[MD] Unreality of Equality

[Arlo J. Bensinger]

[Ham]

Yeah, I know the quotes from the ideologically right. Its not what I'm asking.
The problem with this dialogue is that there are only two caricatured positions
tossed about, that of the right, which paints any belief in social programs as
evil, commie Marxism, and that of the left which paints any challenge to the
existing programs as heartless evil Randism.

Are these our only options? I don't think so. I have yet to see anyone in my
entire life suggest that people SHOULD live on welfare, on promote the doing
so. You may caricature the far left this way, but it hardly reflects the
reality of the many people (myself included) who believe that the provision of
a temporary, supportive safety net is a moral function of government, that
improves the lives of everyone. Are we reaching a time when there are breaks in
the levees? Sure. Should we rethink the programs, maybe even cutting some while
further funding others? Maybe. Should people be required to work, in some
capacity, to receive this temporary help? You bet.

You've now indicated that local charity (or national in the case of the Red
Cross) will handle the poor. The historical track record for that is not so
hot, but I respect your faith in man. 

[Ham]
Charity begins at home, and a household that fosters personal responsibility and
self-reliance will go a long way toward eradicating the need for public
welfare.

[Arlo]
No argument there.

[Ham]
Local communities, not the bureaucrats in Washington, bear the responsibility
for assisting the sick and poverty-stricken members of their society, and the
focus should be aimed at effective rehabilitation rather than permanent
dependency.

[Arlo]
No argument with the latter point, but can you clarify if you mean local
government should have a role, or are you talking exclusively charity?

[Ham]
I see  little danger of people starving to death in a responsible community.

[Arlo]
One hopes not. But reading history presents a different picture.

Arlo