Total Posts:32|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Libertarians for a Safety Net?

GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/23/2012 2:20:41 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Are there any Libertarians here for a safety net? It seems everyones is either Anarcho-Capitalist or Anarcho-Communist. But what about inbetween?

As a Libertarian, I support freedom across the board, but there are a few exceptions where I take a stance contrary to the An-Caps.

- I support taxes. People will not voluntarily give their taxes nor give enough. I prefer the income tax to be zero and rather get revenue from excise taxes, non-protectionist tarriffs, and low capital gains tax. But if that's not enough, it may be the case that we need an income tax. Some may say that this is theft or against freedom but I say false. Taxes are automatically taken from your paycheck and its barely missed. I dont hear people cry "thats not liberty" if they get a pay cut or demotion. So if I am going to get less pay, I'd prefer that it go towards government funded roads than go towards nothing. Youre supposed to benefit from the taxes you pay so its not really theft. I'd rather pay a small percentage with no effort for a highway than take the effort to pay out of my pocket more money for a private highway. I think we can all agree that seeing a few cents less on our paychecks that goes toward the good of the nation doesnt make us feel enslaved.

- I support a safety net. This is also the reason why I support taxes. No taxes, no safety net. There are times when people get in a rut or experience a crisis out of no fault of their own and theyre not just lazy. There needs to be safety net. For example, unemployment benefits. People lose their jobs, it happens. And not because theyre lazy. They need to be able to live while they find another job.

- I support laws that help you help yourself. For example laws that require everyone to have car insurance. This makes sure everyone is liable when getting into dangerous vehicles on the road. For instance, if someone were to crash into me and destroy my $80,000 Mercedes (no I dont really have one), they better pay up and be able to compensate you for the damages. Without that law, people would have to buy a gun, go to their house and bank info and take the 80,000 grand that they owe. But since were required to have insurance we know that there is enough money and a guarantee of compensation.

- I support an FDA. Obviously not the current Illuminati corrupt one, but an agency that makes sure that the burger that I order with my money is as advertised and not soiled or could cause a deadly disease. It ensures that food is safe or as advertised which means that a restaraunt may serve cyanide burgers so long as he advertised it and displays health warnings, but if Burger King advertises cyanide-free burgers and yet you die after eating it, thats against the law and BK should be prosecuted.

All of these measures I believe are for the better and do not infringe on freedom.

.
.
.
.
.
.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
OMGJustinBieber
Posts: 3,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/23/2012 2:31:27 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I agree with much of what you say here and I call myself fiscally moderate. I don't know how compatible the label of libertarian is with what you've described here. You might be socially libertarian, but I tend to conceive of someone who supports a basic welfare system and governmental regulatory agencies as not quite libertarian.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/23/2012 2:34:42 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 2/23/2012 2:31:27 PM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
I agree with much of what you say here and I call myself fiscally moderate. I don't know how compatible the label of libertarian is with what you've described here. You might be socially libertarian, but I tend to conceive of someone who supports a basic welfare system and governmental regulatory agencies as not quite libertarian.

Well I'm still against most forms of foreign aid, the welfare state, handouts, government controlled education, etc.

But I've always considered myself a Left Libertarian.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
logicrules
Posts: 1,721
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/23/2012 2:42:48 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 2/23/2012 2:20:41 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
Are there any Libertarians here for a safety net? It seems everyones is either Anarcho-Capitalist or Anarcho-Communist. But what about inbetween?

As a Libertarian, I support freedom across the board, but there are a few exceptions where I take a stance contrary to the An-Caps.

