In response to:

20 Observations About Human Nature That Liberals Would Probably Disagree With

Dr_Zinj Wrote: Dec 03, 2012 9:17 AM
Darwinian selection and the stardard bell curve would dictate that there are going to be a large portion of the population who aren't capable of operating at a level that would take them out of poverty. As long as they aren't starving to death, they're still ahead. The point is, you could give them all the training and money in the world, and they'll still make bad choices. The question is, is it of value to the providers to be their nannies? The hard answer is no, unless you're using someone else's money and resources.
OBAMA-DRAMA Wrote: Feb 13, 2013 10:13 AM

Genetic science will end what you note and do so this century. Elevating mean human intellect to above 120 is critical and essential to achieve enabling the survival of man. This is both the nuclear age and Age of Genetics. My post above explains this fact.
Topeka Wrote: Dec 03, 2012 11:04 AM

1) Working hard, being self-reliant and taking responsibility for your own life are good for you and will make you much happier than having too much leisure time, being overly dependent and giving others responsibility for your life.

2) The more a behavior is rewarded with attention, fame, sympathy or money, the more of it we'll see. We recognize this almost instinctively when it comes to good behaviors, but we also tend to almost habitually block it out when it comes to behaviors we don't want to encourage.

3) There's nothing shameful about being poor -- but, if you stay...