Teunis

Interessting picture. I though about it a bit. Actually the picture is turning reality arround. 1) Welfare created by respecting property right and adopting free market. 2) Excess food, production and welfare result in the state creating and offering citizens the welfare state. 3) Because of (1) the (2) is able to exist. 4) After (2) the free market gets limited and the property right are no longer completely protected. Thanks to the free market the welfare state survives but has a big impact on economy so that true growth does not happen overtime. Thats why your income hasnt risen.

Thanks for your replies people. Some arguments I knew but thanks TheRobin for the: how far away are you responsibble argument.

Hey everyone, I'd like to learn more about the collapse of several welfare states in the history like the one of the Roman Empire. Does someone have some nice articles about this topic? Thanks in advance. Teunis Dokter

Hello everyone, With the welfare state thousands of people that wouldn't get any money because they cannot work, like mental patients or people with a born disease, cancer or some kind of retardation could possibly die without welfare checks. The issue I am facing is this. 1. Using force to give to other people so they can survive is a noble goal but with sick means. 2. Would society give retarded, homeless and jobless people donations without the state? 3. Example: Two men are in one room. One is hungry and underfed. The other one is healthy and has a bread. The hungry man asks the man with the bread to give him some in order to survive. The healthy man doesnt want to give his bread. Its his afterall. The healthy man is in his right not to do anything because he is the owner of his property. But this 'not helping' is that not a kind of agression towards someone in need? Although you cant be 'unethical' for doing nothing lets see a following example: Someone from who you know he cant swim jump into a pool. He is struggling and almost drowns. When you do nothing he dies. When you help he survives. Are you obligated to help? Yes or no? And why? 4. Short: Is it an act of agression not to help when someone is in grave danger. I need this issue solved. Not only for a book I am writing but also because of libertarian views on this. Ive read some on the subjects but I don't know. I just want to hear your impunt. Thanks! What are ways to make sure homeless, retarded and so on are not left to die? Ofcourse it is my opinion they should be fed and live a life just as alot of others think it is but I no longer want to justify the use of violence against our population for this reason.