Total Posts:25|Showing Posts:1-25
Jump to topic:

Welfare

nonentity
Posts: 5,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/1/2011 2:20:49 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Can someone sell me on the idea of it? I see people cashing government cheques upwards of $1500 each month and wonder why I bother with my part time job if these people are getting paid for free.

I vaguely remember making a similar thread months and months ago---I posted a newspaper article of a delinquent teenager in a group home getting ridiculous government handouts. If I find the link again, I'll post it here.

What are the Pros of welfare and do you think they outweigh the Cons?
LaissezFaire
Posts: 2,050
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/1/2011 2:24:51 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Cons: It's immoral (see video)
Should we subsidize education?
http://www.debate.org...

http://mises.org...

http://lewrockwell.com...

http://antiwar.com...

: At 6/22/2011 6:57:23 PM, el-badgero wrote:
: i didn't like [Obama]. he was the only black dude in moneygall yet he claimed to be home. obvious liar is obvious liar. i bet him and bin laden are bumfvcking right now.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/1/2011 2:37:44 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
can you seriously get $1500 a month from welfare checks? Wow, that's more than my living expenses for rent and food, and I get by pretty well!
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
nonentity
Posts: 5,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/1/2011 2:38:23 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/1/2011 2:24:51 AM, LaissezFaire wrote:
Cons: It's immoral (see video)



lol You're supposed to sell me on the idea. I'm already against welfare :p (although my profile says 'undecided')

I suppose the video could be an argument against Universal Health Care also (which I'm Pro for) so it sounds like I'm contradicting myself, but that's another topic.
LaissezFaire
Posts: 2,050
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/1/2011 2:40:30 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/1/2011 2:38:23 AM, TulleKrazy wrote:
At 1/1/2011 2:24:51 AM, LaissezFaire wrote:
Cons: It's immoral (see video)


lol You're supposed to sell me on the idea. I'm already against welfare :p (although my profile says 'undecided')

I suppose the video could be an argument against Universal Health Care also (which I'm Pro for) so it sounds like I'm contradicting myself, but that's another topic.

If you're asking people to sell you on the idea, it doesn't sound like you're really against it all that much. And you should be. So I posted the video to help cement your position against it.
Should we subsidize education?
http://www.debate.org...

http://mises.org...

http://lewrockwell.com...

http://antiwar.com...

: At 6/22/2011 6:57:23 PM, el-badgero wrote:
: i didn't like [Obama]. he was the only black dude in moneygall yet he claimed to be home. obvious liar is obvious liar. i bet him and bin laden are bumfvcking right now.
nonentity
Posts: 5,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/1/2011 2:41:01 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/1/2011 2:37:44 AM, darkkermit wrote:
can you seriously get $1500 a month from welfare checks? Wow, that's more than my living expenses for rent and food, and I get by pretty well!

I work in a bank. One of my clients literally cashed more than $1600 in cheques from the government of Canada, all dated for the month of December.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/1/2011 2:54:21 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/1/2011 2:41:01 AM, TulleKrazy wrote:
At 1/1/2011 2:37:44 AM, darkkermit wrote:
can you seriously get $1500 a month from welfare checks? Wow, that's more than my living expenses for rent and food, and I get by pretty well!

I work in a bank. One of my clients literally cashed more than $1600 in cheques from the government of Canada, all dated for the month of December.

Oh, right canada gives more welfare money then America.

Well I'm off the fulfill the dream of moving to canada and abusing their welfare system.

Also, just for the hell of it, here's a pro argument. Decreased marginal utility one receives from money. The poor person would receive much more utility from an extra dollar than a rich person would.
Society can maximize happiness by redistribution of wealth, and giving dollars from the rich to the poor.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
Zetsubou
Posts: 4,933
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/1/2011 3:04:24 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
herrp derrp free money.

