Do you agree with Nobelist Economist Milton Friedman on Government & The Poor?

Question News & Politics

Do you agree with Nobelist Economist Milton Friedman on Government & The Poor?

by Grooms for Governor Posted October 16, 2009 15:58:00

19 answers
Read all 23 comments

There is one basic underlying fallacy in this whole set of social security and welfare measures, the fallacy that it is feasible and possible to do good with other peoples money. That view has two flaws, if I’m going to do good with other peoples money it means I first have to take it away from them. That means that the welfare state philosophy of doing good with other peoples money at its very bottom is a philosophy of violence and coercion. Second place is that very people spend other people’s money as carefully as they spend their own.

Answers
Results

Sort By

Most Raves
Least Raves
Oldest
Newest

text size

Comments

CDMINSC October 19, 2009 13:49:19

Answered: Yes, 100% Greater Freedom, Less Government = Greater Wealth, Less Poverty
I find it amazing how the school systems over the past 40 years have dumbed down Americans to the point they can't even make much sense in responding to these real concerns. #1 - the Federal Government of the USA has no constitutional right to interfere with the private sector health care industry what-so-ever. This is a trumped up case to take more control of your lives. So far they have given away our money to the point that the dollar is worth 25% less now than it was last month. The stimulus package saved or created exactly 0 jobs in this country. They have control of major automakers in this country only saving the union membership (for a little while) since GM will go bankrupt shortly anyway. They will soon be talking about taking away all your jobs unless you pay Al Gore's company to buy CO2 credits. And now they are about to take away the best healthcare providers on the planet so they can control it through the government. WHAT ARE WE THINKING? It's probably too late to take all this back anyway.
+1
morning40oz~NeoRadical October 17, 2009 10:03:04

Answered: Yes, 100% Greater Freedom, Less Government = Greater Wealth, Less Poverty
Has it escaped the public what a bang-up job our government has done thus far? We weren't allowed to see the Great Experiment's results because our government sold us out on December 23, 1913 to the Federal Reserve. Next, we had FDR touting his Socialist chicken in every pot rhetoric, and the masses ate it up like candy. The public has allowed our roads and shores to be Socialized, begged for our retirement to be Socialized, our education to be Socialized so that we now have a dumbed-down America. How proud can we be that we are ranked 7th and as low as 17th in our education compared to the rest of the world? Most people have, rightfully, given up on any idea that Social Security will be an option in roughly twenty years...or less.

The public doesn't even realize we are neither a republic or a democracy anymore. We are in a corporate communist state brought on by the gradualist agenda of the Fabians. Our Federal Reserve system is plank number five of Marx's Communist manifesto. Income tax, once again, Marx.

I have to question if America is still the home of the brave. It would seem to be the case when you figure people are too cowardly to bear responsibility for themselves and would rather rely on the government to do their thinking for them. We've allowed our...

Has it escaped the public what a bang-up job our government has done thus far? We weren't allowed to see the Great Experiment's results because our government sold us out on December 23, 1913 to the Federal Reserve. Next, we had FDR touting his Socialist chicken in every pot rhetoric, and the masses ate it up like candy. The public has allowed our roads and shores to be Socialized, begged for our retirement to be Socialized, our education to be Socialized so that we now have a dumbed-down America. How proud can we be that we are ranked 7th and as low as 17th in our education compared to the rest of the world? Most people have, rightfully, given up on any idea that Social Security will be an option in roughly twenty years...or less.

The public doesn't even realize we are neither a republic or a democracy anymore. We are in a corporate communist state brought on by the gradualist agenda of the Fabians. Our Federal Reserve system is plank number five of Marx's Communist manifesto. Income tax, once again, Marx.

I have to question if America is still the home of the brave. It would seem to be the case when you figure people are too cowardly to bear responsibility for themselves and would rather rely on the government to do their thinking for them. We've allowed ourselves to continue on this path for generations. The people have spoken. Perhaps, too few recognize and/or value what freedom is anymore.

(more)
Compmend October 16, 2009 20:45:17

Answered: Yes, 100% Greater Freedom, Less Government = Greater Wealth, Less Poverty
There was a famous professor whose name I cannot recall at the moment who said "For the government to give a dollar to one individual, it must first take a dollar from another individual."

I like being able to decide which charities, institutions, etc. that I donate my time and money to. For instance if I see that a children's hospital is fiscally responsible and is truly making worthwhile progress in treating children, then I can contribute as much as I desire to aid them in their goal.

The "social welfare" as it exists is very liberal with taxpayer money, has huge overhead for administration, allows many people to abuse it, etc... and taking the money via taxes is "coercion" because I personally do not want to support such a broken institution.

There are already private charitable institutions that provide aid to the poor and indigent, in my area alone there is

The American Red Cross
Catholic charities (Help pay utilities, groceries,etc)
Meals on wheels (Bring a hot meal everyday to those who are home bound , bedridden, etc.)
The Salvation Army
Lighthouse Ministries (Huge homeless shelter that feeds homeless on less than $2.00 a day per individual, by buying in bulk).

