How to libertarians and people to the far right justify a society where the less fortunate are not helped?

Question

I understand that there is a big belief that people should be responsible for themselves and that its unfair for anyone to have to pay to help others out...but in a free capitalistic society where there will always be the have's and the have not's (which is all fair), how can anyone suggest that its not worth at least a small portion of everyone's fortune to help the least fortunate people?

Please don't just lump less fortunate into just being lazy people who would rather sit on the couch than work, as this is not an accurate description of all the less forutnate....no more than a greedy fat cat trying to exploit everyone possible describes anyone successful.

Let me first say thanks for all the great answers. I asked this merely to hear the persepctive of other like minded people.

I have alwasy beelived that giving is good and moral but should be up to the individual and not forced. In addition, I do not beelive it should be up to politicians to decide where my charity should be go (welfare) as the governemtn has a long history of screwing eveyrthing up. I much prefer a result oriented charity to help others - its interesting to hear many other points of view on this, thanks so much.

****I feel the need to respond to jonesohms – you have drawn assumptions about me that are baseless. If you had simply taken the time to visit my profile and see the nature of my Q&A you would know how off base you are, but evidently you were more interested in your condescension and anonymous reporting all your so called good deeds (yes, everyone is a millionaire on the internet too!) than sincerely answering the question.. Feel free to show some dignity and apologize within the additional notes – actions speak louder than words after all.

Answer 1

It is a matter of where the help comes from. Traditionally, people received help from their families, churches and local community.

In my opinion, liberals have damaged these institutions over the past 50 years. The result is that the less fortunate must rely on the federal government for assitance. Like everything the government does, the quality of assistance is lower, the price is higher, and it turns free citizens into dependent children.

Answer 2

Ever see those panhandlers on the street corner at stoplights? Let's just say that the light stays red for about a minute. So every two minutes they have a chance to make some money. Say that they make 1 dollar every two lights. Thats 15 dollars and hour, then you have the tourist or person that feels sorry for them and slips them a 10 or even a 20. We'll say this happens ever two hours. So all in all we have an average of 25 dollars an hour for 8 hours a day is 200 tax free dollars. Some people are smarter and more privilaged than others; it had to begin somewhere. You're right, not everyone has the means to make it. However I know for a fact that every child can go to school and get an education, the choices they make when they hit the 9th grade is all on them. If they want to study and work hard, they can get scholarships. No? Student loans. No again? The military(worked for me). I was one of those less fortunate people and I made the right decisions. Now at the ripe old age of 23 I work for a fortune 500 company pulling in six figures. I work hard for my money and that is exactly what it is, MY money. I don't mind paying taxes, we need them. I just don't like the fact that someone is mooching off of my hard work. I can understand if there is something wrong with the person (disabled in some way), but lazy is no excuse.

Answer 3

Mannix,
I am surprised that you believe people would not help each other unless forced to.

In my experience most people are ready and willing to help those in need if there is any possible way they can spare time, money, or material goods to do so. Of course, each individual will decide which of the myriad charities they will support. Our community calendar is full of fund-raising events for all sorts of causes. Sporting events, musical events, bake sales, car washes, auctions, barbecues, book sales, dance-a-thons, cook-offs, and rummage sales are just a few of the many creative methods used to raise money for those in need. These are put on by church groups, school groups, businesses, fraternities & sororities, clubs, and sometimes just the friends and families of the person who needs support. It would be difficult to live here and not have contributed to at least one such fundraiser, unless you chose to live in complete isolation from society.

When people are naturally this giving, why would you want to use the force of government against them, to take their hard-earned money and decide for them how it should be distributed?

P.S. May I ask where you live? It sounds like your experience with other people is quite different than mine.

Answer 4

Thank you for this question...It does seem shameful that Americans have allowed themselves to fall into the pit of indifference. Although many on Y/A are merely instigators there are those who have little considerations for the plight of others and this brings a terrible image to our nation as a collective people. I think if the challenges of life were to designate them as recipients of some catastrophe they might appreciate a helping hand. How does a child determine the choices to create wealth or poverty? How can a rational human being judge such a child?

The responsibilities should not be simply on the backs of those who readily give as some do but on the shoulders of every member of society to some degree and even the greedy who wouldn't give for any reason but who would certainly reap the benefits were they themselves challenged accordingly.

Answer 5

Great question. I wish I had the answer. It's just galling that most people are so wrapped up in themselves and their material belongings that they don't care what happens to their fellow man. I have seen many posts on Y!A stating that I worked for the money so I should keep it. Yes they did work for it but instead of using that money to buy another IPOD or car why don't they donate so that a hungry child can have breakfast before school? Not all less fortunate are lazy. An astounding amount of Americans are only 1 paycheck away from bankruptcy yet they go to work everyday to just get by while those that do better spend money on materialistic garbage. I make about $23,000 a year. I donate money and time to charity's because I know somebody will need the help and it makes me a better person.

Answer 6

Libertarians are not necessarily conservatives and are not far right. Libertarians believe in semi-open borders and the legalization of drugs as well as abortion.

However, they do believe that every person has right to make their own way without relying on someone else to build the path.

I would ask the question, if far left liberals are so giving to the poor, why are most of the liberal politicians rich. Why aren't the liberal actors and business people broke because they gave all their money away. Hypocrites.

Answer 7

there are plenty of charity's and non-profit organizations that give help. it's not that libertarians believe the less fortunate should not be helped, the philosophy behind it is the federal government can't understand the specific needs of local communities and the government is not effecient in addresseing local situations. with less government regulation, the free market will keep prices fair because prices are essentially determned by the consumer. a libertarian believes in no income taxes so we can all keep more of our money we earn.

Answer 8

I don't think anyone is saying not to help. It is the form of help that is the difference. Liberals tend to want to give handouts while conservatives are more interested in a hand up. What I am saying is that conservatives want programs that will help these people be self sufficient in the long run. Things like job training and schooling will work better than just passing out a check every month.

Answer 9

It's not that at all. It's that the Constitution doesn't allow for the federal government to be taxing the people or spending money on such charity.

Let these words from James Madison, "Father of the Constitution" sink in:

"Charity is no part of the legislative duty of the government."

"I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents."

Charity (welfare, medicare, social security) is not within the Constitutional scope of the federal government.

Either the Constitution is the law of this country or it is not.

Answer 10

It isn't that we do not care about those who are less fortunate.
What makes us raving mad is the the government makes us take care of not only the less fortunate but the mentally ill and the ones abusing the system.
We would rather it be done by us for the charities we want.