Libertarians and radical capitalists follow the assumption that one gets what one deserves if he tries hard enough to achieve something. Well sorry, society isn't that egalitarian, some people born into sh*t or sh*t happens to them. Welfare was introduced to the USA to support people after the great depression by Franklin Roosevelt, an era where people suffered not because they were lazy but because people work wasn't available. To support those who, though willing to woek couldn't make ends meet. Welfare exists so that everybody has a starting point in life were that they have a REASONABLE chance of achieving things, unbeknownst to many, who consider it the last great larceny - which it sort of is - some people in life, won't have the basic essentials that are a required for a modest life in which they can ascend the work ladder. It almost as though people forget that a person can't succeed without the education, security and utility fiscal success requires. A hungry worker is a unless worker.

Libertarians on DDO come from two distinct backgrounds, either to people born to classes Middleclass or above who see those on welfare as lazy surplus scum, or from the other half, people raised the public school system who consider themselves as part of the intelligentsia that could achieve without the drag of others.

Mfw - I still support the Tory(moderate libertarian) party.
'sup DDO -- july 2013
LaissezFaire
Posts: 2,050
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/1/2011 3:47:09 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/1/2011 2:54:21 AM, darkkermit wrote:
Also, just for the hell of it, here's a pro argument. Decreased marginal utility one receives from money. The poor person would receive much more utility from an extra dollar than a rich person would.
Society can maximize happiness by redistribution of wealth, and giving dollars from the rich to the poor.
Not true. Wealth isn't a zero-sum game, it doesn't work like that. If you redistribute wealth, you destroy it. Taxes on people that earn money creates a disincentive to work for those people, so they don't work as much, thus producing less total wealth. The people that otherwise would have benefited from their services lose out. And giving people money to not be productive gives them an incentive to not work. The more money you pay someone for being poor or unemployed, the more people will want to be on welfare rather than working. The wealth that those people could have created by working is never created. Overall, society ends up with much less total wealth created.
Should we subsidize education?
http://www.debate.org...

http://mises.org...

http://lewrockwell.com...

http://antiwar.com...

: At 6/22/2011 6:57:23 PM, el-badgero wrote:
: i didn't like [Obama]. he was the only black dude in moneygall yet he claimed to be home. obvious liar is obvious liar. i bet him and bin laden are bumfvcking right now.
badger
Posts: 11,793
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/1/2011 11:34:19 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/1/2011 2:24:51 AM, LaissezFaire wrote:
Cons: It's immoral (see video)

both myself and robin hood disagree. another thing we've in common.
signature
djsherin
Posts: 343
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/1/2011 12:54:07 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/1/2011 2:54:21 AM, darkkermit wrote:
At 1/1/2011 2:41:01 AM, TulleKrazy wrote:
At 1/1/2011 2:37:44 AM, darkkermit wrote:
can you seriously get $1500 a month from welfare checks? Wow, that's more than my living expenses for rent and food, and I get by pretty well!

I work in a bank. One of my clients literally cashed more than $1600 in cheques from the government of Canada, all dated for the month of December.

Oh, right canada gives more welfare money then America.

Well I'm off the fulfill the dream of moving to canada and abusing their welfare system.

Also, just for the hell of it, here's a pro argument. Decreased marginal utility one receives from money. The poor person would receive much more utility from an extra dollar than a rich person would.

Interpersonal utility comparisons aren't possible due to the subjectivity value.

Society can maximize happiness by redistribution of wealth, and giving dollars from the rich to the poor.

Granting the first part of the argument, this could be true in the short run, but the disincentives to production and investment created by this act can cause much more long term damage (the rich 100 years ago were not as well off as the poor of today).
djsherin
Posts: 343
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/1/2011 12:54:56 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/1/2011 11:34:19 AM, badger wrote:
At 1/1/2011 2:24:51 AM, LaissezFaire wrote:
Cons: It's immoral (see video)

both myself and robin hood disagree. another thing we've in common.

