View Poll Results: Welfare class/culture = socially parasitic relationship with the tax payer as host?

Voters
3. You may not vote on this poll
  • Parastic relationship benificial to only the parasite

    2 66.67%
  • Parasitic relationship - symbiotic - obligate (both depend on each other to survive)

    0 0%
  • Parasitic - symbiotic - facultative (benefits both, but not necessary to either)

    0 0%
  • Not parasitic but parasitic like

    0 0%
  • Not parasitic because they're the same species

    0 0%
  • Not parasitic because we're discussing humans

    1 33.33%
  • I have my own options which I've included below.

    0 0%
  • Whoever asked this question is a jerk.

    0 0%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Welfare class/culture = a socially parasitic relationship with the tax payer as host?

  1. #1
    Advisor GreenvilleGrows's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    My version of reality
    Last Seen
    10-05-12 @ 04:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    566

    Welfare class/culture = a socially parasitic relationship with the tax payer as host?

    I'm sure this concept has probably been ill used in the past, but if a class of people develops who totally depend on another class of people to exist can they be called parasites? If it is a parasitic relationship, are there benefits to the rest of the citizens in maintaining the relationship of support (symbiotic)?

    Some symbiotic relationships are obligate, meaning that both parties cannot live on their own. Others are facultative, meaning that they can, but do not have to live with the other organism.

    No, I'm not advocating any kind of wacko inhuman treatment.
    The US is an odd ship. The captain yells out when he sees obtacles , but 535 individual propellers do the steering.

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Naperville, IL
    Last Seen
    09-24-12 @ 02:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    11,963

    Re: Welfare class/culture = a socially parasitic relationship with the tax payer as h

    Quote Originally Posted by GreenvilleGrows View Post
    I'm sure this concept has probably been ill used in the past, but if a class of people develops who totally depend on another class of people to exist can they be called parasites? If it is a parasitic relationship, are there benefits to the rest of the citizens in maintaining the relationship of support (symbiotic)?

    Some symbiotic relationships are obligate, meaning that both parties cannot live on their own. Others are facultative, meaning that they can, but do not have to live with the other organism.

    No, I'm not advocating any kind of wacko inhuman treatment.
    It's called maintaining a basic standard of living to sustain a consumer based economy during changes and shifts in industries and technology.

    BTW - no one forces corps to ship jobs overseas.

  3. #3
    Advisor GreenvilleGrows's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    My version of reality
    Last Seen
    10-05-12 @ 04:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    566

    Re: Welfare class/culture = a socially parasitic relationship with the tax payer as h

    Quote Originally Posted by hazlnut View Post
    It's called maintaining a basic standard of living to sustain a consumer based economy during changes and shifts in industries and technology.

    BTW - no one forces corps to ship jobs overseas.
    Sorry, I should clarify. I'm not talking about a temporary safety net. I'm talking about the fixed culture within the US culture. Sometimes, a welfare recipient (or their offspring) could become "healthy" enough to become a host (in this comparison).
    The US is an odd ship. The captain yells out when he sees obtacles , but 535 individual propellers do the steering.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •