I see a lot of stuff written about people who could work but won’t.
I read stuff about wanting to do drug testing for welfare recipients.
I see posts touting no benefits for illegals.
I hear moral outrage.
Who would defend the immoral?
You know that costs money don’t you?
To those who could work but won’t, is your job being a burglar? Are you chemist making meth but you don’t make tons of it because you’re too lazy? I doubt that El Chappo is lazy. If he comes in illegally to the US and we incarcerate him, he will be receiving the benefits of prison lodging food and health care. AND WE WILL BE PAYING FOR IT. Not to mention that the tougher on crime we try to be will mean paying for additional prisons, guards, and their associated expenses. Ambitious criminals can only be contained by ambitious law enforcement.
Welfare shouldn’t allow people to use money for drugs and get food with stamps. Sounds reasonable, but drug testing costs money. You had better hope you take enough people off welfare to pay for the testing, otherwise you’re just providing free drug testing. But it isn’t free. It will be paid for also.
Would you say I’m defending the immoral by not wanting to pay for tough tactics? In the olden times when people weren’t coddling criminals they didn’t get buried with those expenses.
No, they didn’t. Those most common punishment was being run out of town and in earlier times, banishment. Those are very cheap inexpensive ways of dealing with troublemakers. Where would you want them sent. BTW, Australia got it’s start that way, but I don’t think they will take more now.
Living in a society is not cheap. Writing was invented to record taxes.
Tolerating immorality is cheaper than forcing compliance.
Just had to say that.