Didn't Robin Hood take from the government, not the rich per se?
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/1/2011 12:57:54 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/1/2011 2:20:49 AM, TulleKrazy wrote:
Can someone sell me on the idea of it? I see people cashing government cheques upwards of $1500 each month and wonder why I bother with my part time job if these people are getting paid for free.

I vaguely remember making a similar thread months and months ago---I posted a newspaper article of a delinquent teenager in a group home getting ridiculous government handouts. If I find the link again, I'll post it here.

What are the Pros of welfare and do you think they outweigh the Cons?

Do you want the general notion of welfare, or a defense of the overspending that we are currently doing?
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Sieben
Posts: 2,736
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/1/2011 1:34:03 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/1/2011 3:04:24 AM, Zetsubou wrote:

Libertarians and radical capitalists follow the assumption that one gets what one deserves if he tries hard enough to achieve something.
False. Human beings have free (enough) will. Anything can happen on the market.

Well sorry, society isn't that egalitarian, some people born into sh*t or sh*t happens to them.
Yup.

Welfare was introduced to the USA to support people after the great depression by Franklin Roosevelt,
False. http://www.thefreemanonline.org...

an era where people suffered not because they were lazy but because people work wasn't available. To support those who, though willing to woek couldn't make ends meet. Welfare exists so that everybody has a starting point in life were that they have a REASONABLE chance of achieving things,
False. See vote-buying. http://www.independent.org...

unbeknownst to many, who consider it the last great larceny - which it sort of is - some people in life, won't have the basic essentials that are a required for a modest life in which they can ascend the work ladder. It almost as though people forget that a person can't succeed without the education, security and utility fiscal success requires. A hungry worker is a unless worker.
What welfare is supposed to do, and what its actual outcomes are, are very different things. I'd give you another link but you could always retreat by saying "Well that's not the kind of welfare I was talking about".

Libertarians on DDO come from two distinct backgrounds, either to people born to classes Middleclass or above who see those on welfare as lazy surplus scum,
Gross oversimplification. Even the hardiest Marxist will admit that SOME people on welfare are lazy. This is not characteristic of libertarians.

or from the other half, people raised the public school system
Almost everyone was "raised" in the public school system. Its called compulsory education.

who consider themselves as part of the intelligentsia that could achieve without the drag of others.
We don't see government handouts (to ourselves) as a drag. We see them as a boost to the individual receiving them, albeit an inefficient and immoral one.

Mfw - I still support the Tory(moderate libertarian) party.
Yes, well, even hardcore free marketism is "left" of the status quo.

Also, if you're going to slander libertarians, do so with proper spelling and grammar.
Things that are so interesting:

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...
PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/1/2011 2:23:36 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Libertarians and radical capitalists follow the assumption that one gets what one deserves if he tries hard enough to achieve something. Well sorry, society isn't that egalitarian, some people born into sh*t or sh*t happens to them.:

Why should that be the burden of everyone, since life isn't egalitarian? Robbing Peter to pay Paul is still robbery of Peter. You happily sacrifice one moral at the expense of another.

Welfare was introduced to the USA to support people after the great depression by Franklin Roosevelt, an era where people suffered not because they were lazy but because people work wasn't available.:

FDR also destroyed trillions of pounds of food that could have gone to the poor so that he could subsidize farmers. What's your point?

To support those who, though willing to woek couldn't make ends meet. Welfare exists so that everybody has a starting point in life were that they have a REASONABLE chance of achieving things, unbeknownst to many, who consider it the last great larceny:

No, that's what lines of credit are for. We all want or need things that we cannot pay off immediately. So we take out loans. We want/need a car, but most of us cannot afford one out of pocket, so we get a car loan. Look, we all have to scratch and claw our way through life for survival. I don't know why some people seem to think that we're somehow exempt from the laws of nature, but we aren't. You, me, everyone, has to to find a way to survive.

