Why are Libertarians/Ron Paul against a government provided safety net ?

because its not about safety, its about siphoning off that money into the controllers pockets.

so you're saying everyone should have a right to free medicine, free medicare, etc. Why don't you go live in Cuba?

reply to post by wlord


Why would I need to go to Cuba when I have free health care here in the UK.

Originally posted by mikejohnson2006
I tend to agree with the Republicans more than I agree with the Democrats Im not against a Government helping People I just think the State Governments should help the Poor the Disabled and the Elderly I support a State Government social safety net.

+Mike, if you are still invested in the belief that there is some substantial difference betw. the Democrats and the Republicans, you should do a bit more study. We have had alternating administrations and Congresses wherein first one and then the other party had control. And yet we have seen a steady, unrelenting move towards more and more Governmental control over our lives and Society in general.

This whole question of a "social safety net" cannot be understood in light of today's status quo. It will have to be dealt with the way things are now, but to understand it we must go back in time. Today the system is so screwed up that it makes no sense in trying to understand it within its own paradigm.

There was once a time in the United States when there were no "social safety nets". In that time the disadvantaged in whatever way were cared for by their immediate communities. Not the Federal government. Not the States' governments. But by the local community in which these unfortunates lived.

You may believe that "private charities" would not be able to help all of these unfortunates of our Society if you looked at these charities in light of today's situation. Why? Because today the Government, at all levels, has been leveeing taxes upon those who do work and who do create wealth for decades. To the degree that the Government takes away the wages and savings of the "fortunate", to that same degree, the fortunate are impoverished. They have less money. And less money means less to give to charity!

So you cannot look at social welfare today and extrapolate as to what needs to be done to (a) abolish welfare, getting the Government out of the "safety net", and (b) still have the unfortunate cared for. The American People are naturally generous and good-hearted. Given the chance they will take care of their own, IF they are not so impoverished by the Government that they cannot.

Neither political party really cares about these unfortunates. Nor do they care about you and me, if we are among those who still can work. These two mirror-image parties are controlled by the Oligarchy, and that Oligarchy is certainly not concerned! They are using this whole welfare system to gain control over all citizens. They use the welfare carrot to dangle in front of the eyes of those stuck in the lower classes of Society, as a way to buy votes and perpetuate themselves in office.

What is needed is a Third Political Party independent of the status quo. Barring that, what is needed is a true patriot, committed to the Constitution and the Republic, regardless of what Party he is affiliated with.

reply to post by bozzchem


Ah, but had you read the entire Bible you would have found that there are specific instructions for caring for the less fortunate in society. Does the word tithing mean anything to you? Alms for the poor perhaps? It's only stealing if it's involuntary. We're supposed to want to help... albeit within a corruption-free and efficient system.