What's new

Scientology Lowering IQ in a Hidden Way

mockingbird

Silver Meritorious Patron
Scientology has a huge percentage of people that are deeply impoverished. Most Sea Org members and many staff members are extremely poor and this is by design. Ron Hubbard created the orgs with no minimum wage and many Sea Org members make pennies per hour, if they get paid at all.

Recent studies have found that farmers who are extremely poor for part of the year and get most or all of their pay at once have an interesting change. When they are flat broke they do much more poorly on IQ tests. When they have received their pay for the year their IQ scores rise sharply.
Apparently being distracted by a mindset of scarcity drastically reduces IQ. If this hypothesis is true then Scientology is sabotaging itself by impoverishing most of its most loyal and devoted members.

Many people have noted that lots of Scientology cult members act as if their aptitude is diminished while in Scientology. I think this may be partially explained by other factors described by cult experts such as Alexandra Stein in her book Terror, Love and Brainwashing and Margaret Singer in her book Cults In Our Midst and Robert Jay Lifton in the eight criteria for thought reform (free online and in his book Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism).

If this initial hypothesis gets lots of verification by repetition of results in further studies it can revolutionize several fields and policies. Nobel laureate Daniel Kahneman in his book Thinking Fast and Thinking Slow described how people make worse decisions in a mindset of scarcity - when they are losing financially no matter how they spend their income they are in a no win scenario and make worse decisions than people who are not in such dire straits.

Now a lot of people have long said poor people on average make worse decisions than people who are not poor. But the explanation often used was that they make bad decisions and so that results in their poverty. The reality that the exact same people can take IQ tests before getting paid and do poorly then get paid a lump sum and have their IQs rise on average significantly introduces the idea that IQ is not entirely the result of genetics and education. It also may be influenced by economic circumstances.



 
Last edited:

mockingbird

Silver Meritorious Patron
Here is a Ted Talk with more details on the lowering of IQ by poverty.

I am going to quote excerpts from the transcript which is partly available online.


I'd like to start with a simple question: Why do the poor make so many poor decisions? I know it's a harsh question, but take a look at the data. The poor borrow more, save less, smoke more, exercise less, drink more and eat less healthfully. Why?

00:24
Well, the standard explanation was once summed up by the British Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher. And she called poverty "a personality defect."

00:32
(Laughter)

00:34
A lack of character, basically.

00:37
Now, I'm sure not many of you would be so blunt. But the idea that there's something wrong with the poor themselves is not restricted to Mrs. Thatcher. Some of you may believe that the poor should be held responsible for their own mistakes. And others may argue that we should help them to make better decisions. But the underlying assumption is the same: there's something wrong with them. If we could just change them, if we could just teach them how to live their lives, if they would only listen. And to be honest, this was what I thought for a long time. It was only a few years ago that I discovered that everything I thought I knew about poverty was wrong.

01:26
It all started when I accidentally stumbled upon a paper by a few American psychologists. They had traveled 8,000 miles, all the way to India, for a fascinating study. And it was an experiment with sugarcane farmers. You should know that these farmers collect about 60 percent of their annual income all at once, right after the harvest. This means that they're relatively poor one part of the year and rich the other. The researchers asked them to do an IQ test before and after the harvest. What they subsequently discovered completely blew my mind. The farmers scored much worse on the test before the harvest. The effects of living in poverty, it turns out, correspond to losing 14 points of IQ. Now, to give you an idea, that's comparable to losing a night's sleep or the effects of alcoholism.

02:22
A few months later, I heard that Eldar Shafir, a professor at Princeton University and one of the authors of this study, was coming over to Holland, where I live. So we met up in Amsterdam to talk about his revolutionary new theory of poverty. And I can sum it up in just two words: scarcity mentality. It turns out that people behave differently when they perceive a thing to be scarce. And what that thing is doesn't much matter -- whether it's not enough time, money or food.

02:53
You all know this feeling, when you've got too much to do, or when you've put off breaking for lunch and your blood sugar takes a dive. This narrows your focus to your immediate lack -- to the sandwich you've got to have now, the meeting that's starting in five minutes or the bills that have to be paid tomorrow. So the long-term perspective goes out the window. You could compare it to a new computer that's running 10 heavy programs at once. It gets slower and slower, making errors. Eventually, it freezes -- not because it's a bad computer, but because it has too much to do at once. The poor have the same problem. They're not making dumb decisions because they are dumb, but because they're living in a context in which anyone would make dumb decisions.

