Quote of the day—Doug Huffman

We were horrified, and rightly so, at Adolf Hitler’s solution to the problem. But we haven’t got a solution to the problem either.

Doug Huffman
August 16, 2014
[No. No any sort of mythical “Jewish problem.” The problem Doug was talking about was what to do with those people that are “unfit” to support themselves because they are too stupid, crazy, or lazy. In our society we are on track for an Idiocracy type “solution”.

Doug and I talked late into the night on this and other somewhat related topics.

The problem as I see it is that our ethics are appropriate for a tribe but they don’t scale to a population of a million people let along a population of 300+ million. When we see someone, children in particular, hungry or in need of care we help them even if they will never be able (or choose) to support themselves.

In a tribe of a 100 to 200 people everyone know everyone else and the peer pressure significantly reduces the freeloader problem. As soon as there is anonymity freeloaders become an essentially unsolvable problem. And with large numbers of people combined with a society in possession of advanced technology in the essentials of life it now becomes possible to support those that cannot support themselves as well as those who chose not support themselves.

And with that support of those who cannot and choose not to support themselves we end up, literally, breeding more of them. We are scared, perhaps even justifiably horrified, of the risks of the government assuming the power to mandate some people not be allowed to reproduce or to raise their children the way they see fit.

I see horrific outcomes in either of the two “solutions”.

There is at least one other potential solution. It is, as I see it, the least unpleasant of the available alternatives and as you might expect, the least likely path for our society to take.

That potential solution is for our Federal government to stay within it Constitutional bounds. If the individual states or counties or cities wanted to experiment with government welfare or “free healthcare” then those experiments could have run their course over the last 200+ years.

What I expect would have happened is with enough of these type of experiments being run that people would realize there are some people that we just have to let “nature take its course” with. We would have a lot fewer freeloaders. We would have a constant, but small, set of tragic cases of people that could not support themselves and could not convince family and/or friends to support them.

There would be heart wrenching cases and people would organize charities (Shriners, Elks Club, Eagles Club, Salvation Army, etc.). to help those for whom help was appropriate. The decision to help or “let nature take its course” would be done in more of a “tribe environment” for which our ethics were “designed” for.

I don’t see how our society can get from where we are now to the “least bad of the available options” without a lot of pain, suffering, and death. It’s like trying to solve a global optimization problem when the slopes of the sides of current local optimum are steep and high.

Nature is “going to take it’s course” with us. All of us. I’m certain many, perhaps even a large percentage of, people will survive the big “challenges” ahead. But I cannot predict if those challenges will send our descendants to the stone ages  or to a Star Trek universe. But one way or another this ethical problem will “resolve” itself if we don’t resolve it.

Nature is testing it’s own “solutions” right now. Ebola, economic instability, and even the immigration issue are in beta test now. They may not be released soon or even ever if people do the right thing. But if we don’t then full production of something awful is coming soon.—Joe]

13 thoughts on “Quote of the day—Doug Huffman

  1. For the powers tha be, the second option *is* the soluton. Overload the system with with people whose natural survival instincts have been atrophied away by dependency. What has been purposely done to black people in this country was just the pilot project for the rest of us. Once the system collapses, those same dependents will clamor for the Socialist Utopia (TM). Cloward and Piven, bayybeee!

    (Just before hitting post, I had a mental image of King Putt as Slim Pickens, riding the nuke all the way to the ground. Anyone with mad P-shop skillz?)

  2. The fundamental problem is that we don’t want to let people suffer the consequences of their actions. Until feedback loops operate effectively, there won’t be much change. Like you, Joe, I don’t see a very happy ending to this.

  3. Natural consequences are just that – natural. You don’t have to pass a law or choose them, they just happen. If we try to support too many parasites, and don’t correct poor decision-making promptly, regardless of reasoning or intent, then eventually they will drag us down. It is inevitable. But the “lifeboat” might float for a lot longer than we think possible, but the longer we allow the consequences go unenforced, the farther people are removed from the land and the lowest level of survival and production of the necessities, the harsher the corrections will be. And, when it comes, being “nice” will not be a selected-for survival characteristic, I fear.
    I think you are right – nothing, or nothing major, from the Feds, push all aid down to the lowest level where freeloaders have to look their neighbors in the eye, knowing. It needs to be stigmatized, big time.

    • Oops, missed a “/” there. Oh, well.
      Actually, there is another thought that occured to me a while back. Make our welfare/indigent support system limited by budgeting the top line as a percentage of overall tax revenue, and then that’s allocated across the applicants, rather than saying a person at the bottom should get X, and multiplying by how many recipients there are to get a top-line demand. That way, the recipients are well aware that they are in competition for “free” money, and will not encourage others to get on assistance, they will rat out cheaters (because it’s coming out of their check), and we can budget the top line rationally in the context of how much we have.
      That may mean that what each one gets is inadequate – but combine with rationalizing the way payments are reduced when a person starts earning money (right now it’s lose all of a benefit at a particular income level, rather than any sort of taper) it might incentivize more of the right behavior.
      I also like the FairTax method of doing away with most welfare programs, too.

    • I would argue that government intervention is still natural. Slavery is a natural consequence of some people wanting to enslave, and other people not being strong and united enough to resist.

      Some of my ancestors were proud pirates – not ashamed to steal, rape and pillage from those who worked. You see the same lack of shame in the Moocher class today.

