Originally Posted By: sinij
Somalia is not such off-base comparison. It demonstrate what happens when society disappears. You cannot create wealth in the vacuum, and society isn't just "is", social order has to be maintained so productive part of society can go on and create wealth.

Are you familiar with game theory? If yes, human society cannot exist with pure cooperators, it is just not in human nature to behave in altruistic manner or purely creatively. We can only manage level of exploitators, best we can hope is to keep level down so cooperators can function. As much as I hate defending welfare queens, their contribution to society is not murdering you and me with a machete while we sleep. That what we pay them for, to keep exploitators from outright destructive behavior. We both might not like it, but Somalian alternative is much, much worse.


Talk about a false dichotomy. But a good reminder of one reason the Founders saw fit to enshrine our right to keep and bear arms nonetheless.

However, I must say I find the idea of allowing a sub-class to perpetuate by reason of not implementing free-market reforms that would help them lift themselves out of said sub-class due to fear of the sub-class itself to be utterly abhorrent.

Better give the scary man a fish, but dont even think about teaching him to fish - hes scary and might decide he just wants me to hand him fish after all?

For who could be free when every other man's humour might domineer over him? - John Locke (2nd Treatise, sect 57)