Thanks for counting, if you'd read them you'd see that I've addressed your points already and you aren't moving the debate on. To reiterate though, supporting p

Thanks for counting, if you'd read them you'd see that I've addressed your points already and you aren't moving the debate on. To reiterate though, supporting parents with a holiday is not the same as supporting children. My dad taking time off doesn't make me healthy, well nourished or smart. Healthy is healthcare, well nourished is money and only god can do smart. Immigration is an alternative to domestic population growth. Domestic population growth or even maintenance is not a positive or necessary outcome. There are alternative approaches such as state-funded childcare or a generally different work culture that would be more effective and fairer to help native-born children. Hypotheticals aren't a silly debating tactic, they're an important component of logic and reason, see the discovery of SR. You clearly do not understand the concept of the tyranny of the majority, it's not what this thread is about but since you asked... The tyranny of the majority refers to the problem with voting systems where anything that 51% agrees to, no matter how unjust, will pass, especially where it harms the 10%. The reason why it does not apply to western democratic systems: Major changes can require supermajorities. Constutions and rights laws restrict the range of possible laws that can be passed. Citizens do not vote directly on outcomes but elect a representative who is expected to consider things more deeply on their behalf.