Some people claim social programs are necessary because they are a "safety net". However, this is not really true. The government is comprised of us ("We the people..."), and it is also funded by us. We (you, me, and all of our fellow tax-payers) are the "safety net", the government is just 1 possible method of distribution.
I believe that nothing much would change if the programs went away. After all, we (the tax-payers) and our money have not disappeared, so it is not a question of available resources, it is a question of distribution. With the programs gone, we could each choose our own method of distribution (person to person, Red Cross, United Way, Salvation Army, chruches, temples, etc). I prefer this method because it embodies the idea of freedom ("land of the free, home of the brave").
I am open to your opinions, but please, if all you are going to do is call me names, then don't bother.
2006-07-18
09:53:34
·
15 answers
·
asked by
Aegis of Freedom
7
in
Government