03:42
So suddenly I understood why so many of our anti-poverty programs don't work. Investments in education, for example, are often completely ineffective. Poverty is not a lack of knowledge. A recent analysis of 201 studies on the effectiveness of money-management training came to the conclusion that it has almost no effect at all. Now, don't get me wrong -- this is not to say the poor don't learn anything -- they can come out wiser for sure. But it's not enough. Or as Professor Shafir told me, "It's like teaching someone to swim and then throwing them in a stormy sea."

04:24
I still remember sitting there, perplexed. And it struck me that we could have figured this all out decades ago. I mean, these psychologists didn't need any complicated brain scans; they only had to measure the farmer's IQ, and IQ tests were invented more than 100 years ago. Actually, I realized I had read about the psychology of poverty before. George Orwell, one of the greatest writers who ever lived, experienced poverty firsthand in the 1920s. "The essence of poverty," he wrote back then, is that it "annihilates the future." And he marveled at, quote, "How people take it for granted they have the right to preach at you and pray over you as soon as your income falls below a certain level."

05:08
Now, those words are every bit as resonant today. The big question is, of course: What can be done? Modern economists have a few solutions up their sleeves. We could help the poor with their paperwork or send them a text message to remind them to pay their bills. This type of solution is hugely popular with modern politicians, mostly because, well, they cost next to nothing. These solutions are, I think, a symbol of this era in which we so often treat the symptoms, but ignore the underlying cause.


https://www.ted.com/talks/rutger_br...acter_it_s_a_lack_of_cash/up-next?language=en

https://www.ted.com/talks/rutger_br...er_it_s_a_lack_of_cash/transcript?language=en
 
Last edited:

JustSheila

Crusader
00:37
Now, I'm sure not many of you would be so blunt. But the idea that there's something wrong with the poor themselves is not restricted to Mrs. Thatcher. Some of you may believe that the poor should be held responsible for their own mistakes. And others may argue that we should help them to make better decisions. But the underlying assumption is the same: there's something wrong with them. If we could just change them, if we could just teach them how to live their lives, if they would only listen. And to be honest, this was what I thought for a long time. It was only a few years ago that I discovered that everything I thought I knew about poverty was wrong....

...
03:42
So suddenly I understood why so many of our anti-poverty programs don't work. Investments in education, for example, are often completely ineffective. Poverty is not a lack of knowledge. A recent analysis of 201 studies on the effectiveness of money-management training came to the conclusion that it has almost no effect at all. Now, don't get me wrong -- this is not to say the poor don't learn anything -- they can come out wiser for sure. But it's not enough. Or as Professor Shafir told me, "It's like teaching someone to swim and then throwing them in a stormy sea."

04:24
I still remember sitting there, perplexed. And it struck me that we could have figured this all out decades ago. I mean, these psychologists didn't need any complicated brain scans; they only had to measure the farmer's IQ, and IQ tests were invented more than 100 years ago. Actually, I realized I had read about the psychology of poverty before. George Orwell, one of the greatest writers who ever lived, experienced poverty firsthand in the 1920s. "The essence of poverty," he wrote back then, is that it "annihilates the future." And he marveled at, quote, "How people take it for granted they have the right to preach at you and pray over you as soon as your income falls below a certain level."

05:08
Now, those words are every bit as resonant today. The big question is, of course: What can be done? Modern economists have a few solutions up their sleeves. We could help the poor with their paperwork or send them a text message to remind them to pay their bills. This type of solution is hugely popular with modern politicians, mostly because, well, they cost next to nothing. These solutions are, I think, a symbol of this era in which we so often treat the symptoms, but ignore the underlying cause.


https://www.ted.com/talks/rutger_br...acter_it_s_a_lack_of_cash/up-next?language=en

https://www.ted.com/talks/rutger_br...er_it_s_a_lack_of_cash/transcript?language=en
Great Ted talk, thanks. :thumbsup:
 

lotus

stubborn rebel sheep!
Actually I was taking a break, working on my laptop for a few hours to prepare a meeting with public health people whom decisions regarding the poor elders of my community are very much negatively impacting their futur lives.. a hopeless land

Friday night , I was preparing this meeting with somebody else and we were constantly coming back to the question: Why are the people (staff and executives) in those public organisations are acting such a different way toward poor people than toward middle class , educated people ???

