<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Why Democrats Hate Work</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ben-shapiro/why-democrats-hate-work/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ben-shapiro/why-democrats-hate-work/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=why-democrats-hate-work</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Dec 2014 10:31:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>By: Justin Graziano</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ben-shapiro/why-democrats-hate-work/comment-page-1/#comment-5455782</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Justin Graziano]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Jul 2014 23:25:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=218626#comment-5455782</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ACtually, whatever the bible is for CONservatives are against. Try reading Leviticus 19:33-34 and Matthew 19:21-24.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>ACtually, whatever the bible is for CONservatives are against. Try reading Leviticus 19:33-34 and Matthew 19:21-24.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joe Crowe</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ben-shapiro/why-democrats-hate-work/comment-page-1/#comment-5427098</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Joe Crowe]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Jun 2014 15:54:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=218626#comment-5427098</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Job lock, as I understand it... is a good problem to have.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Job lock, as I understand it&#8230; is a good problem to have.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joe Crowe</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ben-shapiro/why-democrats-hate-work/comment-page-1/#comment-5427095</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Joe Crowe]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Jun 2014 15:50:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=218626#comment-5427095</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Yes. They ARE that stupid. They may be very intelligent, but all their intellectual effort is bent on justifying the delusion that individuals will benefit if they sacrifice their individuality on the pyre of a collective entity. They actually do believe that. That&#039;s what collectivity does to a person. With the loss of &#039;self&#039; comes the loss of &#039;thinking for oneself&#039;. Like social loafing, social thinking is an abdication of one&#039;s own mental capacities where the more people you have in the collective, the stupider they become. It&#039;s a cult, in that sense. That&#039;s why communists and socialists always look to that cult of personality: they need the &#039;chosen one&#039; to think for them and, consequently, to tell them also what they are to think... for the common good of course. Invariably, the scum that rises to the top of that mindless cesspool is a fascist sociopath/psychopath who is more than willing to &#039;make the tough decisions&#039; for &#039;the good of the state&#039;. No matter how much evil results (loss of liberty, loss of life), the collective justifies it - they are even blind to it. They have fully immersed themselves in the idea that the ends justifies the means, that the sacrifices of life and liberty will be worth it in the end, that history will not repeat itself if only we sacrifice more liberty and more lives, that these sacrifices are good for the nation and are the patriotic duty of a loyal subject who cares about his fellow man. For these final reasons, anyone who doesn&#039;t conform to this nationalist sentiment becomes a traitor - which further justifies any atrocities committed upon them. If their enemies are wealthy, they are labelled &#039;evil&#039; for merely wanting to retain their rightful property to justify theft of their property. If their enemies are poor, they are labelled &#039;trash&#039; for not having property steal and for being a &#039;burden to society&#039;. If in peace they have many children they are &#039;irresponsible&#039; and should be &#039;educated&#039; in ways that justify euphemistically a policy of eugenics. If preparing for a war or a revolution those who have many children to sacrifice to the state are smiled upon. 

The real stupidity comes in not being able to see when they are repeating the mistakes of the past and demonize anyone who can see it and no matter how obvious the propaganda technique (big, big lies and use of euphemisms to hide violations of civil liberties) and no matter how pre-patterned the evolution of collectivism and the evils it imposes on society, they somehow miss the connection as if Mao appeared before his people with a pitchfork and ram&#039;s horns or if Hitler had a goatee and a cloven hoof or if Stalin left fiery footprints where he walked or if Mengistu Haile Mariam had enlarged canines and was repulsed by garlic, running water and mirrors. All these horrible people speak from the same script - revolutionary changes, populism, collectivism, blame the wealthy, redistribution.

