<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
On 05/11/2011 08:25 PM, Mr Jones wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:BANLkTinysSc=JodUEdAAcmM04vqRk-zddg@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 3:39 PM, Kelly
Anderson <span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:kellycoinguy@gmail.com">kellycoinguy@gmail.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt
0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);
padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="im">2011/5/10 Mr Jones <<a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:mrjones2020@gmail.com">mrjones2020@gmail.com</a>>:<br>
</div>
<div class="im">> Particularly interesting to me were these
few sentences...<br>
>><br>
>> Yes, I believe that coercion<br>
>> is a prima facie bad. But I also believe that it
is prima facie bad<br>
>> for people to fail to get what they deserve, or for
their basic needs<br>
>> to be unmet. These moral beliefs, to my mind, have
just as firm a<br>
>> standing as my opposition to coercion. I see no
reason to believe<br>
>> that in a conflict between them, the opposition to
coercion should<br>
>> always trump.<br>
><br>
> I agree the govt doesn't get to dig into your pocket
for any lil' ole thing<br>
> they want/need/desire. But until people have their
basic needs met, society<br>
> deserves the burden, as a whole.<br>
<br>
</div>
I agree with this, except for the "as a whole" part. I think
there are<br>
enough generous people, at least in a country like America, to
care<br>
for the truly indigent. </blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I would love to think that's true. And if I knew it to be
true, I'd be all for govt being shrunk beyond belief. But
that'd require more than just meals/shelter for the indigent.
We'd still need roads, water, etc.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Are you claiming people cannot get all those things without making
them a government project?<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:BANLkTinysSc=JodUEdAAcmM04vqRk-zddg@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div> </div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt
0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);
padding-left: 1ex;">The problem with government is you end up
with<br>
a program like Food Stamps that now serves 35 million people
(12% of<br>
the population). These are not all indigent. I know, I was on
Food<br>
Stamps myself for a while and I was by no means indigent at
the time.<br>
I just qualified for the program. I'm pretty sure I would
qualify now.<br>
I am not indigent, but I could steal money from all of you (at
least<br>
the Americans who pay taxes) by going down and applying.<br>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>In order to qualify for foodstamps, you've got to have a
fairly minimal income. A 4 person family (2 adults/2kids) has
to have an income under something like $36k/yr to qualify (not
certain, but I'm fairly close I believe). That's a pretty low
income. Unless you're living in some crime ridden inner-city,
with horribly performing school systems, you'd have a hard
time getting by. Is this really how we should expect our
families to live?</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Irrelevant. Anyone who wants to help anyone they consider poorer
than they can stand can. They just can't use a gun to force those
that don't feel as they do to do the same. Which is where
government is a bad idea in that government has legalized force
available to it and does precisely this sort of thing with it.
Goodbye freedom. To add insult to injury you get more poverty
instead of less by involving the government. <br>
<br>
- samantha<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>