Do I Want Poor People To Die?Chris | InformationLiberation
Jul. 24, 2012
1."That's Not True" BBC Host Hangs Up On Guest for Citing Rotherham Muslim Rape Scandal
2.Trump Rips Bill Kristol: "All The Guy Wants to do is Kill People and Go to War"
3.VIDEO: Telemundo Busted Staging Shot at Anti-Trump Protest
4.UK Home Secretary Theresa May Hails "Benefits" of Sharia Law
5.Migrants Thank 89-Yr-Old Austrian Man Who Gave Them Euros by Robbing Him
6.The Huffington Post Is What Happens When There's No Men In The Room
7.Anti-Trump Protesters Win Hearts and Minds by Threatening to Murder Trump
8.Is This The Most Fail Interview Of All Time?
Some people are going insane because they think I said welfare should be banned because people may use the money to murder people. Let's look at what I actually said:
All over TV they're saying we need to ban guns as they enabled his attack, but where are the calls to ban welfare which enabled him to buy his guns?I was pointing out the hypocrisy of advocating guns be banned because they "enabled" his attack, while ignoring that fact taxpayer money forcibly redistributed to the shooter enabled him to buy the guns. I was not calling for welfare to be banned, I was pointing out hypocrisy. There is a difference.
That said, I am against "welfare" (which should more accurately be called "slave management to prevent revolt") because it's a criminal act to steal from someone and give it to someone else (after "administrative fees," of course), no matter how "just" your cause. I'm against welfare not because I want poor people to die, but because I think stealing is wrong, even if it's "voted" on by a democratic mob.
I believe the poor would be helped better through having freedom and free markets, rather than simply stealing everything the "rich" and middle class have as part of a "great leap forward." They tried that in communist China, it ended with 50,000,000 people dead. If you forcibly stole everything from everyone and redistributed it evenly to everyone, according to my own calculation, each person would only have some $8,000 total in assets. In such a situation, no one would have any wealth, and there would be nothing to buy, because no one would have the capital to mass produce goods at low cost, everyone would be forced to "fend for themselves" and live off scraps. Does that sound like utopia to you? It doesn't to me.
I want everyone to be rich, forced wealth redistribution could be described as a scam to ensure the rich don't have to face competition from the poor, poor people are bought off and given handouts so they'll become dependent slaves rather than self-empowered independent individuals who guide the course of their own lives (and challenge the status quo). I want people to be allowed to create their own world and not be robbed of everything they own by the state. Even poor people pay 40% on average in taxes. Why can't everyone be allowed to have more, rather than only some people get more by stealing it from someone who gets less? Enshrining crime into the law doesn't produce a "fair" society, it produces a society where some people are rulers and everyone else is slaves.
Chris runs the website InformationLiberation.com, you can read more of his writings here. Follow infolib on twitter here.