Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
How is that scenario even relevant to the discussion?
It is simply an example that shows even limit Libertarians use violence against society members.
And yes the people through their government can take what you have to the rules established. If you don't like them all you need to do is get them changed.
It is simply an example that shows even limit Libertarians use violence against society members.
And yes the people through their government can take what you have to the rules established. If you don't like them all you need to do is get them changed.
I don't disagree with that.
It still doesn't change the fact that what you propose is immoral, unjust and unfair and against the basic human decency.
It still doesn't change the fact that what you propose is immoral, unjust and unfair and against the basic human decency.
Nope. In fact it is the other way around. Any human society that does not provide reasonable care to its weakest members is immoral, unjust and unfair and against the basic human decency. Those who take advantage of a society must aid the collective including its weakest members.
Nope. In fact it is the other way around. Any human society that does not provide reasonable care to its weakest members is immoral, unjust and unfair and against the basic human decency. Those who take advantage of a society must aid the collective including its weakest members.
I agree that a human society should provide reasonable care to its weakest members. Nobody is arguing against that.
It should be done on a voluntary basis though. If it has to be a taxation basis, then everybody should be paying the same amount.
Please name those who took advantage of a society.
He/she is arguing against it, with the Libertarian fantasy that people will willingly donate the needed money, which I've made clear is false
At current levels of private giving if all government aid is shut off we would face massive shortfalls. In a country where 57 million people don’t have health insurance and one in five children live in poverty, falling support for government welfare programs can’t be defended on the grounds that Americans remain individually charitable.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
