A comparison of government controlled charity (welfare) and private charity. With example of $100
government:
1. cost of IRS to enforce tax collection, cost of federal prisons, courts, buraucracy, re-election funds, etc, recipient gets tiny fraction of $100
2. recipient gets cash: can buy beer, cigarettes, drugs, candy, etc, rampant fraud
3. no choice, when money is wasted / lost I still pay taxes next month
4. my car broke but I must pay taxes so I'm forced into debt
private (i.e. church, salvation army, etc):
1. low or no administrative cost, recipient gets full $100
2. recipient gets food or medicine, not cash, virtually no fraud
3. choice: Red Cross wasted $100, so next month I give to United Way instead
4. my car broke so I keep my $100 this month, make it up later, not forced into debt.
These are just a couple quick points that prove privatization is the only logical method to help the needy. We must help the needy, but not through the government. Can you refute?
2007-02-20
08:01:03
·
16 answers
·
asked by
Aegis of Freedom
7
in
Politics