Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 8/23/84; site ucbcad.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!ucbvax!ucbcad!faustus
From: faustus@ucbcad.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.politics.theory
Subject: Re: Re: Taxation is theft?
Message-ID: <109@ucbcad.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 18-Feb-85 11:20:24 EST
Article-I.D.: ucbcad.109
Posted: Mon Feb 18 11:20:24 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 20-Feb-85 07:40:25 EST
References: <326@gargoyle.UChicago.UUCP> <utzoo.5031>, <1370@dciem.UUCP> <5045@utzoo.UUCP> <674@ccice5.UUCP>
Organization: UC Berkeley CAD Group, Berkeley, CA
Lines: 22

> 1.  Private charity can not create an adequate social net. (I'm not going
>     to argue this one with anybody; I believe it!)
> 2.  Without the social net, people would have no alternative but to get
>     goods and services in any way they can.  (Criminal acts enter here)
> 3.  Criminal acts are going to be directed at those that have goods and
>     services.  (The rich certainly have the goods)
> So what the rich have to gain from the redistribution of wealth is their
> lives.  That may seem far-fetched, but there are plenty of incidents from
> history that show it can happen.

You have a good point, but the question is, what sort of safety net are
we talking about? The present system of unemployment insurance,
medicare, social security, etc is too much. What I would like to see is
a system where the government provides housing, food, and medical care
for people who don't have any money, but at a very basic level. People
who are getting these benefits should have to do at least a token
amount of work, unless they are too old or otherwise incapable of
working.  Something like that would be more of a real "safety net" than
what we have now, which provides too much support to some and too
little to others.

	Wayne