George Orwell said it pretty well:

"The essence of poverty," he wrote back then, is that it "annihilates the future." And he marveled at, quote, "How people take it for granted they have the right to preach at you and pray over you as soon as your income falls below a certain level."

That will be my meeting opening quote to those people who are (good for them) evolving in the upper middle class and make very much impacting decisions regarding the present and NO futur life of those poor elders.

Could someone explain to me the true meaning of ''pray over you'' in the context..I can't find.
Thank you.
 
Last edited:

screamer2

Idiot Bastardson
Actually I was taking a break, working on my laptop for a few hours to prepare a meeting with public health people whom decisions regarding the poor elders of my community are very mush negatively impacting their futur lives.. a hopeless land

Friday night , I was preparing this meeting with somebody else and we were constantly coming back to the question: Why are the people (staff and executives) in those public organisation are acting such a different way toward poor people than toward middle class , educated people ???

George Orwell said it pretty well:

"The essence of poverty," he wrote back then, is that it "annihilates the future." And he marveled at, quote, "How people take it for granted they have the right to preach at you and pray over you as soon as your income falls below a certain level."

That will be my meeting opening quote to those people who are (good for them) evolving in the upper middle class and make very much impacting decisions regarding the present and NO futur life of those poor elders.

Could someone explain to me the true meraning of ''pray over you'' in the context..I can't find.
Thank you.

Could someone explain to me the true meraning of ''pray over you'' in the context..I can't find.
Thank you.


It come from Christianity, it from the bible

....Is any among you afflicted? let him pray. Is any merry? let him sing psalms. Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord: And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up; and if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him. Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much..... -James 5:14 (KJV)

Unless you meant
Lemon-Meringue-Pie-6.jpg


:)
 

mockingbird

Silver Meritorious Patron
“Overcoming poverty is not a task of charity, it is an act of justice. Like Slavery and Apartheid, poverty is not natural. It is man-made and it can be overcome and eradicated by the actions of human beings. Sometimes it falls on a generation to be great. YOU can be that great generation. Let your greatness blossom.” Nelson Mandela
 

JustSheila

Crusader
Actually I was taking a break, working on my laptop for a few hours to prepare a meeting with public health people whom decisions regarding the poor elders of my community are very mush negatively impacting their futur lives.. a hopeless land

Friday night , I was preparing this meeting with somebody else and we were constantly coming back to the question: Why are the people (staff and executives) in those public organisation are acting such a different way toward poor people than toward middle class , educated people ???

George Orwell said it pretty well:

"The essence of poverty," he wrote back then, is that it "annihilates the future." And he marveled at, quote, "How people take it for granted they have the right to preach at you and pray over you as soon as your income falls below a certain level."

That will be my meeting opening quote to those people who are (good for them) evolving in the upper middle class and make very much impacting decisions regarding the present and NO futur life of those poor elders.

Could someone explain to me the true meraning of ''pray over you'' in the context..I can't find.
Thank you.
It's an odd turn of phrase lotus, usually you pray for someone not over them, but I think he means to be patronising and condescending, that's my interpretation anyway, for what it's worth.
Lotus, that's a great quote. This whole thread strikes a chord with me. You and Mockingbird have described the situation so perfectly and succinctly that I have nothing to add. Your meeting speech will be a knockout. :yes:

Strati is right. In this context, "pray over" is patronizing and condescending. It isn't defined that way, but George Orwell was a master at subtle double-entendre to make people think. Orwell also often commented on the hypocrisy of some Christians and churches, where they say one thing but mean another, or where something that appears outwardly compassionate and sympathetic is actually an act of belittling another. The man was sharp.

In a Christian church, you have your supporters and patrons, the church regulars, you know - the pillars of the community and all of that. Orwell makes it clear that they set themselves apart and above others who are below a certain income and see those people as inferior, not praying FOR them, but as Strati pointed out, praying OVER them (i.e., they are ABOVE and BETTER than those poor, wretched souls).
 

