Ask the Libertarian

[turin08]

I was actually talking about your policies towards humanitarian involvement and isolationism and such. The problem is with your stance is that it shows absolutely no compassion towards the people of other countries. I mean according to your stance America would have cared nothing about the Holocaust, the genocide in Rwanda or the suffering of millions of people in the Sudan. It's just quite heartless and selfish. As for your point about welfare its nice as an ideal, ironically like socialism, but in practice it hasn't worked and thats why we need welfare. The truth is charities have too little money and don't have the organisation needed to reach everyone. People fall through the net when its the governement but more would fall through if it were just up to the charities.

[SomeRandomDude]

I was actually talking about your policies towards humanitarian involvement and isolationism and such. The problem is with your stance is that it shows absolutely no compassion towards the people of other countries. I mean according to your stance America would have cared nothing about the Holocaust, the genocide in Rwanda or the suffering of millions of people in the Sudan. It's just quite heartless and selfish. As for your point about welfare its nice as an ideal, ironically like socialism, but in practice it hasn't worked and thats why we need welfare. The truth is charities have too little money and don't have the organisation needed to reach everyone. People fall through the net when its the governement but more would fall through if it were just up to the charities.

So we go in on humanitarian reasons, reorganize the country into a "democracy," watch it fall into civil war and get stuck occupying it. Very compassionate.

So government has this vast amount of money? Take the money we're giving to the government for teaching pre-schoolers sex ed, and let the people give it to charity. Now the charities have money.

But the point I'm making is that you cannot force people to be generous, which is what government welfare is attempting to do. The fundamental right to property is more important than redistributing wealth so that everyone can live comfortably. Taxation for the purpose of welfare is a redistribution of property, and is thus a violation of individual sovereignty and the right of the individual to decide for himself and his family was is best for them. No, instead big brother has to make sure that you're doing "the right thing."

[turin08]

Do you honestly believe that if the government didn't tax the money they use for welfare the people would give that money to charity? If so you are deluded. They would keep it for themselves because, as you are so quick to point out in other threads, all humans are naturally greedy. You seem to think that it would be different in your country because you are supposedly a christian nation. But you are forgetting that America has a god it follows before Jesus, the great god Profit. After all you hold the 'fundamental right to property' up like its the holy of holies but even that is a totally unbiblical sentiment. The Bible teaches that none of actually have any property. All we have is God's and when we give we are merely giving back to him what is his. If you were in charge you would stop welfare and millions would suffer as a result.

[Gate Troll]

Do you honestly believe that if the government didn't tax the money they use for welfare the people would give that money to charity? If so you are deluded. They would keep it for themselves because, as you are so quick to point out in other threads, all humans are naturally greedy. You seem to think that it would be different in your country because you are supposedly a christian nation. But you are forgetting that America has a god it follows before Jesus, the great god Profit. After all you hold the 'fundamental right to property' up like its the holy of holies but even that is a totally unbiblical sentiment. The Bible teaches that none of actually have any property. All we have is God's and when we give we are merely giving back to him what is his. If you were in charge you would stop welfare and millions would suffer as a result.

[begin spiel] Ah, but it isn't our problem. The government isn't responsible for being a crutch for every poor person in existence. The government can't make us give our money to poor people. The government is responsible for governing and taxing people for welfare is ridiculous. We shouldn't be forced to support our poor neighbors. That is not its job. Please don't think with your emotions, think with your brain. [/end spiel]

I feel like this:    
I'm the person and I'm banging your head against the wall called 'reason'.

[turin08]

And again we come back to this ridiculous idea that poor=lazy. And you say that you use reason.

[MR. Lurtzy]

But do poor people deserve our hard-earned money?

[Gate Troll]

And again we come back to this ridiculous idea that poor=lazy. And you say that you use reason.

Modified. Poor person.

[sickofpalantirs]

see here we go...he's right...we tend to think that poor=lazy. thats not always the case.

do poor people deserve our hard earned money? no.  do we deserve Gods hardearned grace? no.

something to think about.

also I see what your saying, the government shouldn't use out taxes to pay for welfare...so it should use them to buy fun new toys and weapons and not to help the poor and needy (legitimately poor)?
just throwing stuff out there.

[Gate Troll]

see here we go...he's right...we tend to think that poor=lazy. thats not always the case.

do poor people deserve our hard earned money? no.  do we deserve Gods hardearned grace? no.

something to think about.

also I see what your saying, the government shouldn't use out taxes to pay for welfare...so it should use them to buy fun new toys and weapons and not to help the poor and needy (legitimately poor)?
just throwing stuff out there.

Not toys and weapons but just cutting the tax that goes toward welfare and letting charity count toward the taxes you would have to pay anyway. Also I believe the legitimately poor such as the crippled, the blind, the deaf, those incapacitated mentality etc... should be supported, once again by some of the money you would have to pay anyway.  I argue against giving money to lazy people. Not people who actually need it survive day-to-day.

[MR. Lurtzy]

But the government didn't force God to give us all his grace...

[sickofpalantirs]

no...just saying we shouldn't complain when people want to use our money to help the poor.  And I believe it was turin, who had a valid point. Would we really use that money for charity? when it came down to it, would we? or would we spend it on something else.

again gate troll, you are implying that poor people are disabled or lazy.  not always the case.

[MR. Lurtzy]

But you see, it is not the government's place to decide how much of my money that I work for, should go to people that have less than me. It is not their business.

[Elf_Lvr]

Well, we could help fix up the multiple billions of dollars we have in national debt.

Not like anyone would do that.

Thing is - the government either can't or doesn't care enough to differentiate between people who really need help and people who take advantage of the system.

If the average American could dip into his or her own pocket a little bit more to help the needy, then the government shouldn't have to. That's the point, really - if people were more charitable, we wouldn't have to rely on the government for charity, because that's not really what it's there for.

[turin08]

But do poor people deserve our hard-earned money?

Well lets see, what does the Bible say about this.

"Sell your possessions and give to the poor. Provide purses for yourselves that will not wear out, a treasure in heaven that will not be exhausted, where no thief comes near and no moth destroys." Luke 12:33

Notice that it is not "Sell your possessions and give to the poor (if you think they deserve it. If in your infinite wisdom you belive that they're not quite working hard enough, you might as well keep that money for yourself.)

If you were looking at this with a Biblical perspective then you wouldn't be so hung up about YOUR MONEY because its not YOUR MONEY its God's, as is everything you own. If you were really living in the full truth of the gospel you would want to give away your money freely to all who need it more than you do.

[Gate Troll]

But do poor people deserve our hard-earned money?

Well lets see, what does the Bible say about this.

"Sell your possessions and give to the poor. Provide purses for yourselves that will not wear out, a treasure in heaven that will not be exhausted, where no thief comes near and no moth destroys." Luke 12:33

Notice that it is not "Sell your possessions and give to the poor (if you think they deserve it. If in your infinite wisdom you belive that they're not quite working hard enough, you might as well keep that money for yourself.)

If you were looking at this with a Biblical perspective then you wouldn't be so hung up about YOUR MONEY because its not YOUR MONEY its God's, as is everything you own. If you were really living in the full truth of the gospel you would want to give away your money freely to all who need it more than you do.

So why haven't you given all your money away? And your computer? You obviously don't live by what you teach if you haven't sold your computer and by the very fact you posted I know you didn't. 

One thing that all Christians can agree on is treating others politely...please try to keep that in mind.
~NB