How many times must history repeat itself? A person is smart, but people are incredibly, criminally and malevolently stupid.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes. They ARE that stupid. They may be very intelligent, but all their intellectual effort is bent on justifying the delusion that individuals will benefit if they sacrifice their individuality on the pyre of a collective entity. They actually do believe that. That&#8217;s what collectivity does to a person. With the loss of &#8216;self&#8217; comes the loss of &#8216;thinking for oneself&#8217;. Like social loafing, social thinking is an abdication of one&#8217;s own mental capacities where the more people you have in the collective, the stupider they become. It&#8217;s a cult, in that sense. That&#8217;s why communists and socialists always look to that cult of personality: they need the &#8216;chosen one&#8217; to think for them and, consequently, to tell them also what they are to think&#8230; for the common good of course. Invariably, the scum that rises to the top of that mindless cesspool is a fascist sociopath/psychopath who is more than willing to &#8216;make the tough decisions&#8217; for &#8216;the good of the state&#8217;. No matter how much evil results (loss of liberty, loss of life), the collective justifies it &#8211; they are even blind to it. They have fully immersed themselves in the idea that the ends justifies the means, that the sacrifices of life and liberty will be worth it in the end, that history will not repeat itself if only we sacrifice more liberty and more lives, that these sacrifices are good for the nation and are the patriotic duty of a loyal subject who cares about his fellow man. For these final reasons, anyone who doesn&#8217;t conform to this nationalist sentiment becomes a traitor &#8211; which further justifies any atrocities committed upon them. If their enemies are wealthy, they are labelled &#8216;evil&#8217; for merely wanting to retain their rightful property to justify theft of their property. If their enemies are poor, they are labelled &#8216;trash&#8217; for not having property steal and for being a &#8216;burden to society&#8217;. If in peace they have many children they are &#8216;irresponsible&#8217; and should be &#8216;educated&#8217; in ways that justify euphemistically a policy of eugenics. If preparing for a war or a revolution those who have many children to sacrifice to the state are smiled upon. </p>
<p>The real stupidity comes in not being able to see when they are repeating the mistakes of the past and demonize anyone who can see it and no matter how obvious the propaganda technique (big, big lies and use of euphemisms to hide violations of civil liberties) and no matter how pre-patterned the evolution of collectivism and the evils it imposes on society, they somehow miss the connection as if Mao appeared before his people with a pitchfork and ram&#8217;s horns or if Hitler had a goatee and a cloven hoof or if Stalin left fiery footprints where he walked or if Mengistu Haile Mariam had enlarged canines and was repulsed by garlic, running water and mirrors. All these horrible people speak from the same script &#8211; revolutionary changes, populism, collectivism, blame the wealthy, redistribution.</p>
<p>How many times must history repeat itself? A person is smart, but people are incredibly, criminally and malevolently stupid.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joe Crowe</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ben-shapiro/why-democrats-hate-work/comment-page-1/#comment-5427074</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Joe Crowe]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Jun 2014 15:15:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=218626#comment-5427074</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#039;d be pretty charitable with other people&#039;s money, too.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;d be pretty charitable with other people&#8217;s money, too.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alleged Comment</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ben-shapiro/why-democrats-hate-work/comment-page-1/#comment-5368572</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Alleged Comment]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 16 Feb 2014 03:50:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=218626#comment-5368572</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Demoncraps are very easy to figure out.  Whatever the Bible is for they are AGAINST!

God says work to eat.   The Demoncraps say no work get free medical care for life.  

God says worship me.  The Demoncraps say no, worship big government instead.

God says keep my commandmnts.  The Demoncrap say no, do whatever feels good.

Stuff like that! 