JustSheila

Crusader
@lotus

Just an interesting aside that you might find interesting... your comment led me refresh myself on George Orwell. In his autobiographical essay, "Such, Such were the Joys," Orwell wrote about his Catholic boarding school experiences. He was accepted as a student there at reduced fees, so he would know firsthand what it felt like to be "prayed over" since he came from a family with less than an ideal income.

Orwell recollects his early boarding school experiences with unvarnished realism. St Cyprian's was, according to him, a "world of force and fraud and secrecy," in which the young Orwell, a shy, sickly and unattractive boy surrounded by pupils from families much richer than his own, was "like a goldfish" thrown "into a tank full of pike." The piece fiercely attacks the cruelty and snobbery of both his fellow pupils and of most of the adults connected with the school, — particularly the headmaster, Mr. Vaughan Wilkes, nicknamed "Sambo," and his wife Cicely, nicknamed "Flip".

Orwell describes the education he received as "a preparation for a sort of confidence trick," geared entirely towards maximising his future performance in the admissions exams to leading English public schools such as Eton and Harrow, without any concern for actual knowledge or understanding. He describes the approach as amounting to being cynically 'crammed', as a 'goose is crammed for Christmas'. The process is exemplified by the 'date learning' teaching of history in which boys were encouraged to learn dates, without any understanding of 'the mysterious events they were naming.' "1587? Massacre of St. Bartholomew (there is a mistake here in the book, in fact 1572)! 1713? Treaty of Utrecht – 1520? Field of the Cloth of Gold! and so on." Orwell also claims that he was accepted as a boarder at St Cyprians—at half of the usual fees—so that he might earn a scholarship that would look good in the school's publicity, and that his training relied heavily on the use of beatings, while the rich boys received preferential treatment and were exempted from corporal punishment.
The essay lashes out at the hypocrisy of the Edwardian society in which Orwell grew up and in which a boy was "bidden to be at once a Christian and a social success, which is impossible."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Such,_Such_Were_the_Joys
 

Leland

Crusader
As in Screamers post above....

The James 5:4 quote:

Praying Over is done by the Clergy....those Ordained.

Praying for can be done by anyone.
 

lotus

stubborn rebel sheep!
@JustSheila
@Leland
@screamer2
@strativarius

Much thanks To all of you guys for you helping me To understand the second degree of the expression. As Strati mentionned I thought it néant patronizing and condescendancy toward the poors..

Also thanks for pointing the difference in praying over vs playing for...it tells all in Christian religion.
I was raised Christian, educated by christians nuns till college grades and have been exposed...to what Sheila commented about George Orwell.

It has already been uncluded in my presentation

I love how, sometimes, things and timing reunite together to save you!

@JustSheila

The following quote is actually 50% of my presentation....the hypocrysie of a system and it's decision makers toward the society, tax payers and ultimately, those who become old, ill and poor....while they appears to do their duties To provide services to people in need, they do the opposite and only try to get rid of them and discard them.​

Orwell also often commented on the hypocrisy of some Christians and churches, where they say one thing but mean another, or where something that appears outwardly compassionate and sympathetic is actually an act of belittling another.
Thank you very much Sheila for the reasearch..It's so helping To craft my presentation with less Words of explanations, but greatest impact of such quotes!
 
Last edited:

JustSheila

Crusader
@JustSheila
@Leland
@screamer2
@strativarius

Much thanks To all of you guys for you helping me To understand the second degree of the expression. As Strati mentionned I thought it néant patronizing and condescendancy toward the poors..

Also thanks for pointing the difference in praying over vs playing for...it tells all in Christian religion.
I was raised Christian, educated by christians nuns till college grades and have been exposed...to what Sheila commented about George Orwell.

It has already been uncluded in my presentation

I love how, sometimes, things and timing reunite together to save you!

@JustSheila

The following quote is actually 50% of my presentation....the hypocrysie of a system and it's decision makers toward the society, tax payers and ultimately, those who become old, ill and poor....while they appears to do their duties To provide services to people in need, they do the opposite and only try to get rid of them and discard them.​

Orwell also often commented on the hypocrisy of some Christians and churches, where they say one thing but mean another, or where something that appears outwardly compassionate and sympathetic is actually an act of belittling another.
Thank you very much Sheila for the reasearch..It's so helping To craft my presentation with less Words of explanations, but greatest impact of such quotes!
You're very welcome, Lotus! I loved reading about George Orwell again - he's such a unique, gifted writer and you reminded me how much he inspired me years ago. You sure picked the perfect writer!

