Conrod Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 What are the statistical numerical differences between those who choose not to work and those who want to work yet at this time cannot find work because of the economic situation caused by gross mismanagement of the economy by the big financial institutions, greedy fat cat corporate tycoons who have shifted millions of jobs overseas and the politicians whose pockets they're all in? There are millions who are desperately looking for any kind of work, even part time jobs, many of them with college degrees who are having to rely on unemployment payouts to help keep them off the streets Many more through no fault of thei own laid off and out of work for a number of years Why not sterilize all the sods who got us into this mess in the first place? A much better idea. You forget the matter of numbers. There aren't all that many senior bankers and tycoons - so sterlising them won't mean that many fewer mouths to feed. Nobody would want a well-meaning person who's between jobs or struggling to get on the employment ladder to be included in the OP's suggestion, but what about those empty-headed youths in shell suits and baseball caps whose family influence has prepared them for a life on benefits and who will probably father half a dozen illegitimate kids to as many dull-eyed dope-smoking young girls by the time they're 25? Are you happy for them to carry on doing that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harleyman Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 You forget the matter of numbers. There aren't all that many senior bankers and tycoons - so sterlising them won't mean that many fewer mouths to feed. Nobody would want a well-meaning person who's between jobs or struggling to get on the employment ladder to be included in the OP's suggestion, but what about those empty-headed youths in shell suits and baseball caps whose family influence has prepared them for a life on benefits and who will probably father half a dozen illegitimate kids to as many dull-eyed dope-smoking young girls by the time they're 25? Are you happy for them to carry on doing that? That's more a case of the government failing to crack down on the chronic spongers. If the government are happy to go on handing out welfare payments instead of a policy of a sponger refusing a job when such jobs are available means no further welfare money for the sponger whose fault is that? Blame government policy instead. I dont like the idea of random sterilization. Who knows where it will end? It's just not compatible with any ideals of democracy but that said there are certain caese where it might be justified such as people who are mentally retarded or criminals convicted of child molestation in which case castration in the latter case would be even better Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeMaquis Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 Buck, you're exaggerating - Godwin would be proud. Western governments already do that with people who have severe mental ilnesses, with people who are incarcerated for life, and people who have a track record of poor parenting and have children taken from them at birth. The only change to current government powers to do so would be to expand the qualifying criteria. Could you name some Western governments who do that and quote figures from reliable sources? There was a scandal a few years ago about Sweden having done some sterilisations after the war for a few years but that's the only case I've heard of. I also find it funny that the Hitlerites on here are calling for sterilisation of people for not working but not for rape or some other serious crimes. You have to wonder why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 That's more a case of the government failing to crack down on the chronic spongers. If the government are happy to go on handing out welfare payments instead of a policy of a sponger refusing a job when such jobs are available means no further welfare money for the sponger whose fault is that? Blame government policy instead. I dont like the idea of random sterilization. Who knows where it will end? It's just not compatible with any ideals of democracy but that said there are certain caese where it might be justified such as people who are mentally retarded or criminals convicted of child molestation in which case castration in the latter case would be even better Although we disagreed on the death penalty, I agree with you on the castration of paedophiles (as long as there is 100% conclusive proof of guilt). I don't agree with sterilising someone because of a disability though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 Will you be supporting that child by inincially providing for it through gainful employment, or will you expect the state to pay for it? And, can you expect the child to be healthy? Of course, as far as anyone knows, Asperger's isn't hereditary, so my kid would be "normal" (for want of a better word), and if, God forbid, the child did inherit my disabilities, I would still love and care for them... And no, I would not expect the "State" to provide for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Bojangles Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 Of course, as far as anyone knows, Asperger's isn't hereditary, so my kid would be "normal" (for want of a better word), and if, God forbid, the child did inherit my disabilities, I would still love and care for them... And no, I would not expect the "State" to provide for them.Good for you Rich, and good luck getting sorted with employment by then so you can do the supporting of your family with independent pride. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Bojangles Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 . . . . . . You would leave it to a government or regime to decide who has a child and who doesn't? . . . . . . . . Western governments already do that with people who have severe mental ilnesses, with people who are incarcerated for life, and people who have a track record of poor parenting and have children taken from them at birth. . . . . Could you name some Western governments who do that and quote figures from reliable sources? There was a scandal a few years ago about Sweden having done some sterilisations after the war for a few years but that's the only case I've heard of. I also find it funny that the Hitlerites on here are calling for sterilisation of people for not working but not for rape or some other serious crimes. You have to wonder why. I think wires are crossed here - I think they were talking about a government having the authority to choose whether people have kids or not, which ours does in the cases quoted above, but not by sterilisation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stewboy Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 The whole OP seems to be like a latter day "Final solution" . It did not work for Germany did it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildcat Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 My argument is against scroungers. Families with a history.of avoiding work. Not disabled etc. Like the Royal family and those born with a silverspoon in their gobs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulgarian Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 More "yes" then "no" now, sad but not entirely unexpected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.