      The question isn’t what to do we with the moochers, but rather how do we keep the moochers from destroying civilization?

      • It’s like feeding the bears in Yellowstone – it just encourages them. Don’t feed the bears, don’t give moochers handouts, *particularly* through government intermediaries who have a vested interest in not tracking outcomes, only keeping the money-spigots open.

  4. Much of my concern regards the damage to the gene pool that is done when responsible people curtail their reproduction while the irresponsible do not. If responsibility has a genetic link, we are selecting for irresponsible behavior.

    It is likely that any sustainable population needs to weed out the weak and genetically ill just to combat random mutations. Our sense of compassion prompts us to lend a helping hand to the poor, the weak and the oppressed thus enabling them to reproduce. That may be a fatal flaw in Western European civilization.

    • I do not believe there is a “responsibility gene”. Irresponsibility (the lack of hope or confidence in one’s own ability to live a good life without mooching, thievery or deception) does get passed from parents to children, and it is spread culturally, but it’s far from being a genetic inheritance. Nor is intelligence necessarily a factor in leading a moral, reasonably self-sufficient lifestyle until we get down to the idiot level where someone simply can’t figure out how to pick lettuce, mop a floor, or utter the phrase, “Welcome to Wal Mart”.

      Turn over some different stones in your quest, Young Grasshopper. Look not at the molecules, but at the morals. We’re talking about cultural inheritance, or breeding. THAT is something much easier to deal with, and it never involves gas chambers or hand-wringing over “racial hygiene” (a thoroughly Marxist/Nazi/Progressive concept). The only task before us then is to spread hope and knowledge, which lead automatically to exuberance and confidence – the natural state of the innocent.

      In a half-way healthy society there is more than enough private charity to handle any and all cases of true need, or to handle criminals with aplomb.

      Our current pickle of course is that we’ve been set up for failure, quite purposefully, by a hundred year-old program of Progressive demoralization and dependency (and all along we, our fathers, our grandfathers and our great grandfathers fell for the lie that government redistribution and its attendant departure from constitutional principles arouse out of compassion).

      Another Big Lie, the brother lie to the former, and one of if not the biggest lies ever, is that emotion is the essence of humanity. If you believe that you are one of “them”. Emotion in fact is the mind killer, the opposite of reason, and note how it’s been promoted all our lives.

      In any case there WILL be absolute hell to pay. The question is how it will play out, and that’s up to each and every one of us.

      Some people get upset at this– America (not the real estate but the ideal) is the product of the Judeo/Christian belief system and its culture of learning, self reliance and self control. Understand that and you see immediately what went wrong and how, if ever, it will be righted..

  5. Doug, genes can be overcome. Just ask any worthy military Drill Instructor.

    There will be some sort of calamity, during which even the bloated and power-mad governments will be unable to maintain order. The freeloaders will die off so fast that body disposal will be the only issue, not identification of remains or manner of death.

    A small percentage of the freeloaders will form bandit gangs and attempt to prey on prepared survivors of the calamity. Most of these gangs will fail in a hail of bullets, but a few will be organized enough for the remains of the military to have to deal with.

    The freeloader problem will end thus, and the political supporters of sloth will go down with them.

    • If ebola gets to Lagos (population 22 million), population control might not be a problem, but as you say body disposal will be. Though I don’t know how selective it will be.

  6. I firmly believe that the only solution is to refuse to support the fuckers and let them starve to death. (Yea, you might have to deal with some more harshly if they take to looting, but they’ll end up in the same place.)

  7. I think Joe has it about right, and even though we’ve missed a great opportunity by allowing the individual states to take their own course, I suspect, should our system and structure of government continue, that’s what will happen.

    Some of it is happening now: some people are moving from high tax / high regulation states (CA, NY, et al) to low tax / low regulation states (the south). Unfortunately, they’re bringing their HT/HR attitudes with them which is corrupting the LT/LR states (“we used to have X back home, I don’t iunderstand why we don’t have it here….”).

    There will be a cleansing, which few people on either side will enjoy; whether it is a “natural” cleansing like Ebola, or man-made cleansing performed at 500 meters, remains to be seen. I suspect whichever it is, that will be merely the first round in what will become a longer, and painful, cycle of creating a new found attitude toward self sufficiency and independence. Unfortunately, I really doubt the situation as it now exists can be rectified by any other means. There certainly is neither the intelligence nor gumption in most quarters to discover and take another path.

  8. Social Security was predicated on the assumption that old people wouldn’t live so long. Flu epidemics used to kill millions – predominantly the old and weak. An untreatable flu strain hits the US and wipes out everyone over 75, and suddenly the books are balanced again. As the US continues to socialize healthcare, the risk of the middle class getting screwed on an epidemic increases.

    The natural consequences will be:
    1) people stop paying income and payroll taxes. As more and more people are paid under the table, a few people will stop sending the IRS checks. First a few bold risk-takers, then everyone. Just like illegal immigration, the lack of enforcement will let people feel entitled to ignore the law. Only workers who are forced to pay will pay (i.e. government workers, some contractors).
    2) as the federal/state/local governments squeeze businesses more to make up the difference, businesses will cheat more. Flee, lie, bribe – some will stay in business.
    3) “Free health care” will mean that real health care will be a luxury. Everything else the government gives away ‘free’ will be on the slippery slope to unavailability – electricity, clean water, phones and internet.

Comments are closed.