My point is social “programs” also limit individual responsibilities. (I don’t need to give it to charity… Government will do it). This effect is corrosive on humanity and eventually destroys society. Therefore, social programs need to be extremely limited.
My point is social “programs” also limit individual responsibilities. (I don’t need to give it to charity… Government will do it). This effect is corrosive on humanity and eventually destroys society. Therefore, social programs need to be extremely limited.
People who rely on the government to replace their charitable giving are more than happy to vote to raise taxes on others to pay for it. When I point out that is not the same as giving yourself, it is virtue signaling with other people's money, they get angry.
My point is social “programs” also limit individual responsibilities. (I don’t need to give it to charity… Government will do it). This effect is corrosive on humanity and eventually destroys society. Therefore, social programs need to be extremely limited.
The be honest I think we'd all be better off without most of them.
People who rely on the government to replace their charitable giving are more than happy to vote to raise taxes on others to pay for it. When I point out that is not the same as giving yourself, it is virtue signaling with other people's money, they get angry.