Hi Logan.
Interesting Post.
Are you familiar with the Melinda and Bill Gates Foundation? It had an annual budget about equivalent to the UN's WHO prior to Warren Buffett's recent contribution. I don't know how they compare now. Care to speculate on their relative effectiveness?
Recently, a number of prominent figures were querried on what the single best thing to make the world a better place would be. Howard Gardner of Harvard replied that it would be for the governments of the world to confiscate the excess wealth of the richest and distribute it to the poor in a way to create greater economic equality. In other words, Good Bye Melinda and Bill from the World Stage.
What is it that makes folks like Gardner think they know better than Bill Gates what should be done with his money?
Fred
I do see politics in your future....a nice agenda / plank...Senator..please unseat Schumer or Clinton!
Hi KT -
Why limit your view to the present administration? Hasn't government almost always failed or been inefficient? The Great Society? Welfare programs? Medicare and Medicaid? Social Security? The workings of government belong more to Congress than to any President.
The rich today are not the same as the Gilded Age rich....today, anyone with a great idea can climb to the top....look at the people behind Google. Class envy is not a reason to punish those who get ahead.
There is much greater movement from lower to higher income...the gap is not the issue. As Jesus said, the poor will always be with us. The problems we face in this country are puny compared to the rest of the world. Of course, we have a lot of work to do to make things more secure and to improve the quality of life...but there will never be a perfect society.
What does "justice" mean to you?
In my experience, the term "social justice" has been in reality a code word for various socialist solutions to perceived societal/economic/legal /environmental etc. ills....however, it may mean different things to different people. Philosophical interpretations by Rawls or Catholic social teaching or Green Party ideology etc. are not necessarily identical.
KT wrote:
"It may be necessary to tweak the program to account for increased longevity and fewer children per family since the inception of the program, but the basic idea is sound."
I don't think "tweaking" will save S.S. and especially not Medicare or Medicaid. Crunch time is coming.
KT wrote:
"mean-spirited"
This term always comes up when economic realities are being debated.
Because one has a different view of tax policy does not make one "mean spirited" etc. I think making people dependent upon government for their needs is very "mean spirited" as it destroys families, pride and individual growth.
KT wrote:
"government cannot and should not provide for the needs of
the people. As you have probably surmised by now, I cannot support this ideological position."
I disagree with the concept of a cradle to grave Nanny state.
Where does it end?
Government religion next?
Government food control?
Government housing for all?
Central state planning?
There are extremes at both ends....hopefully we can differ around the middle.
Oh well....we can agree to disagree.
As much as we want to encourage discussion on our board, I just want to remind everyone about point #3 in our general guidelines. While letting others know what political views we have is fine, debating them here is discouraged, because we have such a broad spectrum of opinions in that area, and we don't want people who are coming here for religious reasons to feel unwelcome because of the political views they may hold.
KT....thanks for the "coffee hour" chat.
When I see the inefficiency in a simple banking transaction (my soon-to-be-ex bank has done some incredibly stupid things lately) I can't help but smile at the prospect of the free market saving us all.
When I see the craziness involved in accomplishing anything at the DMV (or whatever we now have in GA, as it seems to change every other year) I can't help but smile at the prospect of the government saving us all.
Often the answer is not 1 or 0, but 1 and 0.
The big difference is that you can choose a different bank....
Yes, but you can choose a new bank anytime due to the free market efficiencies at work...but all of the other actions are not sure things (other than a decision to emigrate if accepted by the new country).
If you had a U.S. Govt bank as the only choice....you would be out of luck....DMV tellers.