Survival of the Fittest...oh, no, wait.... Weakest???

Darwin’s Law of Natural Selection: “The process by which by which heritable traits that make it more likely for an organism to survive and successfully reproduce become more common in a population over successive generations. It is a key mechanism of evolution. This theory is also known as ‘Survival of The Fittest’”

On one hand, I feel like I should apologize ahead of time for the things that I am about to say as it is not my intention to offend anyone. But, on the other hand, these are things that definitely need to be said…
Somewhere along the line, the human race decided to go against the laws of nature and support their weak members, bringing our evolution as a species to a halt. Every year, our country, in particular, gets closer and closer to socialism, a system that has lead to the decline of nearly every super-power and great empire this world has ever seen and has been historically proven countless times not to work.

In the United States, the least productive members of society are given money for being the least productive members of society. The less they have, the more they are given. It is at a point now where these people feel so entitled to such treatment that they not only expect it, but they feel that it is owed to them. I have worked in retail pharmacy for over 10 years and I can say, without the shadow of a doubt, that the least patient, least understanding, meanest, most unpleasant people to interact with are the people being supported by the government (and by “government” I mean taxpayers).

These people will get furious, yell, and even times resort to name-calling and violence (which I have seen happen on several occasions) if the dispensing of their free medications, which, might I add, were partially paid for by the person they are doing all of this to, are delayed for any reason whatsover. Yet, the unisured mill-worker behind them will politely pay $120 for his month worth of heart medication and leave you smiling with a joke because he understands that you are supposed to work for what you get. But, I guess this is understandable… the person on welfare is probably missing their afternoon soaps, or something else of equal importance afterall.

This brings me to another point… should people on state aid even have a television to watch their soaps on in the first place? The standard of living in the U.S. is now so high that people completely dependent on the state can have a TV, a computer, a car, cigarettes, alcohol, and many other luxuries that the impoverished in other countries would give anything to have. In fact, these people have as much as people who are considered “rich” in some other countries and often times have as much or more than some of the hard-working people in the U.S. that refuse to go on government aid. Why should I be paying in my hard-earned money to help some guy on welfare get cable TV? (Especially when I can’t even afford to have cable myself....)

I was raised by a single mother for the first 6 years of my life, and she worked three jobs to make sure that we did not have to go on state aid. During this time, she had to watch the people on welfare in front of her in line at the grocery store get brand name cereal, chips, soda, and cookies, while she could only afford to get generic brand bread, cereal and milk (cookies, chips and soda were too expensive and were considered to be a special treat). It seems to me that there is there something wrong if a hard-working, taxpayer has to settle for “Magic Stars” while the person in front of them, whom they are paying money to support, is getting Lucky Charms and whatever else they want. If this isn’t discouraging to the worker, I don’t know what is.

People living on taxpayer dollars should be given the bare necessities to live; government issued beans, canned vegetables, milk, eggs and cereal. Instead, they can get any type of food that they want, and, in the state of Maine anyway, are given $150 a month to spend on anything at all in the grocery store. And, yes, much to my dismay and astonishment, this does include cigarettes and alcohol! YEAH! (Thumbs Up!) This brings up yet another point: I think it should be illegal for people on state aid to purchase anything with welfare dollars that is considered to be unhealthy or unecessary, such as soda, chips, and cookies. Why should we pay money for people to eat or drink nutritionally void things while increasing their risk (or worsening their current state of) diabetes and cholesterol problems which we are going to have to pay (or already are paying) to fix? And, for the same reason and many other obvious reasons, it should be completely illegal for them to buy alcohol or cigarettes at all, regardless of where the money comes from. How can you afford luxuries such as alcohol or cigarettes if you can’t afford your electric bill? It is bullshit at its purest…

I have had people come up to me in the pharmacy and “put their prescription in the book,” (which really means that they charge their $3 copay to the store and never pay it back) yet they wanted to buy beer and chips at the same time. I don’t even think that this situation even warrants further explanation…

Do I think that a person who just lost their job should be given some money for a certain period of time to stay afloat? Yes. (Afterall, they have paid plenty of tax dollars in over the years to warrant a short slump if one occurs). Do I think that children and the authentically disabled (not including people with fake “lower back pain”) should be given aid? Yes. Do I feel that someone who has been on state or federal aid their whole lives without contributing anything to society should receive or continue receiving aid? No. Do I feel that an impoverished woman who probably should not have children in the first place be rewarded for each new child that she pops out? No. Should you have to pass a test to prove that you are capable of supporting a child before having one? Perhaps...

Now, let’s think about this all for a second and summarize. We are currently paying to support people who are not contributing anything to society. We are encouraging that women already on welfare to have more children by giving them more money for each child they have. Statistically, most of these children will choose the free-loading lifestyle of their parents when they get older and pass that on to their offspring. This will all lead to more and more generations of people living off government aid who will proceed to only take from, and never give anything back to, the society that supports them. So, we are rewarding and supporting the weak for being weak, while punishing the strong for being strong, completely eliminating the “survival of the fittest” way of nature. This, in turn, discourages the driven, hardworking person from being so driven and hardworking. So, altogether, we are, in a variety of ways, effectively contributing to the exponential decline of our society’s productivity, work ethic, and, in turn, its overall power. How did the Roman Empire fall again?

~ Jared Genius