

 

[Babs34]

"It's all they know" is a very flimsy excuse. It's their damn fault they continue to live these meager lives. These people aren't trapped. This isn't America circa the 1700's, where it was illegal for the slaves to educate themselves. Public libraries are in every city. The government provides loans for the financially challenged to go to college, and you don't even have to pay some of them back. Knowledge is not kept secret from anyone, but the book isn't going to magically open up and beam knowledge into your fucking brain, you actually have to put forth some effort and read it.

"give a man a fish, and he eats for a day; teach a man to fish, and he eats for a lifetime" is really not the correct saying to describe this situation. In the real world, it's more like "If the man wants to eat fish he better get off his ass and TEACH HIMSELF how to fish". After all, you can't expect a teacher to be there to hold your hand all the time. To expect such is an entitlement mentality.

Personal responsibility: it's so rare we should back our currency on it.

You don't even know what you're talking about. Try going back a few pages and let that serve as your example.

 

[CrackerJax]

Babs, he's not exactly wrong....

No society on earth has an upward mobility like that of the USA. You can be born a pauper in the US and die a billionaire. That doesn't happen anywhere else.
One of the reasons why so many foreigners are knocking on our doors. It isn't for the cheeseburgers.
What helps keep ppl down are the "good intentions" of social programs.

Wanna stay poor? Get on welfare. That will increase ur odds of a failed life greatly. But they will vote for the politicians who give them the "free", but meager existence.

These politicians trade lives for votes.

Education is up to the individual, no one else. No one else.

 

[maxamus1]

i believe people stay where they are at because they are comfterbul there. we always need something to complain about. weather it's about work or whats going on at home. some people will take an opportunity and run with it, while others will not. weather it's do to education or lack of motivation. it will never change.

 

[Babs34]

Babs, he's not exactly wrong....

No society on earth has an upward mobility like that of the USA. You can be born a pauper in the US and die a billionaire. That doesn't happen anywhere else.
One of the reasons why so many foreigners are knocking on our doors. It isn't for the cheeseburgers.
What helps keep ppl down are the "good intentions" of social programs.

Wanna stay poor? Get on welfare. That will increase ur odds of a failed life greatly. But they will vote for the politicians who give them the "free", but meager existence.

These politicians trade lives for votes.

Education is up to the individual, no one else. No one else.

CJ, simply because America has the most upward mobility does not mean that it is accessible to ALL. It also shouldn't mean that we not continue to find new avenues in which to better overall opportunity.
I wish people really understood how the system worked regarding welfare.
Personally, I think it's pathetic that the largest percentage of them are illegal aliens and once they have a child, they are on the docket for life.
What most people don't understand is that once they even BEGIN to get out of "the ghetto"...so to speak, they are penalized for each little baby step they take.
When the goal is to be able to afford paying your own rent/mortgage, food, electricity, the needs of your child(ren).....etc, ON YOUR OWN, you should be afforded the right to actually get there.
I've seen it so many times.....single mothers that literally kill themselves to work fulltime, pay child support, go to school......and then once they work themselves up to that "whoppin" 8 dollars an hour, the government suddenly sees this as you're on your way!!! Now you can afford ALL of those things.........AND you can now pay for yours and your children's health insurance. The fact that you get no child support doesn't really factor in......
They take that desperately needed health insurance away. Mom can't feed her children. She knows she needs to get another job now...so, forget school.
The government WANTS to keep you NEEDY. They have NO desire to change the welfare system.
If they were to alot a period of time where making that 8 dollars an hour was not held against you, a large percentage of recipients would be well on their way and permantely off the docket.
They won't allow for that CJ.
Welfare IS a trap. If people were able to use it as a stepping stone to climb out of extreme poverty, it would be a worthy program.
As of now, it's a JOKE.

 

[CrackerJax]

No system is truly accessible to all..... but the USA is by far the VERY BEST at achieving that goal.

Capitalism gives EVERYONE the best chance and raises the standard of living for those who do not make it to the top BEST as well.

Would you rather be poor in the USA or Russia? An easy choice.

 

[redivider]

true that CJ, but unregulated capitalism allows for crooks in suits to steal and cheat with no real consequences for their actions.

and while there are foreigners looking to come to america to find their dream, there's also american companies looking to foreign talent to meet their needs. there's about 150 Indians (hindu indians) where I live... they've all been recruited by an american company to come to work here. ALL RECRUITED FROM THEIR HOME COUNTRY. i would tax the shit out of that company, for trying to save money on salary by importing workers. this is not a international exchange student program with one or two volunteers, these companies are recruiting foreign talent by the thousands, with no real incentive to stop.... that's f-ed up...

 

[doobnVA]

What exactly do you guys mean when you say "welfare"? Any government program that assists low income families? With the exception of food stamp benefits and the SCHIP programs, there are no "welfare" programs that allow you to remain on them indefinitely.

 

[CrackerJax]

true that CJ, but unregulated capitalism allows for crooks in suits to steal and cheat with no real consequences for their actions.

and while there are foreigners looking to come to america to find their dream, there's also american companies looking to foreign talent to meet their needs. there's about 150 Indians (hindu indians) where I live... they've all been recruited by an american company to come to work here. ALL RECRUITED FROM THEIR HOME COUNTRY. i would tax the shit out of that company, for trying to save money on salary by importing workers. this is not a international exchange student program with one or two volunteers, these companies are recruiting foreign talent by the thousands, with no real incentive to stop.... that's f-ed up...

If you tax something, you will get less of it. No, you ENCOURAGE it because of the service the foreigners (highly educated) provide.

Almost always a foreigner comes here to stay. This should be made as easy as possible. Talent, no matter the origin, should always be recruited as heavy as possible.

 

[redivider]

it's not about levels of talent, it's about the cost of the talent. there's talent here at home, but it costs more.