Quote:
Originally Posted by Trouble  I read today that a tory councillor has been likened to a nazi as he said unemployed/jobless parents breed for greed generally and do it to get more handouts from the government.
He suggested that anybody unemployed who continue to have children should be forceably sterilised after their second or third child.
At first i was horrified but is it such a bad idea?
Thoughts guys  |
Hmm, maybe the Tory Councillor would like to live on benefits for a few weeks, Im sure he wouldnt find much use for the word 'greed'.
People maybe unemployed for a variety of reasons: mental health problems, low job prospects, disabilities... or that old fashioned notion of CHOOSING to be a stay at home mum. Some people are long-term unemployed, others are short-term, would he discriminate against these or just send them all to the operating theatre? The idea of sterilising someone for not having a job is disgusting and clearly violates our basic human rights.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Astro
It is a pyramid monetary structure, with the relatively few stinking rich at the peak, then various grades of wealth gradually ending with a huge mass of people living in poverty. (Benefits in this country are below the world poverty line)
|
To rebalance this, the government need to look at creating social policys aimed at redistributing wealth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Double Trouble
I think sterilisation for the unemployed is the most absurd idea I've ever heard. Why not just stop their benefits and not give them excuses not to work.
|
Who would decide who was worthy of benefits or not? Who had been recieving them for too long? Whether A family should have their benefits stopped? There would be ethical implications to consider alongside issues surrounding equality.