Explain.
2007-04-16 09:09:24 · 8 answers · asked by Dr. Adriano Nostromo 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
Of course. Who do you suppose cared for the poor, the widows, and orphans before Nannified Government came along? It used to be the Church's mandate.
2007-04-16 09:18:50 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Very likely. The less money people are sending off to the government, the more money they'll have to donate to private charities anyway; since most people possess a very charitable nature when they aren't forced to, the poor and handicapped would likely be far better off than they are now. As for quality of care, businesses would be able to compete with one another (who, after all, can compete with the government and have even the slightest hope of winning?), and the company that provided the best care at the best cost would receive the most customers. It wouldn't take very long for such a society to become infinitely more beneficial to the aforementioned groups than any government organization could ever be.
2007-04-16 16:31:02 · answer #2 · answered by Richard S 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
It would be a crap shoot. Some of today's charities do little more then suck money out of generous people, and actually give pennies on the dollar to help the poor. Some of the charities do a fantastic job of helping.
Likewise, we have good and bad politicians.
One thing to remember, though, is that we have some control over our government, and no control over charities.
2007-04-16 22:55:12 · answer #3 · answered by John B 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
In a Libertarian society charities would do a much better job of taking care of people in need. If the government did not take such a huge portion of our money we would be able donate a lot more to charities. The economy would be in much better condition, so there wouldn't be as many poor people to begin with. We have much more control over charities. We can always stop donating to them. It is not advisable to stop donating to the government. They tend to send men with guns to your house if you do.
2007-04-20 01:34:50 · answer #4 · answered by Aaron K 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I would say probably yes. Just look how many private organizations are in the frontlines against disease and handicapped. Private organizations and donations drive research and solutions at a far greater rate than government. Just look at the politization of stem cell research, which is cutting edge and how the private sector (and now foriegn governments) are leading over Us government investment in the stem cell research.
2007-04-16 16:15:00 · answer #5 · answered by cbgaviniii 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Private do better and have done better and will do better.
The one thing the government can do better is waste money.
To show this all you need to do is look at how the government spends your money. 300 for a hammer and 1500 for a toilet seat. Look at welfare and you can see that government spends 85000 to give a family 18000.
2007-04-16 16:18:45 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
I run a private charity. Our paperwork consists of one page. Our clients are not sent through a maze of beaurocratic hell. We just determine the need and take care of it. End of story.
2007-04-16 16:14:13 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Probably not.
If you want an explanation you'll have to figure it out yourself.
2007-04-16 16:13:09 · answer #8 · answered by bestonnet_00 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