&quot;Demoncraps are from the synagogue of Satan.&quot; - Ali Blah Blah]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Demoncraps are very easy to figure out.  Whatever the Bible is for they are AGAINST!</p>
<p>God says work to eat.   The Demoncraps say no work get free medical care for life.  </p>
<p>God says worship me.  The Demoncraps say no, worship big government instead.</p>
<p>God says keep my commandmnts.  The Demoncrap say no, do whatever feels good.</p>
<p>Stuff like that! </p>
<p>&#8220;Demoncraps are from the synagogue of Satan.&#8221; &#8211; Ali Blah Blah</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: verneoz</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ben-shapiro/why-democrats-hate-work/comment-page-1/#comment-5367632</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[verneoz]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Feb 2014 17:48:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=218626#comment-5367632</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[All of these concepts, little or no work, maximizing people on welfare, food stamps, free housing, Medicaid, free tuition for college, and other do gooder programs are part of the Communist grand scheme that replaced the &quot;violent overthrow of US capitalism&quot; doctrine in the 70&#039;s. It&#039;s called &quot;hollowing out from within.&quot; This strategy is to collapse the system so a pure socialist state can be stood up. They are well on their way doing it.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>All of these concepts, little or no work, maximizing people on welfare, food stamps, free housing, Medicaid, free tuition for college, and other do gooder programs are part of the Communist grand scheme that replaced the &#8220;violent overthrow of US capitalism&#8221; doctrine in the 70&#8242;s. It&#8217;s called &#8220;hollowing out from within.&#8221; This strategy is to collapse the system so a pure socialist state can be stood up. They are well on their way doing it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jifun</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ben-shapiro/why-democrats-hate-work/comment-page-1/#comment-5367362</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[jifun]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Feb 2014 11:54:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=218626#comment-5367362</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[That&#039;s not the Democrat way.  Democrats prefer single motherhood and same-sex parents.  The traditional family where 2 parents of opposite sex are married to each other are an anathema to Democrats.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That&#8217;s not the Democrat way.  Democrats prefer single motherhood and same-sex parents.  The traditional family where 2 parents of opposite sex are married to each other are an anathema to Democrats.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jidun</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ben-shapiro/why-democrats-hate-work/comment-page-1/#comment-5367359</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[jidun]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Feb 2014 11:51:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=218626#comment-5367359</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Yes. There are people that are so stupid they think their welfare check comes out of Obama&#039;s pocket.  And that working people earn too much and don&#039;t pay enough taxes.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes. There are people that are so stupid they think their welfare check comes out of Obama&#8217;s pocket.  And that working people earn too much and don&#8217;t pay enough taxes.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Phil</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ben-shapiro/why-democrats-hate-work/comment-page-1/#comment-5367192</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Phil]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Feb 2014 02:33:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=218626#comment-5367192</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[How are we supposed to pay down the 15  national credit cards you Douche Bags maxed out  on us Chuckie Cheese Boy? Or you Harry Dweeb the Tyrant?
Federal Government being addicted to OUR prosperity is why people are suffering.
Got to love the dems mastery of Orwellian Doublespeak.
You know what you nudges. I&#039;d rather be freed from Government Serf lock and worry about my job without your interference.
You just spit in the face of every American with a brain. Phtuy to you too.
