I like to ask people to explain what they mean when they use political labels. There are many many different 'ideas' of what the labels mean.

I believe in the 'it takes a village' concept AND I believe in the 'self accountability' concept. There is no 'either/or' for me. Just a desire for the best parts of each, applied within the context of the particular situation to be addressed or goal to be met. If I shared the 'it takes a village' part, many would claim I am 'socialist'. If I shared the self accountability part, I would be welcomed as 'capitalist'. I pray I am never shallow enough to fit neatly and only in one of the boxes.

"I believe in the 'it takes a village' concept AND I believe in the 'self accountability' concept"? How can the two work together, if you're collecting recourses from others at the barrel of a gun?

There is no barrel of a gun. There is a society and law and policy. There are three branches that work in conjunction to enforce and make or change those laws and policies. There is the choice to live within law and policy of your country, to try to change it, or to move somewhere else.

I'm assuming the full quote is "it takes a village to raise a child" It had nothing to do with taking anything from anyone, it was about the idea that many people are willing to give of themselves when needed and the examples their lives show to a child. Most people are willing to give of themselves especially when it comes to children. It may be something as simple as tossing a ball with some child or mentoring a child in school. It might be something much more as in setting up a local school scholarship or paying for a child's medical care. There is no government involvement or mandate only people giving to others because they want to.

I am familiar with that quote. Yet people have used the particular words 'it takes a village' to describe many things beyond raising children. These words are often referring to the sense that we do not live in isolation, but as community. And as a community, there must be some central source of collective resource, support, values, or what have you to make it a community in the first place.

You should point out that the statement "if poor people work hard enough they will become rich" is ********. That’s called individualism and its based on the idea that life is fully controllable, but anyone with a brain knows otherwise. Life is anything but fully controllable.

You will never know what capitalism throws at you, what debts you must pay, how much interest will be applied to debts, medical bills, tuition fees, etc… You can bet on something but that doesnt mean it will happen. Under capitalism, you gamble for success. You are living in a gambling game in capitalist society where the market is ever changing and opportunity is unequal.

“Every night, you should be coming home and selling something, creating something, learning something, etc.”

Has this idiot ever considered that many people tend to be extremely tired after they come home from work? Has he ever considered that what he sees as ‘laziness’ is actually hoplessness? Has he ever considered how many of those people wanted to get a decent education but couldnt afford it, how many drowned in debt before they could graduate, how many got into accidents and we forced to drain their life savings and quit their jobs? Life isnt always "yeah just work hard and you’ll be fine". Capitalism is dynamic and “equal opportunity” only means equal legal rights, not equal economic opportunity. People can work their ***** off every single day of the week and on an anually salary of 40k and still struggle to put food on the table. Mind you, i’m referring to the US here, how do you think much poorer countries in the capitalist world are carrying out?

Those people unable to produce value end up in poverty, become homeless or starve to death, not because they are lazy, but because the social conditions capitalism creates makes it very hard to do so. But capitalists try to justify the obscene inequalities and poverty that capitalism creates, to reassure the rich that they somehow deserved the wealth they accumulated, and to fool the poor into thinking that they simply aren’t working hard enough. It’s really no different than the Divine Right of Kings from the feudal era.

Here are some things that should be asked:

Is it a mental disability affecting their ability to retain information?
Is it a lack of education/A wealth of bad information?
If they are too "stupid" to learn, are they at fault?
Should people be punished by actions they're unable to consent to?
Are we morally righteous if we watch them suffer through poverty?
Where do they live? Do they live in a poor area? Are there any overwhelming problems in these communities that puts the probability of failure at a higher rate?
Is crime a major issue? “Lazy “people whose options are limited often turn to crime.
How little do they earn in their current job? Do they earn minimum wage?
Can they even get access to a decent job? Do they live in an area where there is few job opportunities?
Are their parents poor as well? .
These are questions that mostly conservatives don’t ask, probably because they don’t want to ask. They attempt to distance their utopian view of capitalism from the absolute clownshow that is actual capitalism by making the excuse that all poor people are just “lazy”. A rejection of reality pretty much.

Minarchist here as well.

I think most of us can agree that not everyone has the same capability nor opportunity.
Sometimes it is just a matter of opportunity and people have to be willing to do what our ancestors did, pack what little we have and move into the unknown. When they are unwilling and join the ranks of the limited capable. That brings us to the real question, what level of support or lifestyle should society provide for these people? Some type of roof over their head? Access to 3 meals a day? Unlimited health care? A cell phone? Transportation? Big screen TV? Internet access? Where should society draw that line?

In my opinion, IF I'm paying taxes to support you, your lifestyle better be well below mine!!!

none

Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness is just that. Any government system or group of people who tries or takes that away from you should be opposed. We do give up some Liberty to have courts, police and such. We control our lives not others.

I'm always pleased to find a minarchist in the forum. I'll have to take up this thread again when I sober up. Should be June/ Julyish...

I don't pay mind to political labels.
I don't pay mind to religious labels.

I think of myself as a realist because I prefer to embrace reality over delusion.

I think of myself as a momentist because I try to live in the current moment.

I'm also an opinionist because I voice my opinion but I also consider the opinions of others.

I'm also an isolationist because I believe your business is really none of my business until it becomes so.

I'm also a dreamer because I believe people have the capacity to rise above their current insanity, if given a chance.

It really doesn't matter how I see myself because others tend to apply their labels to me no matter what I do or say.

This is because from other's point of view, during limited short exchange, I exhibit some qualities inherent to all society labels.
I believe this is because I have a dynamic, responsive personality governed by my own unique set of morals and opinions.

So, call me what you like, in some cases, yer probably right.

Lol