Quote:
|
Quote by: GAdams On a theoretical level, a government doens't have the right to take from you to feed others, unless we accept that might makes right. In which case, there is also no justification other than whim that governemnt should at all be giving it's money to poor states. |
Well according to you the government doesn't have the right to take much money, really, at all. But like I said. This is a practical threat. It is in the interest of national security which is one of the ways the Constitution allows government to tax.
Quote:
|
And finally, I would argue that you are simply keeping foreign states in a state of dependance rather than fostering their own growth through such measures. But this law wouldn't be about helping poor people, it'd be about making rich people feel good.
|
Well, by that argument, all charity is ineffective.
A flat out argument against that is John D. Rockefeller provided major funding for Spelman College. Gave 80 million (in 1900s) to the University of Chicago when it was just a small Baptist College. Both are huge Colleges. You can read the rest here.
John D. Rockefeller - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"To help an inefficient, ill-located, unnecessary school is a waste...it is highly probable that enough money has been squandered on unwise educational projects to have built up a national system of higher education adequate to our needs, if the money had been properly directed to that end."
--John D. Rockefeller.
Charity needs to be wisely spent, not thrown around. Yet when it is, it doesn't create dependence, it actually helps.
So none of that dependence garbage. It makes for a poor argument (and is generally lacking in evidence.)
Quote:
|
Quote by: Ghook OH please! There are so many flaws in that rationale its overwelming |
Thank you very much for remembering I'm playing devil's advocate and for pointing said flaws. I mean your stunning insight into my post only surpassed by that wonderfully polite tone you have adopted in your post.
Quote:
|
Quote by: GAdams It is not the solution. It is the basic reason welfare doesn't work. This is an inexperience naive proposal by Comrade Obama! |
Yes it is the solution. (we could do this for a while). And calling Obama a communist is childish name-calling and achieves no purpose but to annoy his supporters.
Oh and if you have actually responded to these things. I haven't had time to read your other posts addressed to other people, so please reiterate your argument.