Your argument is based on a false premise Sinij. The disagreement you and I have is that you think the government should confiscate from folks to give to others while I think I should be allowed to give to the folks I choose on my own. In my dynamic society doesn't devolve because my view depends on people being locally socially responsible. For proof that my idea works you need only look at our history before 1960. Communities took care of their own and choosing not to work carried a negative stigma while inability to work garnered sympathy and help from your neighbors. Surely you don't believe that a centralized government hundreds or thousands of miles away can better decide how to allocate money to help your neighbors than you can, living just down the street from them.

As I see it, what it really boils down to is folks like you don't want to expend the time and effort it takes to educate yourself about the needs of those around you, so you advocate for the confiscation of goods from everyone and the government dole so that you can feel good about yourself and preach to others about how they aren't doing enough, as though you paying taxes is all the charity you ever need participate in. Perhaps you can sleep at night secure in the thought that your "charity" is simply propagating a new slave class, but I cannot, and I believe that the way to free people from the bonds of dependency is to allow/force them to fend for themselves with the support of their local community. If you don't believe that will happen then that is another fundamental difference between you and me. I believe that most people are innately good and will choose to help their neighbors, while you seem to believe that people are evil and will only do good when forced.

[Linked Image from i30.photobucket.com]