Libertarians on DDO come from two distinct backgrounds, either to people born to classes Middleclass or above who see those on welfare as lazy surplus scum, or from the other half, people raised the public school system who consider themselves as part of the intelligentsia that could achieve without the drag of others.:

You paint with an awfully big brush. Not everyone here was born with a silver spoon in their mouth. Not everyone here is so sheltered from life that they haven't seen the abuses frsthand. It's very presumptuous to try and know our lives when you don't. When I was destitute, I worked grueling hours doing grueling jobs to make ends meet -- like the rest of the f*cking world HAS to do for survival. Jobs that pay sh*t money, at that. And you know, not wanting to live that way anymore is the great incentive to not living that way.

But if the government is feeding you money just for being poor, then what's the incentive to get off of welfare? It's a very comfortable existence. There's no incentive to stop being poor when being poor pays!

You do understand that people can indefinitely live on welfare, right? This isn't like unemployment insurance that runs out. This can go on for the rest of your life.
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)
SuperRobotWars
Posts: 3,906
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/1/2011 9:55:13 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/1/2011 2:24:51 AM, LaissezFaire wrote:
Cons: It's immoral (see video)



http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://www.toptenz.net...
http://www.wikihow.com...
. . . you live there . . . or make one of your own . . .
Minister Of Trolling
: At 12/6/2011 2:21:41 PM, badger wrote:
: ugly people should beat beautiful people ugly. simple! you'd be killing two birds with the one stone... women like violent men and you're making yourself more attractive, relatively. i met a blonde dude who was prettier than me not so long ago. he's not so pretty now! ha!
:
: ...and well, he wasn't really prettier than me. he just had nice hair.
SuperRobotWars
Posts: 3,906
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2011 10:31:10 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/1/2011 10:17:30 PM, FREEDO wrote:
Welfare is a disgrace. It only seeks to make the Capitalist system bearable.

. . . this . . .
Minister Of Trolling
: At 12/6/2011 2:21:41 PM, badger wrote:
: ugly people should beat beautiful people ugly. simple! you'd be killing two birds with the one stone... women like violent men and you're making yourself more attractive, relatively. i met a blonde dude who was prettier than me not so long ago. he's not so pretty now! ha!
:
: ...and well, he wasn't really prettier than me. he just had nice hair.
Zetsubou
Posts: 4,933
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2011 4:04:26 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/1/2011 2:23:36 PM, PARADIGM_L0ST wrote:
Libertarians and radical capitalists follow the assumption that one gets what one deserves if he tries hard enough to achieve something. Well sorry, society isn't that egalitarian, some people born into sh*t or sh*t happens to them.:

Why should that be the burden of everyone, since life isn't egalitarian? Robbing Peter to pay Paul is still robbery of Peter. You happily sacrifice one moral at the expense of another.
When Peter and Peter LLC has so much that it amounts to excess letting Paul go hungry is immoral.

The moral value of their utility is not equal.

Welfare was introduced to the USA to support people after the great depression by Franklin Roosevelt, an era where people suffered not because they were lazy but because people work wasn't available.:

FDR also destroyed trillions of pounds of food that could have gone to the poor so that he could subsidize farmers. What's your point?
non sequitur
Also, a libertarian government has no obligation to give food to the poor.

To support those who, though willing to woek couldn't make ends meet. Welfare exists so that everybody has a starting point in life were that they have a REASONABLE chance of achieving things, unbeknownst to many, who consider it the last great larceny:

No, that's what lines of credit are for. We all want or need things that we cannot pay off immediately. So we take out loans. We want/need a car, but most of us cannot afford one out of pocket, so we get a car loan. Look, we all have to scratch and claw our way through life for survival. I don't know why some people seem to think that we're somehow exempt from the laws of nature, but we aren't.
You can't assume that just because someone waits until their in loan expire they'll have the money any more than when they took out the loan. Nor can you assume that high rate loans for an unemployed person are easy to come by.
You, me, everyone, has to to find a way to survive.
I understand, but you can't survive in the modern world regardless of your mind, body and everything they have come to earn if your start from nothing.

