|
Posted by Amy Blankenship on November 18, 2007, 11:03 pm
> Kris,
>
> I think you need to see that there are two ways of looking at the issue.
>
> 1) I am required, by the use of force, to "help" others. I have little
> say in who, what or how I'm going to help. Nor do I have any ability to
> ensure that my "contribution" will be used efficiently and/or effectively.
> If I don't "help", my property is taken from me, by force. I have no
> recourse, no appeal and no way to rectify the problem.
Ever hear of voting?
> 2) I give, of my own choice, to those who need help. I can be sure that
> my help is used efficiently and effectively. I know that it will be used
> to help those truly needing the help, and not those who are working the
> system, lazy or simply take it because it's available.
>
> There are those that argue there aren't enough people who will do #2, so
> we must do #1. I am convinced that by doing #1, in *any* degree will
> dissuade many from doing #2. I also know that if #2 was the only option,
> we would be in no worse situation with regard to the number of people
> requiring help and be in a better situation with regard to the economic
> circumstances of everybody in general.
You're looking at it the wrong way. We, as a society, decided that there
are certain things that are worth paying for. To pay for it, we as a
country have chosen to allow ourselves to be taxed.
> The only successful long-term answer is to eliminate all forms of
> government welfare and provide it privately. Those who say it's not
> possible simply want to shift the guilt, and the burden, to somebody else.
> YOU should pay to help him, rather than, I will pay to help him.
> Government social programs are now, and always have been, a way to make
> yourself feel better buy stealing somebody's money to give a little of it
> to somebody else.
Education is not welfare, and students do not get money in the process. You
might as well call the military welfare, or the highway system.
> I have not and will not argue that I don't have a personal moral
> obligation to help those in need. I will argue until I die that nobody
> has the right to take my money without my consent regardless of how noble
> the purpose might be.
You do consent by choosing to live in a country where voters have chosen to
be taxed for purposes that are to everyone's benefit. You can always go and
live in Donselvania.
-Amy
| 
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
