rocketalum;1816925 wrote:Something that really struck me so far from this thread. There are a few that I know from the Politics forum to be very right wing. I'm making a bit of an assumption here but typically those on the right supposedly support limited government. Yet we see things on their lists that if enacted would be some of the biggest government intrusions ever into the personal lives of citizens. You can be for limited government and you can support the government reaching into the lives of citizens both are well within your rights. You just can't be both.
I tend to lean to the right in most cases. Its very obvious that the unpopular opinions I posted reduce government involvement in the personal lives of citizens.
Let me explain:
• Anchor Babies - This idea affects US citizens by eliminating the monies needed to support non-US citizens who are here because with the "anchor" baby. It is tax money that most likely will never be reduced from the US citizen's tax burden and will probably be redirected to other government uses, but at least it stops the incentive of non-citizens to gain access to the teet of US tax money.
• Eliminate welfare to recipients who get pregnant - The problem that I see here is that the more babies you have, the bigger welfare check you get. As it stands now, this both de-incentivises citizens to be independent and gives incentive for them to let government be more involved in their lives. By having a welfare eligibility ground rule that says you can not get pregnant, there is an incentive to take personal responsibility and reduces the government's role in the citizen's life. Choosing to break this rule further reduces the role of government in their life even more.
• Food stamps only to be used for food and purchased only at welfare grocery stores - Washington would probably screw this one up and make it a huge new bureaucracy, but it could be done in a way that would reduce government. First, close the Postal Department. It is a drain on the budget and there are private companies providing the same services. It is not needed. Repurpose the former brick and mortar PO buildings and offices as welfare grocery stores. Limit the variety of food items that are available. The goal would be to get off of the government dependency and to become independent and be self sufficient. Within reason, the government will help you, however, you must understand that unless you are truly unable to provide for yourself, (physical, mental, health reasons etc.), there will be limits as to what the government will be giving to you. Fraud would no doubt crop up, however, given the state of the system as it is today, starting new will see a huge improvement to the system.
• Orphanages need to start being an option again - This does not need to be a government program. There are countless private, independent and religious groups who would step up to help kids in need if given the chance. Government could give incentive to individuals and others with direct tax breaks as opposed to having it be a line item budget in a bureaucracy. The children would benefit greatly and society would reap the reward once the kids reach maturity.
Overall... each idea gives incentive to smaller government and greater personal independence.