- I support taxes. People will not voluntarily give their taxes nor give enough. I prefer the income tax to be zero and rather get revenue from excise taxes, non-protectionist tarriffs, and low capital gains tax. But if that's not enough, it may be the case that we need an income tax. Some may say that this is theft or against freedom but I say false. Taxes are automatically taken from your paycheck and its barely missed. I dont hear people cry "thats not liberty" if they get a pay cut or demotion. So if I am going to get less pay, I'd prefer that it go towards government funded roads than go towards nothing. Youre supposed to benefit from the taxes you pay so its not really theft. I'd rather pay a small percentage with no effort for a highway than take the effort to pay out of my pocket more money for a private highway. I think we can all agree that seeing a few cents less on our paychecks that goes toward the good of the nation doesnt make us feel enslaved.

- I support a safety net. This is also the reason why I support taxes. No taxes, no safety net. There are times when people get in a rut or experience a crisis out of no fault of their own and theyre not just lazy. There needs to be safety net. For example, unemployment benefits. People lose their jobs, it happens. And not because theyre lazy. They need to be able to live while they find another job.

- I support laws that help you help yourself. For example laws that require everyone to have car insurance. This makes sure everyone is liable when getting into dangerous vehicles on the road. For instance, if someone were to crash into me and destroy my $80,000 Mercedes (no I dont really have one), they better pay up and be able to compensate you for the damages. Without that law, people would have to buy a gun, go to their house and bank info and take the 80,000 grand that they owe. But since were required to have insurance we know that there is enough money and a guarantee of compensation.

- I support an FDA. Obviously not the current Illuminati corrupt one, but an agency that makes sure that the burger that I order with my money is as advertised and not soiled or could cause a deadly disease. It ensures that food is safe or as advertised which means that a restaraunt may serve cyanide burgers so long as he advertised it and displays health warnings, but if Burger King advertises cyanide-free burgers and yet you die after eating it, thats against the law and BK should be prosecuted.

All of these measures I believe are for the better and do not infringe on freedom.


.
.
.
.
.
.

LOL here we go....lets all claim to be whatever feels good with exceptions. You can not be a libertarian and support taxes. He with the power to tax has the power to destroy.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/23/2012 2:52:55 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 2/23/2012 2:42:48 PM, logicrules wrote:

LOL here we go....lets all claim to be whatever feels good with exceptions.

It's called being rational and practical rather than holding certain views just to claim youre a purest or the best and true Libertarian.

Also, nothing I said I supported goes against freedom and property rights.

You can not be a libertarian and support taxes.

I can. And so does Ron Paul and Noam Chomsky.

He with the power to tax has the power to destroy.

Except theres other methods of taxation that don't leave it in the hands of one man. Local taxes can trickle up to the state and then to the Federal government. Dispersion of power.

.
.
.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
OberHerr
Posts: 13,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/23/2012 2:54:16 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
So, wouldn't laws against marijuana help you help yourself?
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-OBERHERR'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

Official Enforcer for the DDO Elite(if they existed).

"Cases are anti-town." - FourTrouble

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/23/2012 2:58:35 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
That's about my same belief system. However, I seem to be much more capitalist and anti-gvoernment then the average individual so I label myself libertarian.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/23/2012 3:03:45 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 2/23/2012 2:54:16 PM, OberHerr wrote:
So, wouldn't laws against marijuana help you help yourself?

1. Theres a difference between that and the government saving you from yourself. The government can't tell you what to do to yourself and can't save you from yourself. I support government aid in affairs which you cant handle yourself. For example, property rights disputes. If someone stronger than you violates your property, the government will aid you in deterring that or at least discourage it by punishing the stronger person from violating property rights.

2. Marijuana is not known to be necessarily harmful. Though I do believe in state marijuana laws that prevent 5 year olds from purchasing it.

.
.
.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/23/2012 3:13:53 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Also DN and innomen are also part of the libertarian group that would likely favor some of those things above. DN however is moving to the left.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
jimtimmy
Posts: 3,953
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/23/2012 3:20:59 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I support public safety, a strong military, a currency, and other "night watchman" functions.

I still oppose the welfare state, but I do support a warfare state.
President of DDO
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/23/2012 3:22:26 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 2/23/2012 3:20:59 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
I support public safety, a strong military, a currency, and other "night watchman" functions.

