Guns, Guns Guns

[4588686]

Are you seriously suggesting that without the government the poor wouldn't be fed? Catholic charities feed, clothe, educate, house, and give medical attention to more people in the entire world in one day than the American government has done in the past twenty days. All on their own accord, Catholic charities help people. Sisters, Friars, Priests, all acting as missionaries, help people. They have never needed the government to put them at gunpoint to do it. In fact, they have done these things despite governments putting them at gunpoint telling them NOT to do it.

It would cost every single Church in America (From the Basillica to the tiny rural Baptist churches) about 2 million dollars apiece and per year just to take up the slack of social security. Assuming that nobody needs medical care. 

[PhuturePriest]

It would cost every single Church in America (From the Basillica to the tiny rural Baptist churches) about 2 million dollars apiece and per year just to take up the slack of social security. Assuming that nobody needs medical care. 

 

That says nothing about how many people the government covers. That says social security is economically unstable.

[4588686]

That says nothing about how many people the government covers.

 

Yes it does.  

 

 

That says social security is economically unstable.

 

 

No, it says that Social Security could not be sustained if we depended on private charity for it's funding.  

[Jesus_lol]

People that can't afford basic food and health needs must be taken care of by their families, the faithful, or left to die. Maybe in a few generations the post-Great Society American entitlement gene could be bred out of the gene pool.

 

 

Ahh, there is the good Christian way. "oh hi, poor starving child, where is your family? oh you are an orphan? there are no passing people willing to pay for you to eat around here? man thats a shame. Well, hurry up and let your entitled arse die, so my vision of a Randian American can flourish. It is what Jesus would have wanted."

[dairygirl4u2c]

it boils down to what was said in the other thread, justification for some welfare, progressive taxes, or alternatively violence is morally justifiable.

you can know if i was tryin and couldnt provide even food for myself or my family, id steal, and focus on those who thought society was in no way responsible (esp those who were excessively rich, too

 

""

if humaanity were in africa for the most part, and a guy with the

power of bill gates came along and had people start occupying land....
or even worse he just went around claiming land.

that doesnt mean bill gates gets it all.

 

it means man law or perhaps technology bent it for him.

 

God,
natural law says some of those guys in africa are alllowed to go plant
some corn for themselves if they need it, on bill's superfluously
claimed land.

 

or, at the very least.... tax bill enough to compensate them. (hence the basis for some state welfare....
 

(hence the basis for progressive taxes... non flat tax. the people with so much extra should be responsible for that which we decide the poor
should be entitled to

Edited February 22, 2013 by dairygirl4u2c

[God the Father]

Ahh, there is the good Christian way. "oh hi, poor starving child, where is your family? oh you are an orphan? there are no passing people willing to pay for you to eat around here? man thats a shame. Well, hurry up and let your entitled arse die, so my vision of a Randian American can flourish. It is what Jesus would have wanted."

 

Yep, life sucks. Taking care of the misfortunate is my Christian responsibility, not my civic responsibility.

[4588686]

Yep, life sucks. 

 

Well, some people who are alive definitely suck.  :ahem:

 

 

Taking care of the misfortunate is my Christian responsibility, not my civic responsibility.

 

 

Actually, it is.  The country you live in decided, through legal means, to use tax dollars to support the poor.  If you don't like that you're welcome to go away and never come back :)  You could just try to get them to overturn those laws but given the genuine, unadulterated awfulness of what you said I'd really rather you just leave.

[Winchester]

I’d be interested to learn more with regards to this approach.
Cooperation between whom?
Who makes the law? Who enforces it?
Surely the unruly perpetrator needs to be forced to accept a punishment.If the government doesn’t provide a safety net (with tax money), providing basic food and health needs for people that can’t afford it, then I seriously doubt there are enough charities or wealthy humanists to sustain the needy. Who is going to give these people life skills, who is going to encourage them to learn marketable skills or to get out and hunting for jobs?Without rulers how do we create rules, how do we enforce rules? How do we organise ourselves to build and maintain required infrastructure?

If people really want roads, what would prevent them from cooperating to build them voluntarily?

 

Commercial airplanes are massively advanced pieces of equipment. No one sticks a gun in my ribs to build one. There are private roads, private bridges.

 

Common law arose under conditions far different from the modern state, and the Law Merchant arose out of cooperation, and the necessity to deal with the problems of multiple jurisdictions.

 

Who knows what all would happen. Prior to the welfare state, there were not hoards of people dying in the streets. In fact, poverty was declining.

[KnightofChrist]

Blah!

Edited February 22, 2013 by KnightofChrist

[Winchester]

Well, some people who are alive definitely suck.  :ahem:

 

 

 

 

Actually, it is.  The country you live in decided, through legal means, to use tax dollars to support the poor.  If you don't like that you're welcome to go away and never come back :)  You could just try to get them to overturn those laws but given the genuine, unadulterated awfulness of what you said I'd really rather you just leave.

 

 

[4588686]

 

 

 

Who here has ever, ever, ever, ever, ever said that legality confers morality?

If people really want roads, what would prevent them from cooperating to build them voluntarily?

 

That's what public roads are.  Oh, wait, I forgot that you were being held in the country against your will.  

 

Who knows what all would happen. Prior to the welfare state, there were not hoards of people dying in the streets. In fact, poverty was declining.

Poverty was declining in the 1930's?

[Winchester]

Who here has ever, ever, ever, ever, ever said that legality confers morality?[/qiuote]

Are you saying it's moral for me to take money from you personally, if I'm helping someone? Edited February 22, 2013 by Winchester

[4588686]

Are you saying it's moral for me to take money from you personally, if I'm helping someone?

 

 

Maybe. You'd definitely have a much stronger case if I knowingly and willingly chose to live in a community where I knew that a majority of the community had voted to give you that power and the money that I made in the first place depended on the security the community provided and the communities willingness to create a market within which I could make money by reserving the right to use force to enforce contractural relationships I entered into with the individuals who paid me.  

Edited February 22, 2013 by Hasan

[Winchester]

Maybe. You'd definitely have a much stronger case if I knowingly and willingly chose to live in a community where I knew that a majority of the community had voted to give you that power.

Except that's not really in the founding document. You're very accepting of the common arguments. I'm not. I used to be, though.

Anyway, you just described legal proceeding conferring the moral right to use violence to take property.


The majority was never consulted. A lot of people had no voice in the government. Spooner is right about the Constitution. Edited February 22, 2013 by Winchester

[God the Father]

 given the genuine, unadulterated awfulness of what you said I'd really rather you just leave.

 

When the earners and capital flee--taking the tax base with them--the unproductive who remain will pursue them, settle among them, and elect each other to public office in order to perpetuate their lifestyle. That, or die slowly among the ruins of the former civilization they sucked the last drop of blood from.

 

The nation of America is not immune to the pattern that destroyed Detroit, Cleveland, Memphis, and Birmingham. As the wealth-producers fled to the suburbs to escape the civic governments that redistributed their wealth to the degenerates, fulfilling the campaign promises that got them elected, only degeneracy remained. Detroit is leading the charge to insolvency; it's civil services and the hundreds of thousands who depend upon them are in jeopardy.

 

While you gleefully imagine a country where resentful earners pack up and leave, Detroit wishes a few million or so would come back.