Libertarians on DDO come from two distinct backgrounds, either to people born to classes Middleclass or above who see those on welfare as lazy surplus scum, or from the other half, people raised the public school system who consider themselves as part of the intelligentsia that could achieve without the drag of others.:

You paint with an awfully big brush. Not everyone here was born with a silver spoon in their mouth. Not everyone here is so sheltered from life that they haven't seen the abuses frsthand. It's very presumptuous to try and know our lives when you don't. When I was destitute, I worked grueling hours doing grueling jobs to make ends meet -- like the rest of the f*cking world HAS to do for survival. Jobs that pay sh*t money, at that. And you know, not wanting to live that way anymore is the great incentive to not living that way.
I meant to say "most have...".

Did you work at minimum wage? It's also worth adding that the fact you didn't qualify for welfare is evident that you had a reasonable chance of getting to where you are now. I don't approve of the current welfare system however some people, SOME people, don't make that fight for survival. I infer that you think that without welfare everyone would survive with their own hands? Well sir, you are not so far from wrong.

When I wrote those words I wasn't making a claim solely at what I assumed, know many of background of DDOs number. To my knowledge those words are very, very much true.

But if the government is feeding you money just for being poor, then what's the incentive to get off of welfare? It's a very comfortable existence. There's no incentive to stop being poor when being poor pays!
I don't approve of the current welfare system.

You do understand that people can indefinitely live on welfare, right? This isn't like unemployment insurance that runs out. This can go on for the rest of your life.
I don't support life welfare or age pensions.
'sup DDO -- july 2013
Zetsubou
Posts: 4,933
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2011 4:11:56 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/1/2011 1:34:03 PM, Sieben wrote:
At 1/1/2011 3:04:24 AM, Zetsubou wrote:

Libertarians and radical capitalists follow the assumption that one gets what one deserves if he tries hard enough to achieve something.
False. Human beings have free (enough) will. Anything can happen on the market.

Well sorry, society isn't that egalitarian, some people born into sh*t or sh*t happens to them.
Yup.

Welfare was introduced to the USA to support people after the great depression by Franklin Roosevelt,
False. http://www.thefreemanonline.org...
lol, if that's true why was there mass poverty before the 1930s(1920s for Europe).
an era where people suffered not because they were lazy but because people work wasn't available. To support those who, though willing to woek couldn't make ends meet. Welfare exists so that everybody has a starting point in life were that they have a REASONABLE chance of achieving things,
False. See vote-buying. http://www.independent.org...


unbeknownst to many, who consider it the last great larceny - which it sort of is - some people in life, won't have the basic essentials that are a required for a modest life in which they can ascend the work ladder. It almost as though people forget that a person can't succeed without the education, security and utility fiscal success requires. A hungry worker is a unless worker.
What welfare is supposed to do, and what its actual outcomes are, are very different things. I'd give you another link but you could always retreat by saying "Well that's not the kind of welfare I was talking about".
True.
How about I define "my" welfare system another time then? And finish it then.

Libertarians on DDO come from two distinct backgrounds, either to people born to classes Middleclass or above who see those on welfare as lazy surplus scum,
Gross oversimplification. Even the hardiest Marxist will admit that SOME people on welfare are lazy. This is not characteristic of libertarians.
Well yes. But look at the above post, he comes from a modest background was sees many of them as lazy.

or from the other half, people raised the public school system
Almost everyone was "raised" in the public school system. Its called compulsory education.
Private education.

who consider themselves as part of the intelligentsia that could achieve without the drag of others.
We don't see government handouts (to ourselves) as a drag. We see them as a boost to the individual receiving them, albeit an inefficient and immoral one.
Fair.
'sup DDO -- july 2013
Sieben
Posts: 2,736
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2011 12:56:05 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/3/2011 4:11:56 AM, Zetsubou wrote:

False. http://www.thefreemanonline.org...
lol, if that's true
What do you mean "if"? Its a historical event.

why was there mass poverty before the 1930s(1920s for Europe).
There is still a lot of poverty.

