Description

👈🏼 Back 。・::・゚★,。・::・゚🎇・::・。,★゚・::・。 Forward 👉🏼

“It is easy to be conspicuously 'compassionate' if others are being forced to pay the cost.”
― Murray N. Rothbard

Socialism loses.

6 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

the problem with socialism is that it only works on a small scale - like the town that pulls together when a neighbor gets sick or a home burns down. Most people are more than willing to make a minor sacrifice to help a friend or even an acquaintance.

But on a larger scale, people don't want to make a sacrifice for someone they've never met, for results they'll never see. "out of sight, out of mind" note: giving to charity isn't the same thing - people give to charity because it makes themselves feel better

6 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I don't know why Socialists have issues with charity, but they have an irrational hatred for any NGO pitching in to alleviate social issues. It always has to be government to fix stuff, instead of private, at all.

6 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

that's the first I've ever heard of it.

my understanding is that socialists don't have an issue with NGOs pitching in, but believe that certain functions really should be provided by the government, rather than being based on the whims of some donor.
also, not getting into the difference between what americans refer to as socialsts and actual socialism

6 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

What's the cost of compassion?

6 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Deleted

This comment was deleted 6 years ago.

6 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Well I can relate, I mean, taxes, as a concept, are as communist as it gets :P and I pay way too much for a lot of things like public education for other people's kids and funding the military industry but a society that allows kids to go starving and uneducated, isn't helping itself in the long run.

6 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I think not allowing people to die of hunger is objectively a good thing for countries to strive for? Not allowing people to die needlessly in general, actually, is a solid goal. (And I do think education is an important part of that, although a thorough schooling isn't enough to stem ignorance completely.)

6 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Agreed and agreed. And schools are not enough about learning and too much about memorizing (I believe the only truly important thing you should learn in school is how to learn on your own because schooling can only take you so far) but it's better than nothing.

6 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

You do not have permission to comment on giveaways.