SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Pastimes : My House
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Poet who wrote (2187)10/5/2002 6:09:49 PM
From: TimF  Read Replies (1) of 7689
 
Who was it who said that the true measure of a society is its willingness to care for its most vulnerable?

Caring for the most vulnerable is fine, if they can't help themselves esp. if our help can allow them to help themselves but just handing out money to anyone who can claim poverty is counterproductive.

If someone is just being lazy I don't think we owe them anything. We might decide to let no one (or at least no one who does not actively fight the attempt to help them) starve, but we can do that with half of our current tax burden. Eliminate most subsidies and transfer payments to those who are not poor. Strive for greater efficiency in what the government does do including breaking the public sector unions and even modifying the civil service rules if it is necessary. Get the government out of trying to run large sections of the economy Do this and we can spend more on those who are actually poor with much lower tax rates and still have no budget deficit. It may not be politically possible because the special interests are intrenched but it is fiscally possible if the politics come around.

I do think that assistance to the poor should be relatively minimal because otherwise it provides them with a disincentive to help themselves. Some people will work hard even if they don't have to, some people will not work hard even if they do have to, and some people are incapable of doing much work because of disability but many people can work and will work if they have to but won't if they don't have to. I also think that forcibly taking money from someone to hand it over to someone else is equivalent to theft, but I wouldn't condemn someone who stole a loaf of bread to avoid starvation so I guess I can accept enough support to keep people from starving, and as a practical matter if the support can be structured to help people help themselves (and move away from needing any public assistance) I would not object to a somewhat higher then minimal level of support.

Also if we keep tax rates low in the long run the economy will grow faster and we will have more wealth to go around. The poor might be getting relatively poorer but in absolute terms the long run trend if for them to get richer. If we hurt the economy enough through taxes and regulation we risk that long run trend.

Tim
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News