 Quote:
Originally Posted by Tigerwiccan  That would be fine with me. I'd be one of the "producers". I wouldn't want to be anyone's pet. I'm just saying that those that make huge amounts of money should be required to give some of it to those that need it. Or maybe to starving kids in Africa or something. I know that's an ideal, though. Real people are more like you and want to keep everything they have no matter how much other people are suffering. | Well I just don't think it is governments job to play Robin Hood, those earning high salaries should pay higher taxes and should have tax relief for charity donations to those in need.
Redistribution of wealth is just wrong because compassion belongs at family, church and community level. In the 1960's there were welfare states because the states provided welfare and some gave out more bennies than other states... hoards of government barnacles would travel to the state where the most handouts came. Then the federal government said, hey that's messed up I bet we can mess it up even better, and they did.
The federal government doesn't need to do anything for the states that the states can do for themselves. The states don't need to do anything for the counties that they can do for themselves. Compassion belongs close to family, church and community and when it is exported beyond that environment dictators in Africa get rich and some puke in some city that doesn't deserve compassion takes the check while others are stepped over in doorways because it's the governments problem. |