Posted on 12/30/2004 1:17:50 PM PST by bruinbirdman
Our money is not the government's to give.
As the death toll mounts in the areas hit by Sunday's tsunami in southern Asia, private organizations and individuals are scrambling to send out money and goods to help the victims. Such help may be entirely proper, especially considering that most of those affected by this tragedy are suffering through no fault of their own.
The United States government, however, should not give any money to help the tsunami victims. Why? Because the money is not the government's to give.
Every cent the government spends comes from taxation. Every dollar the government hands out as foreign aid has to be extorted from an American taxpayer first. Year after year, for decades, the government has forced American taxpayers to provide foreign aid to every type of natural or man-made disaster on the face of the earth: from the Marshall Plan to reconstruct a war-ravaged Europe to the $15 billion recently promised to fight AIDS in Africa to the countless amounts spent to help the victims of earthquakes, fires and floods--from South America to Asia. Even the enemies of the United States were given money extorted from American taxpayers: from the billions given away by Clinton to help the starving North Koreans to the billions given away by Bush to help the blood-thirsty Palestinians under Arafat's murderous regime.
The question no one asks about our politicians' "generosity" towards the world's needy is: By what right? By what right do they take our hard-earned money and give it away?
The reason politicians can get away with doling out money that they have no right to and that does not belong to them is that they have the morality of altruism on their side. According to altruism--the morality that most Americans accept and that politicians exploit for all it's worth--those who have more have the moral obligation to help those who have less. This is why Americans--the wealthiest people on earth--are expected to sacrifice (voluntarily or by force) the wealth they have earned to provide for the needs of those who did not earn it. It is Americans' acceptance of altruism that renders them morally impotent to protest against the confiscation and distribution of their wealth. It is past time to question--and to reject--such a vicious morality that demands that we sacrifice our values instead of holding on to them.
Next time a politician gives away money taken from you to show what a good, compassionate altruist he is, ask yourself: By what right?
David Holcberg is a research associate at the Ayn Rand Institute in Irvine, Calif.
You just used the "Nazi" accusation and therefore lose the argument!
If that hit too close to home tough S***. It wasn't directed at anyone in particular. But I see that you know who you are
Do you mean to say there is nothing or no one in this country that can't be helped with her $500, plus the travel costs associated with such largess?
I don't usually comment on peoples home page but since you have been know to use the comments on others homepage negatively, I will say that your's is very appropriate:
"Grumpy old man"
You see nothing. You lost the argument because you resorted to name-calling. Lame.
That's why we have charities.
Because of reason, logic and Constitutional principles?
We are all sorry for these people. Those that want to give to charity should.
But, the government should NOT send taxpayer money for charity, especially when we can't even afford to produce the F-22!!!
I pity you that your tear jerking gets in the way of sound reason and Constitutional principles.
Americans will give plenty themselves. Let me repeat this for you: the Pentagon has announced that we can't afford the F-22!! How can America give U.S. Treasury money to charity if we can't afford the F-22?
The actual paper belongs to the Federal Reserve. The value associated with that piece of paper belongs to those who rightfully earn and hold it. You are splitting hairs here - it's our money not the government's.
Do you support a 100% tax rate since it's not your money anyway?
You are a Marxist. Your comment about forced U.S. giving to charity proves it.
You are also anti-American. We are canceling the F-22 because we can't afford it, but our government sends charity to flooded terrorist nations.
You are also dense since you want me to explain what should be obvious to you when you look in the mirror.
Your name calling has no basis in fact. Quite childish.
Our total annual giving to charity is over $1.1 trillion per year. I look at the sum total.
If America pledged just $136,000 like France, that would still be too much.
A nickel is too much. Charity should be a private matter by each citizen, not the government forcing us to pay it through our tax dollars.
And don't give me this "enough already witht the F-22." Every American needs to decide what is more important--their tax dollars to defend America, or their tax dollars to send to terrorist nations.
That is the spirit. Individual responsibility. Accepted and acted upon.
That is shameful.
You see nothing. You lost the argument because you resorted to name-calling. Lame
Who did I call a nazi? I didn't even say anything disparaging about the two groups I mentioned. If you're a member of one or both , take it however you want. I don't care, you are irrelevant .
Curious where your 1.1 trillion came from. I see something more in the 242 billion range.
http://www.usaid.gov/fani/ch06/usassistance.htm
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/06/24/national/main560206.shtml
Feds use 50% of foreign aid tax dollars for administrative purposes.
UN takes 99% of fed tax dollar contribution aid for corrupt purposes.
no yitbos
I did not look at your links yet, but 242 billion sounds like the amount Americans give (not the government) to private charities.
The source of the $1.1 trillion in 2004 to charity is the U.S. budget, Section 3, Superfunction "Human Resources". This $1.1 trillion to charity of taxpayer dollars is about 66 cents of every dollar in the U.S. budget.
This is only domestic charity so does NOT include aid to foreign nations through the State Department budget or other forms of foreign aid.
I agree with the tenor of this post even as I seek a charity I can donate to that will not use my money for bureaucratic global aspirations or petty larceny. Any suggestions, fellow freepers?
The Salvation Army has always been my favorite charity.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.