zlacker

>The thing about state dependence that I don’t like is that that means the state has power over you. Follow our rules or you lose benefits. What, you’re against X? Sorry, come correct or lose your privilege to those benefits.

I don't understand how this would be a valid reason to not give a benefit. Even if that benefit comes with strings or can be taken away, isn't receiving that benefit for a period of time more helpful than never receiving it at all?

>>slg+(OP)
You’re not thinking long enough. Give the state enough time and it will use it as a cudgel to get people to do things the way they want.

>>slg+(OP)
It doesn't have to be a valid reason. From the POV of a state that wants to micromanage the beliefs of its population, social benefits become a tool of coercion. This has happened before, the history of USSR has plenty of examples.

That's not an argument against state help & social services per se. It's an argument for being vigilant and ensuring the government serves the people more than it serves itself.

>>mc32+B
Or they will be returned to the exact same state they would be in otherwise? How is that a threat? Would a hungry person turn down a free meal because they will just be hungry later and they don’t want to be reliant on whoever gave them the meal?

>>TeMPOr+a2
In USSR these opportunities didn't exist outside of the state. In the US, opportunities exist, some people are just too far down below the ladder that they can't even begin to climb. If you fear this type of situation in which people in the US are dependent on the state, isn't it an acknowledgment that the self reliance and "pull yourself up by the bootstraps" ideas that are used to argue against state help are myths? Otherwise why would people allow themselves to be coerced by the state if there were other viable alternatives?

>>mc32+B
I'd like to see what real-world examples you're thinking of when you write this, because the line of reasoning you're pursuing in this part of the thread looks to me more like a terminally cynical description of having a society and legal system.

>>slg+X3
> If you fear this type of situation in which people in the US are dependent on the state, isn't it an acknowledgment that the self reliance and "pull yourself up by the bootstraps" ideas that are used to argue against state help are myths?

Perhaps. I personally don't buy the "self-made man" arguments. They feel too much like survivorship bias.

>>slg+X3
I don't think it's that simple. The presence of a benefit can create a moat around other opportunities, e.g. social housing easing the burden of finding housing but also reinforcing geographic segregation by social class.