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.
Politics : About that Cuban boy, Elian -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: epicure who wrote (5871)5/20/2000 3:32:00 PM
From: Lane3  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 9127
 
<<The reason I included all those programs is that X2 thinks they are all socialist>>

Oh! Your list was based on X2's definition. No wonder we weren't communicating! <g>

Now that we're talking the same language, we seem to differ only on the safety-net programs.

I see a continuum of people who advocate FEDERAL safety-net programs. On one end are the "inadvertent socialists," the kind-hearted and generous souls who are so saddened by people in need that they just want the need met and they either don't think about or don't care about the implications of who meets it. On the other end are those who are consciously socialist--they think that we should all collectively own everything--share and share alike. It's hard to draw a bright line between being generous and turning into a collective. Already there is too much of a sense of entitlement to the fruits of the taxpayer's labor to suit me. I like the concept of charity much better.

<<If I had ever seen a reasonable suggestion about how to safely privatize safety nets I would be less supportive of the federal government doing it.>>

Privatizing isn't the only alternative to the federal government. There are always state and local governments and quasi-governmental organizations as options.

<<At least if I post to myself I get an intelligent reply.>>

Surely you have more options than that! <VBG>

Karen-