I just spit in all of D.C.&#039;s face. I&#039;ll tell you what guys. Why don&#039;t you all do us a favor and go to Hades!!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How are we supposed to pay down the 15  national credit cards you Douche Bags maxed out  on us Chuckie Cheese Boy? Or you Harry Dweeb the Tyrant?<br />
Federal Government being addicted to OUR prosperity is why people are suffering.<br />
Got to love the dems mastery of Orwellian Doublespeak.<br />
You know what you nudges. I&#8217;d rather be freed from Government Serf lock and worry about my job without your interference.<br />
You just spit in the face of every American with a brain. Phtuy to you too.<br />
I just spit in all of D.C.&#8217;s face. I&#8217;ll tell you what guys. Why don&#8217;t you all do us a favor and go to Hades!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Phil</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ben-shapiro/why-democrats-hate-work/comment-page-1/#comment-5367187</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Phil]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Feb 2014 02:23:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=218626#comment-5367187</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[How are we supposed to pay down the 15  national credit cards you Douche Bags maxed out  on us Chuckie Cheese Boy? Or you Harry Dweeb the Tyrant?
Federal Government being addicted to OUR prosperity is why people are suffering.
Got to love the dems mastery of Orwellian Doublespeak.
You know what you nudges. I&#039;d rather be freed from Government Serf lock and worry about my job without your interference.
You just spit in the face of every American with a brain. Phtuy to you too.
I just spit in all of D.C.&#039;s face. I&#039;ll tell you what guys. Why don&#039;t you all do us a favor and go to Hades!!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How are we supposed to pay down the 15  national credit cards you Douche Bags maxed out  on us Chuckie Cheese Boy? Or you Harry Dweeb the Tyrant?<br />
Federal Government being addicted to OUR prosperity is why people are suffering.<br />
Got to love the dems mastery of Orwellian Doublespeak.<br />
You know what you nudges. I&#8217;d rather be freed from Government Serf lock and worry about my job without your interference.<br />
You just spit in the face of every American with a brain. Phtuy to you too.<br />
I just spit in all of D.C.&#8217;s face. I&#8217;ll tell you what guys. Why don&#8217;t you all do us a favor and go to Hades!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: reader</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ben-shapiro/why-democrats-hate-work/comment-page-1/#comment-5367162</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[reader]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Feb 2014 01:36:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=218626#comment-5367162</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[You did not say anything about utopia, but trying to make &quot;jointly held social goods more equitable&quot; - without the market forces that would be by decree, I presume, - is a mission by a utopian. I agree that pure stateless market is an impossibility, but what you&#039;re doing here is an ambitious attempt to reinvent the bicycle. You&#039;d be better off if you teachers really taught you why and how the Constitution came about, but nowadays they try to do the opposite more often than not. I wonder if you even ever read Adam Smith.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You did not say anything about utopia, but trying to make &#8220;jointly held social goods more equitable&#8221; &#8211; without the market forces that would be by decree, I presume, &#8211; is a mission by a utopian. I agree that pure stateless market is an impossibility, but what you&#8217;re doing here is an ambitious attempt to reinvent the bicycle. You&#8217;d be better off if you teachers really taught you why and how the Constitution came about, but nowadays they try to do the opposite more often than not. I wonder if you even ever read Adam Smith.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nathan Jacobsen</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ben-shapiro/why-democrats-hate-work/comment-page-1/#comment-5367152</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Nathan Jacobsen]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Feb 2014 01:22:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=218626#comment-5367152</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[No one said anything about a utopia, but I don&#039;t understand why trying to make jointly held social goods more equitable is delusional.