False. See vote-buying. http://www.independent.org...


unbeknownst to many, who consider it the last great larceny - which it sort of is - some people in life, won't have the basic essentials that are a required for a modest life in which they can ascend the work ladder. It almost as though people forget that a person can't succeed without the education, security and utility fiscal success requires. A hungry worker is a unless worker.
What welfare is supposed to do, and what its actual outcomes are, are very different things. I'd give you another link but you could always retreat by saying "Well that's not the kind of welfare I was talking about".
True.
How about I define "my" welfare system another time then? And finish it then.

Libertarians on DDO come from two distinct backgrounds, either to people born to classes Middleclass or above who see those on welfare as lazy surplus scum,
Gross oversimplification. Even the hardiest Marxist will admit that SOME people on welfare are lazy. This is not characteristic of libertarians.
Well yes. But look at the above post, he comes from a modest background was sees many of them as lazy.
Many of them probably are lazy. Its a dumb place for a libertarian to start arguing, but its true nonetheless.

or from the other half, people raised the public school system
Almost everyone was "raised" in the public school system. Its called compulsory education.
Private education.
Its still compulsory. You have to go. Curricula are also heavily influenced by the state.

And the majority of people do not attend private institutions.
Things that are so interesting:

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...
Zetsubou
Posts: 4,933
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2011 9:05:37 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/3/2011 12:56:05 PM, Sieben wrote:
At 1/3/2011 4:11:56 AM, Zetsubou wrote:

False. http://www.thefreemanonline.org...
lol, if that's true
What do you mean "if"? Its a historical event.
No, it's a list of laws that have "inhited" 'friendly-societies'.

why was there mass poverty before the 1930s(1920s for Europe).
There is still a lot of poverty.
Not like back then.

False. See vote-buying. http://www.independent.org...


unbeknownst to many, who consider it the last great larceny - which it sort of is - some people in life, won't have the basic essentials that are a required for a modest life in which they can ascend the work ladder. It almost as though people forget that a person can't succeed without the education, security and utility fiscal success requires. A hungry worker is a unless worker.
What welfare is supposed to do, and what its actual outcomes are, are very different things. I'd give you another link but you could always retreat by saying "Well that's not the kind of welfare I was talking about".
True.
How about I define "my" welfare system another time then? And finish it then.

Libertarians on DDO come from two distinct backgrounds, either to people born to classes Middleclass or above who see those on welfare as lazy surplus scum,
Gross oversimplification. Even the hardiest Marxist will admit that SOME people on welfare are lazy. This is not characteristic of libertarians.
Well yes. But look at the above post, he comes from a modest background was sees many of them as lazy.
Many of them probably are lazy. Its a dumb place for a libertarian to start arguing, but its true nonetheless.


or from the other half, people raised the public school system
Almost everyone was "raised" in the public school system. Its called compulsory education.
Private education.
Its still compulsory. You have to go. Curricula are also heavily influenced by the state.

And the majority of people do not attend private institutions.
My point was that many, most, libertarians when to them.
'sup DDO -- july 2013
Sieben
Posts: 2,736
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2011 9:14:12 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/6/2011 9:05:37 AM, Zetsubou wrote:
At 1/3/2011 12:56:05 PM, Sieben wrote:
At 1/3/2011 4:11:56 AM, Zetsubou wrote:

False. http://www.thefreemanonline.org...
lol, if that's true
What do you mean "if"? Its a historical event.
No, it's a list of laws that have "inhited" 'friendly-societies'.
Social security and employment insurance sound like welfare to me.
why was there mass poverty before the 1930s(1920s for Europe).
There is still a lot of poverty.
Not like back then.
So? The whole damn world was poor back then.

And the majority of people do not attend private institutions.
My point was that many, most, libertarians when to them.
Source? Its not like private schools are a hotbed for anti-government thought though.
Things that are so interesting:

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...