Yes, even the most compassionate Liberals often have an arrogance and attitude that there is something personally deficient in anyone who is poor or elderly. Their sympathies can be so condescending that they evoke a counter-reaction and it's an ugly dance. I've seen it, and it usually comes from mediocre people with little to no true life experience who are condescending to people superior in intellect and experience who are simply older, disabled or struggling financially. It's disgusting. The attitude is much worse than 30 years ago. Your speech is important. I'm sure you'll get this important message across in a powerful way. :heartflower:

Your presentation is going to be a smash hit.
 

lotus

stubborn rebel sheep!
You're very welcome, Lotus!

Yes, even the most compassionate Liberals often have an arrogance and attitude that there is something personally deficient in anyone who is poor or elderly. Their sympathies can be so condescending that they evoke a counter-reaction and it's an ugly dance. I've seen it, and it usually comes from mediocre people with little to no true life experience who are condescending to people superior in intellect and experience who are simply older, disabled or struggling financially. It's disgusting. The attitude is much worse than 30 years ago. Your speech is important. I'm sure you'll get this important message across in a powerful way. :heartflower:

Your presentation is going to be a smash hit.
Thank you @JustSheila for another great input.

This bois quote of you...how do you explain it...it's exactly the situation. It's becoming very ugly when they address To people more efucayef and knowledgeable than they are...they immediatery point their weapons ( the whole pack) and they fire on them like a dangerous ennemy.....
Here we don't have "political cult" mindsets...like in USA since people are not loyal To one side or ideology... It changes a lot from from one election to another.

Thus, I am still trying to grasp the reasons for those attitudes and behavior...Can it be the intelligent and experienced people are more difficult to manage like a compliant flock???
Is this that they can promote and demand changes??? Or they know their civil and individual rights???

It is for sure that I've seen this culture of miserabilism in Christian societies...
As for Georges Orwell , he is responsible for m'y SO escape and has been an eye opener.
I had read 1984 just before i went into the SO and realized soon IT WAS 1984...I told to one person and she told me I was restimulating because I was not used to such a theta ethical environement...

:hysterical:

This book has really been my life saver to understand in which world I landed...
 
Last edited:

JustSheila

Crusader
Thank you @JustSheila for another great input.

This bois quote of you...how do you explain it...it's exactly the situation. It's becoming very ugly when they address To people more efucayef and knowledgeable than they are...they immediatery point their weapons ( the whole pack) and they fire on them like a dangerous ennemy.....
Here we don't have "political cult" mindsets...like in USA since people are not loyal To one side or ideology... It changes a lot from from one election to another.

Thus, I am still trying to grasp the reasons for those attitudes and behavior...Can it be the intelligent and experienced people are more difficult to manage like a compliant flock???
Is this that they can promote and demand changes??? Or they know their civil and individual rights???
Yes, I think many intelligent, experienced people have worked hard to achieve the awareness and dignity to live freely. Many have high personal values so don't spend their lives satisfying personal vanity, greed or put on pretenses to impress those in power. Those are the sell-outs, the financially secure people who achieved it by selling their souls and later resent those who did not.

Those people who are arrogant toward the poor, elderly and disabled do it because they are so insecure, they need to put others down to think they are important. They have no sense of self beyond status. Status is everything to people like that so they go out of their way to ensure there is always a status quo and that underclasses will always remain underclass so that they can always believe they are better. The real reason, though, is they are TERRIFIED. These are people who could not survive hardship, who could not fall down and get back up again and again. They are fragile and weak and watching someone strong and it scares them like a reflection of their own weaknesses. What appears as the strong condescending to the weak is really the weak terrified of the powerful character of the person in front of them and doing all he or she can to convince this strong person that he is not.

And that is when charity is not charity.

A sudden catastrophe can set anyone back. Then what? Should a person accept charity? How much charity? If the person claiming to be charitable does it only to degrade another and put himself on a pedestal, should it be accepted? How can a person in trouble be sincerely helped without degrading him or her?

What about those who started off in sincere need of charity and then were degraded, so lost sight of their original dignity? How do we restore trust, dignity and personal confidence in that person?
It is for sure that I've seen this culture of miserabilism in Christian societies...
As for Georges Orwell , he is responsible for m'y SO escape and has been an eye opener.
I vas read 1984 just before i went into the SO and realized soon IT WAS 1984...I told up one person and she told me I was restimulating because I was not used to such a theta ethical environement...

