

Admittedly I’m not well-informed on the early years of the Cuba thing (except that the Bay of Pigs was a thing), only the pre-Trump status quo, so I guess if you could point me to something that goes into more detail that’d be nice. That aside what I’m trying to say is that while the American embargo has been impoverishing Cuba, for the most part Cubans could get the basic necessities of life. Trying to cut off fuel is a new low.

















I hope you can see the contradiction here. You just said they don’t work and now say that they do illegal work. That should be your first clue that something about your information is wrong, because obviously these two things can’t be true at the same time.
More broadly, the idea that “whole communities of minorities stopped working” because of social welfare is, frankly, bullshit. And not just that, it’s the kind of bullshit that gets repeated everywhere (see: welfare queen rhetoric in America), because its purpose is to rile up working class people of the majority ethnicity against minorities. The fact of the matter is: People like having financial security and nice things, so the vast majority of people aren’t going to stop working because they’re getting the pittance of money that counts for social welfare in even really generous countries. When people don’t work, that’s almost always because they can’t work (see asylum seekers for another example), so whoever is telling you that dirty gypsies are lazily living off your tax money is feeding you bullshit. When it comes to Romas specifically, Romas have been shut out of polite society for centuries now, and it’d be ridiculous to assume that it stopped overnight. But we don’t have to assume; we know it hasn’t. It’s no coincidence that countries without intense and longstanding anti-Roma hatred also don’t have stereotypes about dirty Gypsies living off your tax money.
So is there evidence that Roma crime is in any way correlated with social welfare or are you accepting that this “solution” worked based on vibes?