On Wednesday 08 August 2001 08:01 am, you wrote:
> In the news yesterday, it was announced that the State of New
> Hampshire has the lowest poverty rate in the entire US, of only
> 4...
> I think this all pretty much confirms the arguments of
> libertarians and other free market proponents: socialism creates
> poverty.
If you needed social service, and could choose, where would you
live. A place that would let you starve, or a place that at least
tried to supply you with food and shelter?
This argument has a basic flaw. I don't know about the relative
efficiecies, I see information for both sides. I do know that
people tend to move to where they can live, rather than die. (New
Hampshire may not be that strict, but I don't live there, so I
don't know. It could just be that it's so cold in the winter that
if you aren't sure of a warm place at night, you'ld clearly better
be somewhere else.)
If you can propose some other direct causal link, then I would like
to hear it. (Theories must provide relevant and checkable facts.)
This doesn't speak at all to good or bad. To my mind one of the
destructive actions of the supreme court was to strike down the
residency requirement for social services. I can see supporting
members of the community, but when it starts being everybody ...
some things just aren't possible.
--
Charles Hixson
Copy software legally, the GNU way!
Use GNU software, and legally make and share copies of software.
See:
http://www.gnu.org
http://www.redhat.com
http://www.linux-mandrake.com
http://www.calderasystems.com
http://www.linuxapps.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Oct 12 2001 - 14:40:04 MDT