wanting to kill people is characterized as mentally ill so by your own description
you would be killed off as well
"Why? Because they are baby boomers who were laid off to make room for younger people. And do you know why employers would rather have younger people? Because they're afraid the older people will retire."
And "amusingly", young people in the States may have trouble finding work depending on where they live since so many career based jobs these days require 3 to 5 years experience to even be considered.
"So yes, theoretically everyone can become an entrepreneur, but it's a matter of when you can do it that depends upon the individual and their circumstances."
Except it'd be best if it weren't everyone. A common quote from Bioshock: "Someone's gotta scrub the toilets".
Funny you blame poor people for having babies when the right wing has just about eliminated access to abortion and, in some places, birth control. You think poor people with children are living it up on Welfare? It is such a paltry amount of money that I don't know how anyone manages to live on it.
This country and world are out of whack because the 1% has been sucking up all the wealth so that they now own more than the rest of the 99%. They use their wast surplus of funds to buy the government so it carries out their well. Here and their you will find an independent politician but they only are allowed to exist to make the system look like it is a real democracy, which it is not. Furthermore, the 1% is busily destroying the earth so none of us will be able to survive much longer. The 1% are destroying the world a lot more effectively than poor families on Welfare.
Do you know the circumstances regarding your own adoption? Were your birth parents poor? If so by your own statement you eliminate your own existence. You're not exempt because you see yourself as an entrepreneur.
Tell us more about how the poor shouldn't procreate while you're driving around in that car mommy and daddy bought you.
"Can't we just have robots do it? Or do we have to care about people who need to feed their families? :/"
Then we'd need technicians to maintain and repair the robots! For that matter, technicians that are tolerant of dealing with shit cleaning robots.
It'd be more cost effective to develop an inexpensive mixing solution to make shit tasty, edible, and nutrient rich for the poor, ignoring that it'd be a marketing nightmare.
by anastaciaDo you know the circumstances regarding your own adoption? Were your birth parents poor? If so by your own statement you eliminate your own existence. You're not exempt because you see yourself as an entrepreneur.
This is pretty much the most relevant thing anyone's posted.
Being born poor doesn't determine intelligence or capability for success. There are definitely cultural issues in some areas (the two that come to mind are inner city "ghetto" culture glorifying violence, and rural "redneck" culture actively fighting progress in order to save babies and slay the evil gays) but limiting reproduction won't change the inherent cultural sickness.
Pure capitalism itself is becoming outdated, as it becomes more about "wealth" (meaning money) and less about "capital" (meaning goods or services with an inherent value) and while I do believe you have the mindset of a capitalist, you have to understand that the way it's currently working in practice is beginning to resemble feudalism more than capitalism.
If you want to create a capitalist society, don't kill the poor. Destroy all the money. Every last bit of it. Then all the lazy people who pay their bills by trading money for money will have to actually innovate.
Edit to specify the "you" I'm talking to is Luna, not Ana.
A Modest Proposal, except feeding them to other poor people?
Social conditioning plays a huge role here.
The town that I grew up in has a shockingly high rate of teenage pregnancy. Now, in that particular place, teenage girls are absolutely terrified of being accused of being sluts. Whenever someone insults their delicate sense of being, they'll screech, "SLUUUUUUUUUUUUT!" in the general direction of the insult. Provided that the insult comes from a female, and here's where it gets interesting. If the insult comes from a man, the girl will do anything to appease him. Anything to get herself convinced that he likes her. These girls are living with bifurcated states of mind: to get men to like you, you must be sexually appealing, but to be sexually appealing, you're a slut and you're therefore a terrible person.
I believe that this is the result of the emphasis that our society places on the purity of girls. Parents panic that their daughters might be having sex, but their concern about their sons extends only to the sexual health of the boys. So the boys go on perpetuating the notion that they're studs if they've had multiple sexual partners, while the girls are left frustrated and confused.
My father was a sociopath, and he gave me the best Talk I've ever heard any parent give. This is what he said to me when I hit puberty:
"You're going to start feeling a lot of strong biological urges. They will be very hard to resist. You don't have to resist them if you don't want to, but they could get you into trouble if you don't protect yourself." I didn't have to listen to any of that emotional bullshit about how my gender makes me more vulnerable to being hurt by evil men who want to take advantage of my innocence. My father either didn't understand that that's the message our media portrays to us, or he understood it but realized that I wouldn't believe it myself.
Where am I going here?
Well, the girls who lived according to the confusing notions that having sex - under any circumstances - automatically renders you a slut all dropped out of school and squeezed out shrieking brats to the first guys who claimed to love them. Most of them are now single mothers. Some of them are good single mothers; others aren't. Obviously, they're claiming benefits for the raising of these children. Unlike any other town in that country, the largest population is actually the youngest. Most other populations within that country are aging. The people of that town aren't - they're just reproducing. No doubt their children will grow into the same notions as their parents, for the most part, and will continue the cycle.
Now, I'm not saying that these women are sluts. I myself do not use the term; it is a lazy, underhanded way to insult someone. To use it identifies oneself as weak. However, to be a slut, one must have sexual intercourse. And according to the philosophy of these women, sexual intercourse is bad, and anyone who engages in it is a slut (if they're female). Do I believe that such people should be prevented from having children? No. I believe that a voice of reason needs to be made itself heard in towns like that. People often squawk that girls don't value themselves if they're willing to have sex with their boyfriends. They should instead reason that value itself is a composite of ideologies. Values, not value. Valuing oneself depends on the sum of those composites, not on a teenage girl's desire to engage in acts of sexual contact or not.