Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

The Poverty should be decreased by Government Intervention Myth

Expand Messages
  • Shlomi Fish
    I just encountered the following gem when reading ESR s Libertarianism FAQ:
    Message 1 of 1 , Nov 1, 2003
      I just encountered the following gem when reading ESR's Libertarianism

      C3. Would libertarians just abandon the poor?

      No, though abandoning the poor might be merciful compared to what
      government has done to them. As the level of "anti-poverty" spending in
      this country has risen, so has poverty. Government bureaucracies have no
      incentive to lift people out of dependency and every incentive to keep
      them in it; after all, more poverty means a bigger budget and more power
      for the bureaucrats. Libertarians want to break this cycle by abolishing
      all income-transfer programs and allowing people to keep what they earn
      instead of taxing it away from them. The wealth freed up would go directly
      to the private sector, creating jobs for the poor, decreasing the demand
      on private charity, and increasing charitable giving. The results might
      diminish poverty or they might leave it at today's levels -- but it's hard
      to see how they could be any less effective than the present wretched

      The URL is this:


      Think about it. If we assume that "more government funds -> less poverty",
      then if poverty increases we need more government funds to fight it. A
      myth that is refuted by pure logic.


      Shlomi Fish

      Shlomi Fish shlomif@...
      Home Page: http://t2.technion.ac.il/~shlomif/

      An apple a day will keep a doctor away. Two apples a day will keep two
      doctors away.

      Falk Fish
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.