My point wasn't "welfare" specifically. The bigger problem in this particular instance is state-paid medical care. It seems that both parties are now essentially in agreement that is a proper role of government to pay for the medical expenses of anyone who can't pay for them on their own.
Right now, that probably doesn't include homeless heroin junkies. As "enlightened" as all the leftists who run our government are, it still seems like we're more than comfortable as a society with letting them die on the street. But if you make drugs legal, that won't be okay anymore. They'll have a "disease" and the state will be compelled to take care of anyone who feels like living their life as a junkie.
-- SmartMuffin - Because anything less would be uncivilized http://img.imgcake.com/gadsdenflaggifda.gif
That's true, which is a good reason we shouldn't have state-run healthcare. Another reason is that state-run healthcare will tend to reduce innovation in medicine. This may not seem important now, but innovation grows exponentially.....even if the difference is only 2% a year, our grandchildren will feel a huge difference in the quality of healthcare they receive.
red sox 777 posted... This would be true if it wasn't for the existence of the welfare state.
Just because you give someone something doesn't give you the right to control their lives. A gift is a gift is a gift. Once you have given money to someone, it is no longer yours, but theirs. That means they can do whatever they please with it, and you have no right to it whatsoever.
The right to use property as one sees fit should not be infringed.
Is it really a gift if I go to jail if I don't give it to them?
Is it really a gift if I go to jail if I don't give it to them?
The gift isn't from you the taxpayer. It's from the government. The government just takes it from you; there's no giving involved on that end. The people vicariously give to those on welfare because they elect the representatives who dole out the money, NOT because they pay the taxes that fund it. Which may be an immoral system.
That's true, which is a good reason we shouldn't have state-run healthcare
But, even though we don't really have "state run health care" at this point, we still create moral hazard by guaranteeing to treat anyone with a life-threatening condition regardless of ability to pay. Wolf Blitzer tried to make Ron Paul appear heartless by implying he'd just "let people die if they couldn't afford it."
I'm planning some detailed analysis on this topic for a blog post when I get some more time, but yeah.
-- SmartMuffin - Because anything less would be uncivilized http://img.imgcake.com/gadsdenflaggifda.gif
And for what it's worth, I don't mind welfare in principle because it's money that goes right back into the economy. It's like unemployment benefits. That's just money going right back in, which benefits everyone down the line.
I *would* like to see people who depend on it, also be told how to live. You can't drink or smoke or do drugs and you can't reproduce, if you are on welfare, according to what I would personally like to see. Can that be enforced, I dunno. I don't like the idea of the whole thing being a "gift" though. It seems like the government is bribing citizens and laundering money if that's the case, which it probably is.
“The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money.” --Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America
-- SmartMuffin - Because anything less would be uncivilized http://img.imgcake.com/gadsdenflaggifda.gif
At least we lasted longer than any of the French Republics. The gall of DeTocqueville to make a statement like that when his country has gone through 17 government systems in the time that we've had 1.
From: neonreap | #058 And for what it's worth, I don't mind welfare in principle because it's money that goes right back into the economy. It's like unemployment benefits. That's just money going right back in, which benefits everyone down the line.
I *would* like to see people who depend on it, also be told how to live. You can't drink or smoke or do drugs and you can't reproduce, if you are on welfare, according to what I would personally like to see. Can that be enforced, I dunno. I don't like the idea of the whole thing being a "gift" though. It seems like the government is bribing citizens and laundering money if that's the case, which it probably is.
I like this. Especially the part about not being able to reproduce.