These are the ones that come to mind but, their are many, many, more, the ones that I listed are entirely sponsored by donations, contributions, in my area.
helenros October 16, 2009 18:49:19

Answered: No - I think the Government can fix poverty and all woes that plague us.
Friedman is largely responsible for the current mess... Keynes has been proven correct over and over again.
+1
lward99 to helenros October 16, 2009 19:43:01

Oh helenros - you are assuming the Republicans followed Milton this last decade - They did not. They were Keynesian - Grew gov't - and Gov't does what it always does falls asleep at the wheel, didn't mind the store, and wasted Trillions of taxpayer dollars. If Friedman principles were followed we would all be healthier, wealthier, and wiser.
lward99 October 16, 2009 16:53:16

Answered: Yes, 100% Greater Freedom, Less Government = Greater Wealth, Less Poverty
Look around the world and in history - The countries with greatest freedom have the greatest wealth. The Gov't that try to control everything - have the greatest poverty. THAT IS A FACT.
+1
Terry October 16, 2009 16:43:21

Answered: No - I think the Government can fix poverty and all woes that plague us.
The Government has yet to fix anything, just look at the history of this great country. The only cure is less Governement, let the States take care of their own.
gr8punkin October 16, 2009 16:29:17

Answered: Yes, 100% Greater Freedom, Less Government = Greater Wealth, Less Poverty
If government is the answer, it must be a stupid question.
Recovering Republican October 16, 2009 16:22:42

Answered: No - I think the Government can fix poverty and all woes that plague us.
If we are truly a Christian nation, then we will help those in need. Period.
gr8punkin to Recover... October 16, 2009 16:32:11

Interesting and valid take on the subject, but I have to ask do, you consider your taxes to be a charitable donation? Or would you rather donate your money to an organization yourself?
Also I have heard it said many times that the U.S. is the most charitable nation on earth. Do you think that if more money is being taken away by the government for welfare type programs people will continue to be so charitable?
Recover... to gr8punkin October 16, 2009 20:53:43

The need for charitable organizations would decrease significantly if those in need received assistance. It's not the perfect system, but are you PERSONALLY willing to block the door to the hospital, etc. when a sick person attempts to get help? I can't, so I don't expect my elected officials to do that either.
gr8punkin to Recover... October 16, 2009 21:45:23

By no means, and nobody is suggesting that at all. If you want make a component of this subject about health care, and urgent need health care in particular then we already have public care since no hospital can deny treatment to someone in need. As it stands all public hospitals rely on donated funds to make up short falls in their budget, generally those donations come from wealthy individuals who understand the tax advantages that come from generous donations. That in turn insures that those monies make it to those in need, rather than those in greed.
When it comes to me personally giving money for the needy I would rather give it to my church who then co-op a soup kitchen and rescue mission with other churches. Then I know that the money I have given is being spent wisely, and that is not something I can say about giving money to the government to help those who are less fortunate.
Conversely if the government is to take more money from me to help those that they deem deserving, then I am left with less to give to charitable organizations whom I trust.
morning... to Recover... October 17, 2009 09:44:48

If our government was so worried about healthcare, there wouldn't be 50% of our budget spent on being the military welfare system of the world and only 10% on healthcare. If we weren't paying exorbitant taxes for the military industrial complex, wasteful spending, misallocation of funds, people would have a better opportunity at choosing better healthcare for themselves. There could be non-profit healthcare organizations. Or do you doubt the charity of, how did you say it, a "truly Christian nation"?

PS--You really ought to work on your segues. How much are you getting paid to do this?
morning... to Recover... October 17, 2009 09:39:54

What happened to separation of church and state, or is being a "truly Christian nation" a "valid" argument when it is convenient? You are no different than anyone else who wishes for the government to impose and legislate morality.
2sly to Recover... October 17, 2009 11:14:06

And with whose money?
Retroloco October 16, 2009 16:20:35

Answered: Yes, 100% Greater Freedom, Less Government = Greater Wealth, Less Poverty
Absolutely NOT! I think Steve Wynn said it best "Government has never increased the standard of living of one single human being in civilization's history. For some reason that simple truth has evaded everybody. The only thing that creates an increased standard of living is giving someone a job, the demand for their labor -- whether it's you and I, Chris, or anybody else. The people that are paying the price for this juggernaut of federal spending are the middle class and the working class of America."
birdman October 16, 2009 16:12:38

Answered: Yes, 100% Greater Freedom, Less Government = Greater Wealth, Less Poverty
People are much more prudent in spending their own hard-won earnings because they know how much effort it took to come by them.

Welfare, except in the case of people totally incapacitated by real (not trumped-up)disbilities, creates a culture of irresponsibility and laziness which ultimately leads to the collapse of society.
Recover... to birdman October 16, 2009 16:27:10

Curious . . . what exactly is a trumped up disability?
Fannie to Recover... October 16, 2009 16:46:14 (edited)

Oh, those 86 years old people, and can't feed yourself.
birdman to Recover... October 23, 2009 23:35:53 (edited)

Like someone who worked for my Dad. He fell on a cruise ship, injuring his back. Went on full disability, then moved to another stste, where he built a new home himself. If he could do that, I'd say he trumped up his disability.
+1
kevracer October 16, 2009 16:12:05 (edited)

Answered: No - I think the Government can fix poverty and all woes that plague us.
It our collective responsiblity as a nation to reach out a hand to those less fortunate and help them out of poverty. As Robert Kennedy said "I believe that, as long as there is plenty, poverty is evil."
Getreal October 16, 2009 16:06:06

Answered: No - I think the Government can fix poverty and all woes that plague us.
If we just did something about it, not form commitees to evaluate the process, funnel funds for research to see where the problems are, form commitees to analyse the data, and then finally scrap the whole thing because we didn't have a wide enough group for the study to be accurate.

If you think that I just made this up, well you don't know government very well, they do this on a weekly, if not daily basis.
Rob James October 16, 2009 16:05:55

Answered: Yes, 100% Greater Freedom, Less Government = Greater Wealth, Less Poverty
This should be required viewing in every classroom in SC.