@spruce112358 saidCurious -- why couldn't free market charities deal with hunger/exposure? Justice / defense / fire / police I get.
Libertarians as a rule don't think the government should be doing anything to the economy.
My list of what government should do includes justice, defense, maintaining public space, and last-resort charity so no one dies of hunger or exposure. These are things the free market does not provide.
@scottedwards2000 saidNever worked before, why would it work now?
Curious -- why couldn't free market charities deal with hunger/exposure? Justice / defense / fire / police I get.
@no1marauder saidother than charities, volunteer fire departments, it really wasn't tried.
Never worked before, why would it work now?
Also militias were augmenting defense but could have been actual defense.
@scottedwards2000 saidAs cited, in practice it hasn't worked. One way to motivate more such activity would be to tie churches' and other non-profit's tax-free status to showing that they take at least some actions against hunger and exposure. But that would be very difficult to administer.
Curious -- why couldn't free market charities deal with hunger/exposure? Justice / defense / fire / police I get.
In addition to young orphans, the disabled and the homeless, I would combine such an agency with FEMA/state relief agencies to take care of people in temporarily bad straits from natural disasters - the principle is the same.
It is hard to defend private property rights if people are starving/homeless. The only way to do it is say "it's their own fault." But that clearly is not always the case.
Trying to sort out who "merits" aid would actually be more expensive than giving aid to whoever shows up - it will never be a lifestyle people would choose (i.e. can't make it lavish.) Of course private charities could then augment the basics, give people other options, job-training and recovery, etc. Again, tie tax-free status to charities showing up.
@cheesemaster saidYup.
Americans don't care what the rest of the world thinks.
That’s why everyone loves you so much.
@earl-of-trumps saidThe hungry Irish fought capitalistic absentee landlords for the food that was in Ireland and was being exported to England
How's North Korea doing feeding their hungry masses for decades?
The hungry Irish fought a natural catastrophe - the NK's fought the forever ignorance of communists.
@earl-of-trumps said"Nobody is subsidizing America."
so the soviet union collapses. and there goes Cuba and NKorea.
communist countries can never stand on their own two feet.
Nobody is subsidizing America.
Anybody who uses the US dollar as currency is subsidizing America.
@no1marauder saidDoes the fact that it has never worked mean that we should take money by force from each citizen to ensure it works? In other words, isn't the fact that it COULD work good enough to mean it shouldn't be taxable (vs. things like the fire dept and police where there just isn't enough time to find out if you are a paying 'member' deserving protection)?
Never worked before, why would it work now?
@scottedwards2000 saidA free market institution without the profit motive. What’s wrong with that picture.
Curious -- why couldn't free market charities deal with hunger/exposure? Justice / defense / fire / police I get.
If these dichotomous charities were successful they would take away the work (for the lowest pay the market dictates) motive.
Wages would have to be above the charity generated subsistence level.