The (new) Official Political Compass Thread - All Users of VGC join in!

[Viper1]

sapphi_snake said:

Viper1 said:

sapphi_snake said:

That first article looks like propaganda itself. It was even written by a right-winger from Poland. His argument regarding people giving more to the poor now is quite nonsensical. IT's almost like comparing apples to oranges.

Actually, libertarianism advocates social help from the people.  Donating, giving time to volunteer, etc...   The concept is the poor get help more directly instead of through a middle channel (government) so that service is much more efficicent and personal.   It also provides a better economy in that there would be fewer poor to begin with and helps guide those that are poor but are capable of taking care of themselves to do so instead of relying on an entity to do that for you.

Other than t being more "personal", I really don't see any benefit (and honestly, this benefit is more to satisfy a selfish need of the people who volunteer, rather than help those in need). I don't see how private charaties in their current form do any of the underlined.

The problem you are seeing is government itself.  The private sector can never fully service the market if the government is offering much the same services.  In fact, the government corners the market in some facets making it extremely difficult for the private sector to offer services at all.  Not to forget the red tape involved.  The government gets in the way to the point that for many people they feel it's not worth the BS.

But the real kicker is that the government at times of emergency will actually ban non-government aide and support.  I recall during Hurricane Katrina that FEMA forced dozens of full sized 53' trucks to turn around and dozens already there to leave.  They were actualy from Wal-mart, full of food and supplies and were there long before FEMA showed up.  The Department of Homeland Security also prevented the American Red Cross from supplying food.