Subject:
|
Re: Libertarian stuff
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 13 Jan 2000 16:59:29 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1471 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Frank Filz writes:
> Dave Schuler wrote:
> If individuals and corporations are incapable of charity and community
> duty, then why do we have it currently?
Many people and corporations contribute to charities simply for the tax
write-off. Beyond that, some people contribute, I have no doubt, because of a
sense of spiritual duty or because it's proper to do--and that's laudable,
certainly.
Maybe my stance has come across as too black-and-white; I don't doubt that
people and corporations donate to charity, but I do believe that a primary
motivation is the tax break they incur as a result. In addition, I don't
think society can base much of its future on the hopes that people and
corporations will continue to be charitable if no attendant tax break is
forthcoming.
> As far as I know, PEOPLE created our government. You don't seem to be
> preaching the "god" factor.
I'm not sure what you're saying with this...
> Also, I see "deliberate, calculated, and organized neglect" of the needy
> in current society. Show me a system which will not have that, and I'll
> listen.
It just seems that Libertopia establishes a caste system (as I think Matt
Miller observed elsewhere) that becomes almost impossible to breach after even
one generation. In addition--and this might very well not be a tenet of
Libertopia but a fringe injected into this argument by one participant--I've
gotten a sense that society will step in with its "say" about how the children
of the irresponsible are to be raised. I guess I don't understand, in a
society of minimal government, how anyone can be held accountable in such a
case, or who would determine the fitness of the people who step in on the
child's behalf.
Dave!
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Libertarian stuff
|
| (...) Two things. First off, how did the tax break get there in the first place? Second, the tax break just makes it cheaper to contribute to an approved charity, it doesn't improve the actual bottom line. (...) To be honest, I have yet to see any (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Libertarian stuff
|
| (...) Liberama is disqualified because it relies on the assumption that in its great society people and corporations will be motivated by higher ethics and community responsibility--an assumption which is fine on paper but has never come close to (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
209 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
