02-18-2022, 12:57 PM
(02-17-2022, 07:37 PM)pyropappy Wrote:(02-17-2022, 04:50 PM)Duchess Wrote:(02-17-2022, 12:49 PM)pyropappy Wrote: how about getting government out of the charity business altogether?
It's no secret that I'm socially liberal, but that doesn't preclude me from being fiscally conservative and I am. Whether one has a little of it, or a lot, money must be managed in a way that it works for you in the best possible way. I don't view most programs that help the less fortunate as being a waste. When it helps them to be productive members of society it helps more than them, it helps their community. It's a positive thing and whether it's big government or little, I think their help is needed because in most cases they have the resources needed and I'm not strictly referring to their money.
well said, but the government waste and corruption is rampant; the private sector has proven time and time again they can provide more help in a timelier fashion than government. then the tax money usurped, can remain in your pocket. the other major problem, states like California get far more money in government charity than taxes collected in their state. why should the other 49 states subsidize CA's frivolous spending?
What you're saying doesn't relate to public/private sector, it is entirely related to scale. Huge corporations like Walmart are just as corrupt and inefficient as the federal government is. Adam Smith was arguing in support of decentralization, and that has to apply to both the public and private sectors to be beneficial.