|
Posted by Dave J. on October 23, 2005, 1:06 pm
If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
>In uk.politics.electoral on Sat, 22 Oct 2005 at 11:52:23, Dave J. wrote
>:
>>>
>>>What, you mean he should be ignoring the white middle-class majority -
>>>the people who elected him?
>>
>>Pure democracy. Two wolves and a sheep deciding what to have for dinner.
>>
>There's some truth in that, but the point is - pouring money into social
>programs for minorities is like pouring it into a black hole.
Presumably in an intelligent setup you don't pour the money directly, you
invest it in fixing the divisions, IOW in making the minority more a part
of the majority. What's left over then gets 'poured' into any schemes that
are genuinely in demand and genuinely unobtainable due to an aspect of
that section of society. From my POV the primary key is to fix the
divisions.
I loath Ghettos, and in this country I loath supposed 'race relations'
schemes that promote them. Heh - "your neighbours should become your
family, not your family should become your neighbours". [1] Trouble is
that thanks to our divisively selfish culture the first part is a major
stumbling block, I maintain that it shouldn't be 'cured' by choosing for
the second option.
[1] Howazat for a slogan? - quotes added after the fact <g>
>However much you throw at them, they always want more, and you see
>little if any return.
Who was it who said (and I really love this quote) something like "to try
to make a poor person rich by giving them money is to try to fix a hole in
a bucket by pouring in more water" ?
Obviously only true once their income exceeds survival level, but it
includes almost everyone in the western world thanks to the redistribution
that goes with taxation.
Dave J.
| 
XML site map