I grew up in a society where entitlements were expected, solicited, and individuals spent far more time grousing about the oppression of "the man" than they did trying to find gainful employment. As I have begun growing out of that mentality, I have come to realize just why capitalism is a far better system than socialism, although there are problems with both.

I see capitalism as an economic form of "tough love". The concept, for those unfamiliar with it, is to break the cycle of dependence by denying assistance to someone capable of finding it with their own resources. It's often used by families of alcoholics or drug addicts to end the pattern of enabling that predominates the families of these addicts. For instance, an alcoholic busted for a DWI might call his parents in the middle of the night, and the parents would refuse him bail to force him to deal with the consequences of his behaviour.

It's a controversial treatment, and there is certainly risk involved. But it has a reasonable success rate.

When we see capitalism as economic "tough love" we see a system that refuses to subsidize someone's life who is incapable of working. Just as a parent would not use this approach to a child with severe handicaps who was unable to cope without their assistance and support, however, the government should apply the same reason. But a government of almost 300 million individuals is unable to police the system for fraud and ensure that those who are making use of the system are truly incapable of working to support their needs. This is why any such "safety net" should be employed on a local level, preferably by a private organization.

In my rather adventurous life, I have found that adversity has the effect of bringing out the best in me. And I am certain that fact is no less true for many others. If we live in truly adverse situations, we learn to use our own resources to better ourselves; in other words, "that which does not kill us makes us stronger".

The socialist system, in contrast, plays the role of the enabler. Because all things are, in theory, equal among the masses, there's a discouragement to personal achievement and incentive. Laziness is encouraged because the pay for productive workers and lazy workers is basically the same. This is why socialist governments have had to enforce productivity at the point of a gun, leading to massive human rights violations. To return to my analogy, as long as the drunk has a couch to sleep on and money for booze, he will always be a drunk. And the socialist philosophy provides both the couch, and enough money for drink.

While capitalism cannot work without a certain measure of compassion, that compassion should only extend to those who CANNOT work; NEVER to those who WILL NOT. Encouraging those who will not work to remain unemployed on the government dole is not only wrong thinking, it is, in fact, a human rights violation of the highest sort. It has replaced slavery as our method of controlling our lowest class.