I still oppose the welfare state, but I do support a warfare state.


So you're no longer a libertarian.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/23/2012 3:27:56 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I would have a bare-bones safety net.. ensuring food/shelter/medical care/&funds for primary education for children whose guardian's can't provide them, and food for adults who would appear incapable of providing for themselves (soup kitchens).

I'd see it funded through a Luxury tax

I call myself a libertarian... But I'm not quite...

I guess I'm just Libertarianesque.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
jimtimmy
Posts: 3,953
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/23/2012 3:28:36 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 2/23/2012 3:22:26 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 2/23/2012 3:20:59 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
I support public safety, a strong military, a currency, and other "night watchman" functions.

I still oppose the welfare state, but I do support a warfare state.


So you're no longer a libertarian.

Check my profile, lol.

I am a conservative now.

I should probably clarify my stance. I support war when necessary. I don't support a military state that runs everyone's life, lol.

So, I still am very much for free market capitalism as an economic system, but I support a more interventionist foreign policy.
President of DDO
jimtimmy
Posts: 3,953
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/23/2012 3:30:01 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 2/23/2012 3:27:56 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:
I would have a bare-bones safety net.. ensuring food/shelter/medical care/&funds for primary education for children whose guardian's can't provide them, and food for adults who would appear incapable of providing for themselves (soup kitchens).

I'd see it funded through a Luxury tax

I call myself a libertarian... But I'm not quite...

I guess I'm just Libertarianesque.

See, this is where I am still libertarian. I oppose the existence of the welfare state, but I do not oppose the existence of a state.

So, you could say that I am an ultra conservative in the American sense.
President of DDO
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/23/2012 3:32:40 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
also... I would have the police and courts and other necessary facets of government funded through luxury taxes.

I figure if YOU would be happy to waste your money.. I'd be more than happy to steal some for a good cause :)

also.. sure you might not see Indulging as a waste.. but I care less for someone elses indulgence than I do for the kid starving on the street-corner.. So.. I'd be willing to Re-appropriate some of that guy's indulgence fund.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/23/2012 3:40:03 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Well I'm still against most forms of foreign aid, the welfare state, handouts, government controlled education, etc.
WTF do you think the welfare state was invented for if not to be a "safety net?"

But if that's not enough, it may be the case that we need an income tax. Some may say that this is theft or against freedom but I say false. Taxes are automatically taken from your paycheck and its barely missed.
If I walk into a bank vault, grab some money, and walk out, I'm still a thief even if it's "barely missed."
And pfft, taxes are the biggest expenditure for a lot of people, barely missed my a**.

I dont hear people cry "thats not liberty" if they get a pay cut or demotion.
Because the people cutting the pay own the joint. You can go to another business if you don't like it, or form your own. No one will send the Marines if you are self-employed.
hink we can all agree that seeing a few cents less
If by a few cents you mean thousands of dollars.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/23/2012 3:41:34 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I support laws that help you help yourself. For example laws that require everyone to have car insurance.
And road owners can require car insurance you know.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/23/2012 3:43:45 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
You might as well be that "Get your gummint off my Medicare" crone for all the sense you're making.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/23/2012 4:27:03 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
"The most extreme types, like Murray Rothbard, are at least honest. They'd like to eliminate highway taxes because they force you to pay for a road you may never drive on. As an alternative, they suggest that if you and I want to get somewhere, we should build a road there and charge people tolls on it. Just try generalizing that. Such a society couldn't survive, and even if it could, it would be so full of terror and hate that any human being would prefer to live in hell."
-- Noam Chomsky
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/23/2012 4:54:04 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
There are two problems with strict Libertarianism. One is that it does not acknowledge the tribal nature of humans. If someone suffers through no fault of their own, the tribal nature results in people wanting to help. The other problem is that some problems have a truly national scope. That includes national defense and a criminal justice system.