:hysterical:

This book has really been my life saver to understand in which world I landed...
:roflmao: :laugh: Great story!

Yeh, George Orwell is awesome. One of my literary heroes, too. :biglove:
 

This is NOT OK !!!!

Gold Meritorious Patron
snip

In a Christian church, you have your supporters and patrons, the church regulars, you know - the pillars of the community and all of that. Orwell makes it clear that they set themselves apart and above others who are below a certain income and see those people as inferior, not praying FOR them, but as Strati pointed out, praying OVER them (i.e., they are ABOVE and BETTER than those poor, wretched souls).
Orwell may have felt this way, but I don't see it at my church.

The charity is freely given - food and clothing for the most part. I'd say the overall mindset of the donors is "There but for the grace of God go I". We dont pray for our clients - we just give them as much free food and clothing as we can.
 

lotus

stubborn rebel sheep!
I never volunteered in charities after I stop To practice at the catholic church.

The reason is that Charities is an activity that consist of or making use of poor people and poverty to give one a public image of generosity toward the poor who must be grateful , publicly.

Having been in situation I had money to give I remember that giving to charities would mostly benefited me with more money because of tax returns.. But those genevois people don't tell they use them to lower their taxes...
So generous....

Those who are truly minded in sharing and helping to build opportunities for those people in order to succeed a better life , Will GIVE also time and effort (mentoring) without expecting money, public recognition in exchange.

I know of weathy people who do that...they love that their assets and talents can be used to help them in création opportunities to make their life better. They have a policy that all $ donations are made anonymously via their lawyer.

So there is no "praying over" poor people To manage their life....
 
Last edited:

mockingbird

Silver Meritorious Patron
You're very welcome, Lotus! I loved reading about George Orwell again - he's such a unique, gifted writer and you reminded me how much he inspired me years ago. You sure picked the perfect writer!

Yes, even the most compassionate Liberals often have an arrogance and attitude that there is something personally deficient in anyone who is poor or elderly. Their sympathies can be so condescending that they evoke a counter-reaction and it's an ugly dance. I've seen it, and it usually comes from mediocre people with little to no true life experience who are condescending to people superior in intellect and experience who are simply older, disabled or struggling financially. It's disgusting. The attitude is much worse than 30 years ago. Your speech is important. I'm sure you'll get this important message across in a powerful way. :heartflower:

Your presentation is going to be a smash hit.
 

mockingbird

Silver Meritorious Patron
My post on Moving on from Scientology was about this issue. If you tie your reasons to helping others entirely to their output in labor you run into problems. The elderly, disabled, children and refugees are not always capable of returning equal labor. In a utilitarian model this can be problematic.

Would you kick grandma to the curb if she cannot work any more ? What if you have a disabled child ? Or a disabled veteran ?

In a purely utilitarian or reciprocal model these people can be marginalized or worse, up to exterminated.

In a care based model you help people not based on labor output or economic advantages but because you care about the person and their general welfare and human rights.

It is an entirely different approach.

You do not look down at someone but instead know they need help and it is right or just to provide it. They have misfortunes not bad character.
 

I told you I was trouble

Suspended animation
My post on Moving on from Scientology was about this issue. If you tie your reasons to helping others entirely to their output in labor you run into problems. The elderly, disabled, children and refugees are not always capable of returning equal labor. In a utilitarian model this can be problematic.

Would you kick grandma to the curb if she cannot work any more ? What if you have a disabled child ? Or a disabled veteran ?

In a purely utilitarian or reciprocal model these people can be marginalized or worse, up to exterminated.

In a care based model you help people not based on labor output or economic advantages but because you care about the person and their general welfare and human rights.

It is an entirely different approach.

You do not look down at someone but instead know they need help and it is right or just to provide it. They have misfortunes not bad character.
Agreed ... that is why a political system with a lean each way works best (it isn't perfect but so far it's the best we have come up with).

I have never seen anyone suggest or imply that what you mention above (bolded) would be acceptable and am repulsed by the very thought of a society like that but lines have to be drawn because eventually we will run out of other peoples money if we allow socialists to run the place for any length of time (as has already been well demonstrated).

 
Top