I have never heard this one before, so this is the first time. Who are they? They are "Irresponsible Socialists". These are people who are on board for step #1 of socialism where you get things from the government because you want them or need them. Remember my prior blog where I pointed out that Communism and Socialism both have two steps? Step #1 is, "to each according to their needs". All good socialists agree on step #1, but what about step #2, "from each according to their ability to pay"?
What both Communism and Socialism have in abundance is "irresponsible socialists". These are the people who do not want to work and develop their "abilities" to earn money and pay their share of taxes. You know who they are. They are the ones who drop out of school because it is too much work and thus can not earn enough to pay their share. It is the dropping out of school that caused them not to be able to pay their fair share, so why should I have to give them my tax money so they can live the "my fair share" quality of life? Getting the message? How about those who have kids out of wedlock? You know who those people are too. Because they could not keep their knees together when they got the hot's and now can not hold down a job, is that my problem? I don't think so. Because they need some money for drugs and robbed the local store and ended up in jail with a criminal record and now can not get or hold down a job, is that my problem? Again, I don't think so. What we have is a large group of people who are "irresponsible socialists".
Rather than refer to these types of people as criminal, drop outs, druggies or unwed mothers, why don't we all call them "irresponsible socialists" because that is what they really are. They mostly seem to want the benefits of socialism, but do not want to be team players. They want to steal from the responsible socialists. Do you really think that there are any real responsible socialists who feel that it is their duty to work hard and go without so they can pay their "fair share" into the social collective? I don't think so. The 50% + who voted Obama and his group into office were the "irresponsible socialists", not the responsible socialists. I have a hard time telling the difference between a responsible socialist and a capitalist. How about you?
From now on, call these communist and socialist free loaders what they really are and that is "irresponsible socialists". If we do that, may be, the general public will begin to see where the real problem is and why. If this can become real pier pressure, then we might be able to start changing things. Our problem is not socialism, it is the fact that "irresponsible socialists" have the right to vote. Remember the story about the "Little Red Hen"? Some things just don't change.
PS---Socialists "need" capitalists. How else would they be able to pay the bills? Only in fairy tails do you find countries that are 100% socialists. What a real "irresponsible socialist" wants is to live in a country where just less than 50% are capitalists. Sounds like the USA!!!
