@RM
If somebody is so poor they can't eat, they can't have the energy to do a good job at work, decreasing their productivity towards the nation's economy.
They rely on a church to get their food, not the government that uses forcibly obtained taxpayer funds to feed people the taxpayers don't care about.
This 'they are lazy' concept is bullshit.
I don't agree with this concept. The poor are unlucky. Which is why the government should hook them up with a private sector job so they aren't starvin' Marvin anymore.
I ask to you, in your ideal solution to poverty without moving towards social democratic benefits, welfare etc how does the society eliminate brutally severe poverty where going severely hungry and without basic sanitary products is necessary for the poor to be able to afford their bills?
Welfare is backed by social democracy, socialism, and communism.
this question is about both and why the right-wing oppose them.
Because I should under no circumstances be forced to take care of people that I did not create. If you want to help the poor, donate food items to a church so they can give it to the starvin' marvins of the country. Also, encourage sotres to donate their excess food to churches so the starvin marvins of 'Murica can go to churches for their food so they don't starve. It's a shame and moral travesty that the left and antifa and BLM and the socialists and the social democrats and the alphabet mafia bosses are trying to undermine the sanctity of the church, which donates more consensually obtained funds than the government ever did.
The government can use the money saved on welfare to give everyone a free freedom gun so they can defend against tyranny and so we can save money on the military because everyone would have guns so no country would want to invade us. It works in Ukraine, the woke left's favorite country. Ukraine arms random citizens and the Russians would lose Ukraine. Make America Ukraine. Make America Florida. Make America Texas. Make America Alpha-Male again.