I agree that we&#039;ll never be able to achieve something like equality; the Noble Lie of American society is that all are born equal.  I do believe it&#039;s beneficial to try to ensure that social institutions, take public education as an example, are distributed equitably though.


Unfortunately, privatization only works in markets where the profit motive makes sense.  The problem with allowing perfect laissez-faire capitalism in all types of institutions is that the profit motive doesn&#039;t necessarily translate well to every kind of institution due to the effect of unintended consequences and conflicts of interest.  Private prisons have an interest in keeping more people in their custody for longer periods of time, for example.  For-profit education has an interest in giving students good grades, even if they are unearned.  That&#039;s where the other free market, democratic elections, comes in: it acts to provide institutions developed for the common good with an alternative valuation. That is, a motivation (typically, the improvement of society, increased standard of living, etc.) where the classical profit motive is ill-suited.


Remember that bureaucrats are put in their positions by market forces, in particular, they are appointed by democratically elected politicians, and a democracy is (in theory, although not always in practice) the closest thing to a true market free from coercion.


I think a lot of people on both sides have a one-size-fits-all view: the far left believes in a centrally planned economy while the far right believes that laissez-faire, possibly even anarchocapitalism, will solve everything.  The polarization of intellectual debate today creates this false dilemma and discourages people from considering a position that meld together the institutions of government and business where each has a role to play.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No one said anything about a utopia, but I don&#8217;t understand why trying to make jointly held social goods more equitable is delusional.</p>
<p>I agree that we&#8217;ll never be able to achieve something like equality; the Noble Lie of American society is that all are born equal.  I do believe it&#8217;s beneficial to try to ensure that social institutions, take public education as an example, are distributed equitably though.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, privatization only works in markets where the profit motive makes sense.  The problem with allowing perfect laissez-faire capitalism in all types of institutions is that the profit motive doesn&#8217;t necessarily translate well to every kind of institution due to the effect of unintended consequences and conflicts of interest.  Private prisons have an interest in keeping more people in their custody for longer periods of time, for example.  For-profit education has an interest in giving students good grades, even if they are unearned.  That&#8217;s where the other free market, democratic elections, comes in: it acts to provide institutions developed for the common good with an alternative valuation. That is, a motivation (typically, the improvement of society, increased standard of living, etc.) where the classical profit motive is ill-suited.</p>
<p>Remember that bureaucrats are put in their positions by market forces, in particular, they are appointed by democratically elected politicians, and a democracy is (in theory, although not always in practice) the closest thing to a true market free from coercion.</p>
<p>I think a lot of people on both sides have a one-size-fits-all view: the far left believes in a centrally planned economy while the far right believes that laissez-faire, possibly even anarchocapitalism, will solve everything.  The polarization of intellectual debate today creates this false dilemma and discourages people from considering a position that meld together the institutions of government and business where each has a role to play.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: reader</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ben-shapiro/why-democrats-hate-work/comment-page-1/#comment-5367108</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[reader]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Feb 2014 00:14:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=218626#comment-5367108</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I think this is a complete delusion - right from one utopian on to another. Whatever technological advances, there is ALWAYS going to be social, occupational and whatever else disparity and, therefore, envy and dissatisfaction between individuals, groups, countries, you name it. Mind you, the 20th century ended up much more barbaric in terms of violence and depravity than the previous one - despite all the technology. The question is only whether the bureaucrats are supposed to run the order, or the market is, or - naturally - some combination thereof. And - as Milton Friedman repeatedly and ingeniously put it, the market is vastly superior and vastly more equitable than the bureaucrat is.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think this is a complete delusion &#8211; right from one utopian on to another. Whatever technological advances, there is ALWAYS going to be social, occupational and whatever else disparity and, therefore, envy and dissatisfaction between individuals, groups, countries, you name it. Mind you, the 20th century ended up much more barbaric in terms of violence and depravity than the previous one &#8211; despite all the technology. The question is only whether the bureaucrats are supposed to run the order, or the market is, or &#8211; naturally &#8211; some combination thereof. And &#8211; as Milton Friedman repeatedly and ingeniously put it, the market is vastly superior and vastly more equitable than the bureaucrat is.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: tagalog</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ben-shapiro/why-democrats-hate-work/comment-page-1/#comment-5367098</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[tagalog]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Feb 2014 23:57:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=218626#comment-5367098</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I found it interesting that our President discussed people not having to be &quot;locked in&quot; to their jobs just because they took those jobs in order to obtain health insurance for themselves and their loved ones.  So what else is new in Barack&#039;s world?

Isn&#039;t the reason why most people take most jobs is that they are willing to trade their labor for the ability to buy what they want, be it health care or a house/car or the necessities of life?

I mean, really, how many of us actually are working at jobs doing the things we love?  Come on, Barack, you were an instructor at an Ivy League university; you gotta be smarter than that.  I bet being a community organizer wasn&#039;t your first choice for a job, but you wanted to get married and have kids.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I found it interesting that our President discussed people not having to be &#8220;locked in&#8221; to their jobs just because they took those jobs in order to obtain health insurance for themselves and their loved ones.  So what else is new in Barack&#8217;s world?</p>
<p>Isn&#8217;t the reason why most people take most jobs is that they are willing to trade their labor for the ability to buy what they want, be it health care or a house/car or the necessities of life?</p>
<p>I mean, really, how many of us actually are working at jobs doing the things we love?  Come on, Barack, you were an instructor at an Ivy League university; you gotta be smarter than that.  I bet being a community organizer wasn&#8217;t your first choice for a job, but you wanted to get married and have kids.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nathan Jacobsen</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ben-shapiro/why-democrats-hate-work/comment-page-1/#comment-5367052</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Nathan Jacobsen]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Feb 2014 22:45:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=218626#comment-5367052</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I don&#039;t think that the &quot;tall poppy&quot; problem is leftist in nature; it&#039;s in human nature to be jealous.  I also think it&#039;s a little absurd to think that approximately half of Americans think they must destroy progress and individual achievement.


I think what some people on the left often do say is that:
1) hard work doesn&#039;t actually guarantee success 
and
2) even the most ruggedly individualistic success stories don&#039;t exist in a vacuum and that there are a number of unrecognized social components that have contributed to their success.


