It’s not a question of ends, it’s a question of means.
Either government’s role is not merely to protect and preserve liberty, or it is to usurp it, to trample on it. You cannot possibly draw distinctions among the ENDS for which it may do this – because (1) those distinctions are subjective – they are merely the ideals that any individual might have, and (2) ALL such proposed objectives will simply be represented as “for the children” or “for the good of the whole” – those phrases become meaningless (they already have) and pretty soon it’s just a feeding frenzy, people become less focused on creating wealth than on taking it from others, and then there is less to go around.
Freedom and wealth creation go hand in hand, folks.
We’re not talking about helping an elderly homeless person on the streetcorner.
We’re talking about mugging the next 10 people who walk down the street, paying ourselves for the effort and then giving the elderly homeless woman 25 cents on the dollar, and justifying this by either or both of (1) there are 11 of us so we’re a ‘majority’ and (2) look we gave money to an elderly homeless woman.
The inability of so many to see how this creates a precedent for 11 to mug 10 for any purpose is frightening.
Brian please see my other posts, I am a Libertarian, I oppose corporate welfare and think it’s even worse than individual welfare….. I think gays should be allowed to marry each other – - – you won’t see ME at any of the ceremonies, and I think they’re NUTS, but it’s supposed to be a FREE country and you have a right to be nuts!
Hopeful, you should try to be Thoughtful instead – a material minimum wage hike would only put people out of work. That’s what price floors do.
Powered by Yahoo Answers