What's debatable is how much government is needed to meet the genuine needs of people. For example, private charity might take over some, most, or all of the social safety net.

As to consumer safety, there is precedent with Underwriters Laboratories that tests and certifies the safety of consumer goods. Companies pay for the service in order to be able to display the UL seal. Consumers prefer UL approved products. so that justifies the expense.

I think the mistake that Libertarians often make is to want to just do away with all government saying, "Don't worry, everything will work out because we have a theory that says it will." that only sells to ideological libertarians. Ordinary voters don't want to take a chance that grandma will be left on the road if she's hit by a bus. After decades of the nanny state, there is a strong assumption that only government solves problems.

it's much better to proceed incrementally. For example, government might establish a process by which independent testing service are approved. Then independent lab approval might be allowed as an alternative to government approval. Another example is a voucher system as an alternative to public schools; that works where ever it is tried.

If one comes to the conclusion that adopting increments of reduction in government is the correct approach then it's not necessary to develop an ideology of faith as to how it will come out. I think it will go quite far.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/23/2012 5:02:08 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 2/23/2012 4:54:04 PM, RoyLatham wrote:
There are two problems with strict Libertarianism. One is that it does not acknowledge the tribal nature of humans. If someone suffers through no fault of their own, the tribal nature results in people wanting to help.
That's a problem with non-libertarianism, that that is false of many humans. If it were true it wouldn't be a problem of libertarianism. Libertarianism permits charity. Such creatures as you describe donate to charity by definition. Government isn't even capable of affecting the matter except to the extent people are NOT as you say they are.

The other problem is that some problems have a truly national scope. That includes national defense and a criminal justice system.
The criminal justice system isn't even mostly handled on a national level in the United States. Furthermore, it does not affect me if you don't receive protection of the law because you didn't pay your user fee.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
jat93
Posts: 1,440
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2012 12:29:56 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Geo, not sure what you were talking about justifying taxes because of going to things that benefit you. That doesn't mean it's not theft. Come on, that's classic "social contract" theory and we both know it makes no sense. Theft is theft regardless of whether or not the intentions are wonderful or awful. If I buy you something really nice and beneficial to your life and then, by force, make you pay me back, that's still theft isn't it? Secondly and perhaps most importantly, don't be so naive as to think that your income tax goes mostly to roads and infrastructure. Or anything else that remotely benefits your life for that matter. It goes mostly to funding the warfare/welfare state which I assume you still oppose. A very small percentage goes to the things you described and used to justify taxation. I'm pretty sure roads/infrastructure are mainly covered by more local taxes like those on property, and tolls, etc.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2012 4:45:21 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 2/24/2012 12:40:48 PM, logicrules wrote:
If you or I ask for money it i extortion if the government does its taxes.

Ok, let's just spout played out rhetoric. You don't think I've heard that before? I'm a Libertarian and have been for years. The problem with what you say is that if you ask for money it's extortion because you aren't going to give it back to me nor is it going to be spent in a way that it benefits me. When the government does it it comes back to me either in a tax return or it is spent on the highways that I drive on and defense of the homeland. Obviously the current system is flawed because the money is wasted on nonsense but that's another argument.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2012 7:11:57 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 2/24/2012 4:45:21 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 2/24/2012 12:40:48 PM, logicrules wrote:
If you or I ask for money it i extortion if the government does its taxes.

Ok, let's just spout played out rhetoric. You don't think I've heard that before? I'm a Libertarian and have been for years. The problem with what you say is that if you ask for money it's extortion because you aren't going to give it back to me nor is it going to be spent in a way that it benefits me.
No, it's extortion because I don't give permission. If I mow your lawn without your permission and then demand payment at gunpoint, even if you benefit from having your lawn mowed, it's STILL EXTORTION.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
johnnyboy54
Posts: 6,362
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2012 8:06:05 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 2/24/2012 7:11:57 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 2/24/2012 4:45:21 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 2/24/2012 12:40:48 PM, logicrules wrote:
If you or I ask for money it i extortion if the government does its taxes.

