But governmental policy should exist to help those in particular who aren't able to draw on existing networks of kin and friendship to get by. It should, if anything, focus on the friendless, the desperate, and the oppressed.
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @rebelcinder
The conservative rebuttal would be government policy creates those people, and promotes their growth rather than minimizing them.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @TheLumpenprole
It seems a large assumption to make. It's hard for me to envision how having government exist rather than not exist makes someone less likely to have a network of friends.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @rebelcinder
Hmm, how to put it... A welfare system may help those in need but may also promote use. Government taxation to fund welfare can be argued to suppress community charity, etc.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @TheLumpenprole
It's hard to envision any system, governmental or not, whose existence does not promote use of it. The value judgement is whether, taking that into account, leaving those without access to the vagaries of "community charity" with no recourse > giving them recourse to government.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @rebelcinder @TheLumpenprole
Ironically, I think that individuals have far more access to private charities than to public. Sure, sure, your IDEAL public program is great - but look at the real ones. Talk to
@St_Rev about disability programs.1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
For all their faults - which are many - Social Security and the unemployment system keep many more Americans out of destitution than all charities and churches' efforts combined. & that's not crowding out; that's reaching more people than charities and churches ever reached.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Is it, though? This seems like a big assumptions, and begs the question that if there were no taxes and no burdensome regulations and so on, would they be better or worse off?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
It's not assumption; it's knowledge of history. Social Security and unemployment insurance were established because private charity had failed utterly to solve problems of destitution in the Depression.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @rebelcinder @TheLumpenprole and
Thinking that all would be well if we only retvrned to pre-Depression levels of social provision, is basically, "but REAL capitalism has never been tried!"
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
real capitalism WAS tried ... and it was AWESOME
-
-
*certain fairly large exceptions applied
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.