I don&#039;t think anyone could argue against the fact that there are many people who, through simply bad luck, or being born to the wrong socioeconomic class, work as hard or harder than successful people who may not have faced the same struggles, and yet they are not successful.  This is the nature of the world; it is unfair.  The question everyone should ask in an advanced civilization is &quot;How can one try to make the playing field level?&quot;, which unfortunately gets recast as an attempt to make everyone&#039;s outcome the same.  This dovetails nicely into item (2), which is the simple realization that not everyone starts at pole position.


The second item is simply a reflection of the fact that we live in a society, and that all successes, no matter how personal or inventive or individual, are propped up on the shoulders of giants.  Everything from a free public education (the quality of which varies greatly depending on where and to whom one is born), to having access to good public transportation, sanitary living conditions, food security and good nutrition as a child, and positive role models, make success easier.  On top of that, luck plays a large part.  Now, obviously, hard work and innate intelligence play a big (maybe the biggest) role, and they can overcome a lot of these differences.


The question the left asks is, &quot;how do we ensure that everyone has access to a baseline level of civil works and sustenance that enable them to compete fairly?&quot;  Granted, the left&#039;s solution to this problem has been shown to be worse than disease in many cases.  On the other hand though, a lot of people on the right seem to think that these inequalities don&#039;t actually exist and are nothing more than the fever dreams of some evil communist regime plotting to take them down, which I don&#039;t really understand.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t think that the &#8220;tall poppy&#8221; problem is leftist in nature; it&#8217;s in human nature to be jealous.  I also think it&#8217;s a little absurd to think that approximately half of Americans think they must destroy progress and individual achievement.</p>
<p>I think what some people on the left often do say is that:<br />
1) hard work doesn&#8217;t actually guarantee success<br />
and<br />
2) even the most ruggedly individualistic success stories don&#8217;t exist in a vacuum and that there are a number of unrecognized social components that have contributed to their success.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t think anyone could argue against the fact that there are many people who, through simply bad luck, or being born to the wrong socioeconomic class, work as hard or harder than successful people who may not have faced the same struggles, and yet they are not successful.  This is the nature of the world; it is unfair.  The question everyone should ask in an advanced civilization is &#8220;How can one try to make the playing field level?&#8221;, which unfortunately gets recast as an attempt to make everyone&#8217;s outcome the same.  This dovetails nicely into item (2), which is the simple realization that not everyone starts at pole position.</p>
<p>The second item is simply a reflection of the fact that we live in a society, and that all successes, no matter how personal or inventive or individual, are propped up on the shoulders of giants.  Everything from a free public education (the quality of which varies greatly depending on where and to whom one is born), to having access to good public transportation, sanitary living conditions, food security and good nutrition as a child, and positive role models, make success easier.  On top of that, luck plays a large part.  Now, obviously, hard work and innate intelligence play a big (maybe the biggest) role, and they can overcome a lot of these differences.</p>
<p>The question the left asks is, &#8220;how do we ensure that everyone has access to a baseline level of civil works and sustenance that enable them to compete fairly?&#8221;  Granted, the left&#8217;s solution to this problem has been shown to be worse than disease in many cases.  On the other hand though, a lot of people on the right seem to think that these inequalities don&#8217;t actually exist and are nothing more than the fever dreams of some evil communist regime plotting to take them down, which I don&#8217;t really understand.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nathan Jacobsen</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ben-shapiro/why-democrats-hate-work/comment-page-1/#comment-5367039</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Nathan Jacobsen]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Feb 2014 22:20:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=218626#comment-5367039</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I think you&#039;ve misunderstood my comment.  We won&#039;t need volunteers or even human labor at all to do sewer maintenance in 30 years.  I think this concept will be made concrete for a much larger portion of the population when fifteen years from now most, if not all, of our transportation infrastructure is automated, and the first thing to go will be truck drivers, train conductors, taxi drivers, and probably eventually pilots.


