mrstickball said:
richardhutnik said:
mrstickball said:
And Sqrl is correct.
My problem is that government is too large, and far-encompasing, and it causes problems in relation to the tax dollars spent on various services.
For example, education. Currently, 90% of youths are educated via public schooling means. Costs are up, well over inflation, while results are stagnant, or declining. We've also dropped in relative scores against other countries.
An anarcho-capitalist would argue that everyone should be for themselves. I would argue that the system needs vouchers which allow youths to get free education at the school of their choice - public or private. Thats what I want, the liberty to choose.
You can argue that countries cannot exist without large, pervasive governments, but I think Hong Kong and South Korea disagree with you. Both are growing despite an absence of massive government involvement in their economies.
Libertarianism is not perfect. It does require responsibility from the populace, but I believe that if incorporated, would be far better than what we have now. For example, removal of medicare and social security costs and benefits for those 10 years away from retirement. The amount of monies saved for the public by cancelling those 2 systems would be immense...I could invest 5% of my earnings into an IRA to yield the same results as 8.5% via social security. That 3.5% saved could allow me to invest in buying things (helping the economy) or I could give it to people and help reduce depedency on welfare.
|
In regards to giving people money now to help them reduce their dependence on welfare, how much do you actually give at this time? If you aren't doing it now, what makes you think you would give it to others when you have more of it?
|
I give about 20-30% of my income to the poor and needy. I also contribute a decent bit of time to food pantries, homeless shelters, and the like as well.
How much do you contribute
|
If more in society did this, we could probably do away with the welfare system. But the system is now set up so that people believe it is the job of the government to take care of the poor. It certainly would be more humane than social services. Where I am, the DMV is more humane than social services.
As of this moment, I am staying with family and have NO income coming it. What I had been doing, on the limited amount I had when on extended unemployment, was doing about 10% when I could. I was also staying at a shelter environment, and there were people in need, and I would give people rides and bought people various things there, to help out. I also had money set aside to help people in need to. A priest at my local church told me to use the money if I needed it, because I was in need.
