By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Mr Puggsly said:
VGPolyglot said:

Circumstances change. Just because they can't support a family now doesn't mean that they weren't able to in the past. However, even if you do lose your job or something like that, it's not like you can just get rid of your children, so they'll probably be doomed into poverty as well because they won't be able to afford good education.

The question is, why should there be poverty in the first place? There are billionaires who are never going to spend even close to what they have, why hoard all of that money?

That's the thing about left wingers like yourself, you focus on situations where people may have lost their job, maybe health issues, and they could no longer support a family.

What I'm telling you is a lot of women start a family with a useless man and no job skills and that's a significant cause of poverty. Statistically many single mother don't even have a high school diploma.

Wealth redistribution doesn't solve poor life decisions, it enables that behavior and eventually you have a country going broke. I mean poverty could go down drastically if people just made better life decisions. But hey, that's just my right wing logic.

I don't support wealth redistribution. I support a system where wealth doesn't need to be redistributed in the first place. I also don't support the existence of states or even money. Instead, I support a system where people work according to their ability and get according to their needs.