I recommend you read my response to Mr. Newburn below; I suspect that a lot of jobs -- like sewer maintenance -- won&#039;t need human labor at all in the future.  The question is how to make capitalism work in a society where most unskilled and semi-skilled labor is no longer of any value because we have technology, from robots to other forms of automation, that can do it for us.  If it costs little to no human labor to provide for the basic needs of humanity (e.g., food, energy, housing, transportation, maintenance of civil utilities), would it be best to provide a basic level of sustenance that allows people to learn new skills, improve themselves, etc.?

I think that our conception of the purpose of work will change dramatically in the next 20 - 30 years as more and more &quot;undesirable&quot; jobs are replaced by technology, and that we can&#039;t continue to think of work as a necessity to provide meaning in life.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think you&#8217;ve misunderstood my comment.  We won&#8217;t need volunteers or even human labor at all to do sewer maintenance in 30 years.  I think this concept will be made concrete for a much larger portion of the population when fifteen years from now most, if not all, of our transportation infrastructure is automated, and the first thing to go will be truck drivers, train conductors, taxi drivers, and probably eventually pilots.</p>
<p>I recommend you read my response to Mr. Newburn below; I suspect that a lot of jobs &#8212; like sewer maintenance &#8212; won&#8217;t need human labor at all in the future.  The question is how to make capitalism work in a society where most unskilled and semi-skilled labor is no longer of any value because we have technology, from robots to other forms of automation, that can do it for us.  If it costs little to no human labor to provide for the basic needs of humanity (e.g., food, energy, housing, transportation, maintenance of civil utilities), would it be best to provide a basic level of sustenance that allows people to learn new skills, improve themselves, etc.?</p>
<p>I think that our conception of the purpose of work will change dramatically in the next 20 &#8211; 30 years as more and more &#8220;undesirable&#8221; jobs are replaced by technology, and that we can&#8217;t continue to think of work as a necessity to provide meaning in life.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: blert</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ben-shapiro/why-democrats-hate-work/comment-page-1/#comment-5367024</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[blert]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Feb 2014 21:52:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=218626#comment-5367024</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I can see that trolls are conflating widows with single moms. 

In the English language, a widow is never referred to as being &quot;single.&quot; 

She&#039;s always given the honorific of widow... of which war makes plenty.

Single moms is always used as a &lt;i&gt;euphemism&lt;/i&gt; for un-wed mothers. Period. It doesn&#039;t mean anything else. Much ruder terms are known, of course.

So the specious troll-notion that single mommy-hood can be gained by other routes is a falsehood.



A widow raising children is almost always given the honorific: young widow. Elderly widows are almost always termed old widows. &#039;Widow&#039; , as a status, is almost never used without such qualifiers.


America does not have a widow problem, it has an exploding un-married mother problem -- to include divorcees. 



With no fault divorce, a shocking number of gals reject and eject their husbands... on the worst possible grounds. The (feminine) courts assume that each and every is a saint. The kids are reduced to the spoils of war.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I can see that trolls are conflating widows with single moms. </p>
<p>In the English language, a widow is never referred to as being &#8220;single.&#8221; </p>
<p>She&#8217;s always given the honorific of widow&#8230; of which war makes plenty.</p>
<p>Single moms is always used as a <i>euphemism</i> for un-wed mothers. Period. It doesn&#8217;t mean anything else. Much ruder terms are known, of course.</p>
<p>So the specious troll-notion that single mommy-hood can be gained by other routes is a falsehood.</p>
<p>A widow raising children is almost always given the honorific: young widow. Elderly widows are almost always termed old widows. &#8216;Widow&#8217; , as a status, is almost never used without such qualifiers.</p>
<p>America does not have a widow problem, it has an exploding un-married mother problem &#8212; to include divorcees. </p>
<p>With no fault divorce, a shocking number of gals reject and eject their husbands&#8230; on the worst possible grounds. The (feminine) courts assume that each and every is a saint. The kids are reduced to the spoils of war.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: blert</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ben-shapiro/why-democrats-hate-work/comment-page-1/#comment-5367007</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[blert]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Feb 2014 21:34:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=218626#comment-5367007</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[You missed it: she needs to marry Daddy. 
A staggering fraction of newborns are sdratsab!
The consequences of being fatherless are drastic -- even after the father acknowledges paternity.
I give you the tragedy of King Lear... and in particular the sub-tragedy of Gloucester. His sdratsab son Edmund betrays is half-brother, Edgar, and their father, the Earl of Gloucester. The price is heavy. Within Shakespeare&#039;s dialog all of the bitter travails of Edmund spew forth. 

