26 July 2009

Is it possible? Government v. Charities?

This must be a blow to certain progressive Catholics. Well, not really--Government action is always preferable to private charity:

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

Another inane comment "Government action is always preferable to private charity."

If we could dream, it would be great if "WE, the people" would actually provide food, shelter and health for the other "WE, the people." You always make it sound like it's the government against us, which makes me wonder when you'll be moving to a more favorable country where the government has no power, like Afghanistan.

I'm curious - why shouldn't charity support our exceptionally bloated military? Or charity take care of the cost of our police, fire departments, roads, etc?

Obviously the free markets have done an exceptional job of taking care of America's health - if you can shut your eyes to 51 million uninsured children, women and men.

I keep forgetting that this is supposed to be a Catholic website instead of what you continue making it - a place which sometimes covers Catholic matters (and does a fairly good job) only to be confounded with out-of-the-blue pot shots at progressives.

just wondering said...

anon - I think you're 51 million uninsured stats are just a weee bit, shall we say, PADDED. Actualy its more like 24 million with a large percentage of those people making $75K or more a year who choose not to pay for private insurance. Of course those who are unable to pay for healthcare or insurance should receive medical care, absolutely. Oh and government mandated charity does support our military,our infrastructure, and emergency personnel. It's called taxes.