Ok, let's just spout played out rhetoric. You don't think I've heard that before? I'm a Libertarian and have been for years. The problem with what you say is that if you ask for money it's extortion because you aren't going to give it back to me nor is it going to be spent in a way that it benefits me.
No, it's extortion because I don't give permission. If I mow your lawn without your permission and then demand payment at gunpoint, even if you benefit from having your lawn mowed, it's STILL EXTORTION.

Technically it is a quasi-contract sprinkled with a little bit of assault with a deadly weapon.
I didn't order assholes with my whiskey.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2012 8:19:08 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 2/24/2012 8:06:05 PM, johnnyboy54 wrote:
At 2/24/2012 7:11:57 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 2/24/2012 4:45:21 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 2/24/2012 12:40:48 PM, logicrules wrote:
If you or I ask for money it i extortion if the government does its taxes.

Ok, let's just spout played out rhetoric. You don't think I've heard that before? I'm a Libertarian and have been for years. The problem with what you say is that if you ask for money it's extortion because you aren't going to give it back to me nor is it going to be spent in a way that it benefits me.
No, it's extortion because I don't give permission. If I mow your lawn without your permission and then demand payment at gunpoint, even if you benefit from having your lawn mowed, it's STILL EXTORTION.

Technically it is a quasi-contract sprinkled with a little bit of assault with a deadly weapon.

Where's the contract in the quasi-contract coming from?
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
johnnyboy54
Posts: 6,362
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2012 9:00:22 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 2/24/2012 8:19:08 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 2/24/2012 8:06:05 PM, johnnyboy54 wrote:
At 2/24/2012 7:11:57 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 2/24/2012 4:45:21 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 2/24/2012 12:40:48 PM, logicrules wrote:
If you or I ask for money it i extortion if the government does its taxes.

Ok, let's just spout played out rhetoric. You don't think I've heard that before? I'm a Libertarian and have been for years. The problem with what you say is that if you ask for money it's extortion because you aren't going to give it back to me nor is it going to be spent in a way that it benefits me.
No, it's extortion because I don't give permission. If I mow your lawn without your permission and then demand payment at gunpoint, even if you benefit from having your lawn mowed, it's STILL EXTORTION.

Technically it is a quasi-contract sprinkled with a little bit of assault with a deadly weapon.

Where's the contract in the quasi-contract coming from?

It was a joke...
I didn't order assholes with my whiskey.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2012 11:22:07 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 2/23/2012 3:40:03 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Well I'm still against most forms of foreign aid, the welfare state, handouts, government controlled education, etc.
WTF do you think the welfare state was invented for if not to be a "safety net?"

safety net -> Unemployment insurance if you get laid off. Temporary assistance.

welfare state -> Little to no incentives to work, free healthcare, education, housing and/or food. Lots of welfare redistribution

Some safety nets are necessary not just to help others, but its actually good for the economy. More entrepreneurs are willing to take risks that promise to spur economic growth If there are some safety nets. A downward deflationary spiral is less likely to occur, since aggregate demand will go down less If people are insured they will still have money even after unemployment.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2012 11:33:38 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 2/24/2012 11:22:07 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 2/23/2012 3:40:03 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Well I'm still against most forms of foreign aid, the welfare state, handouts, government controlled education, etc.
WTF do you think the welfare state was invented for if not to be a "safety net?"

safety net -> Unemployment insurance if you get laid off. Temporary assistance.

welfare state -> Little to no incentives to work, free healthcare, education, housing and/or food. Lots of welfare redistribution
You've heard of welfare reform in our present welfare state, right?
Also, temporary unemployment insurance is just that-- insurance. By definition it's capable of being filled by, y'know, an insurance company. You pay while employed, then if laid off, you get money from the insurance company.

It's mainly the permanent disabled types that plausibly have any use for a government safety net.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.