Lear is epic because the issues are to the human condition -- especially kinship, honor, loyalty and land rights. (The players are almost all peers.)

Liberal Democrats drove daddy out of the house six decades ago with &#039;Aid to Families with Dependent Children.&#039; Such is NewSpeak! It really was funding for un-wed mothers and their spawn -- or -- abandoned wives and their spawn. 
Their entire running scheme is to morally blame daddy and kick him out of the house. The result is the epic ydratsab that is destroying society.

It doesn&#039;t take a village... It takes a family to raise a child to adulthood.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You missed it: she needs to marry Daddy.<br />
A staggering fraction of newborns are sdratsab!<br />
The consequences of being fatherless are drastic &#8212; even after the father acknowledges paternity.<br />
I give you the tragedy of King Lear&#8230; and in particular the sub-tragedy of Gloucester. His sdratsab son Edmund betrays is half-brother, Edgar, and their father, the Earl of Gloucester. The price is heavy. Within Shakespeare&#8217;s dialog all of the bitter travails of Edmund spew forth. </p>
<p>Lear is epic because the issues are to the human condition &#8212; especially kinship, honor, loyalty and land rights. (The players are almost all peers.)</p>
<p>Liberal Democrats drove daddy out of the house six decades ago with &#8216;Aid to Families with Dependent Children.&#8217; Such is NewSpeak! It really was funding for un-wed mothers and their spawn &#8212; or &#8212; abandoned wives and their spawn.<br />
Their entire running scheme is to morally blame daddy and kick him out of the house. The result is the epic ydratsab that is destroying society.</p>
<p>It doesn&#8217;t take a village&#8230; It takes a family to raise a child to adulthood.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: blert</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ben-shapiro/why-democrats-hate-work/comment-page-1/#comment-5366995</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[blert]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Feb 2014 21:16:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=218626#comment-5366995</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I believe that you&#039;re on to the BIG issue for the rest of this century.
I suspect that service work will continue to expand -- a lot of which would be deemed &#039;make-work&#039; by todays standards.
I also see that the income tax -- as a mechanism for supporting big government -- is going to have be eliminated entirely. This reality will only be accepted when the central government has a fiscal gun to its head.
Taxation, still necessary, will have to move to consumption. This can make service workers more viable -- as it becomes far more attractive to interact with our fellows -- as against buying more Stuff.
Vacation time is a better buy than a new car.
The vacation industry can absorb limitless labor. It also greatly promotes socialization.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I believe that you&#8217;re on to the BIG issue for the rest of this century.<br />
I suspect that service work will continue to expand &#8212; a lot of which would be deemed &#8216;make-work&#8217; by todays standards.<br />
I also see that the income tax &#8212; as a mechanism for supporting big government &#8212; is going to have be eliminated entirely. This reality will only be accepted when the central government has a fiscal gun to its head.<br />
Taxation, still necessary, will have to move to consumption. This can make service workers more viable &#8212; as it becomes far more attractive to interact with our fellows &#8212; as against buying more Stuff.<br />
Vacation time is a better buy than a new car.<br />
The vacation industry can absorb limitless labor. It also greatly promotes socialization.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Guest</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ben-shapiro/why-democrats-hate-work/comment-page-1/#comment-5366978</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Guest]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Feb 2014 20:56:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=218626#comment-5366978</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Being a single mom has become the &quot;Norm&quot;. Being mom several times while being single is still considered a sin by some.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Being a single mom has become the &#8220;Norm&#8221;. Being mom several times while being single is still considered a sin by some.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Object Caching 706/739 objects using disk
Content Delivery Network via cdn.frontpagemag.com

 Served from: www.frontpagemag.com @ 2014-12-30 05:32:06 by W3 Total Cache -->