We need a safety net. There are unforeseen events, acts of G-d, emergencies. There are options for several without violation of the constitution.
First, any state that wishes to provide a system like that can provide some package of safety net services. Such a state is limited in that it can not inflate the currency to provide for such services.
Second, any person who wishes to pay for another’s rent, health care, food, or to provide for income, is free to do so. Let us call that “Charity”.
Third, any person can create, fund, purchase, or rent shares in a corporation that is free to provide rent, health care, food or income to its members, to the limits of its resources. Such a corporation would be free to operate in any state or territory, subject to the laws of that state (or territory).
The choice is not between a safety net and no safety net. It is between coerced bad and over priced service, and freely arranged, correctly priced service that is the best available.
I beg to differ. The Fed. Gov’t has neither the authority nor the Right to give ANY Citizen the fruits labor of another. And, IMHO, neither should States.
For those ‘emergencies’ differ between all Citizens. It is up to neither the Fed nor the State to pick winners/losers. Farmer floods/drought? tornado/hurricane? Medical?. In each of these examples, what does the mechanic 3 Counties over care (aside from the price increase to cover loses, for example)? Why should his pocket take a hit?
Now, for the rest, one has and always will be Free to give whatever they wish to another. The corps/etc., as you postulate, are left to the generosity of those that wish to give/donate/etc. That is FREEDOM, that is Free Will. You lose both, and more, putting a gun to someones head to pick their pocket.
Again, nothing of what you’ve laid out needs the FORCE of gov’t to make happen. We can see just what it has given us as of today.