This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Nikodemos (talk | contribs) at 22:12, 7 January 2005. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 22:12, 7 January 2005 by Nikodemos (talk | contribs)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Some people advocate dramatically cutting welfare payments or eliminating them entirely, but this would leave the very poor no protection from starvation and death, therefore it arguably creates a bigger problem than it solves.
It is simply not true that without a government funded welfare system in place, the poor will die of starvation. This completely ignores the thousands of privately financed charity organizations that assist the needy.
- Since the poor did die of starvation before government-funded welfare was created, it is reasonable to assume that they will do so again if welfare is removed. Private charities have existed for thousands of years, and they've never been able to prevent all the poor from starving to death. Sure, charities make a difference, but it's a small difference. And even if that weren't the case, charities are inherently unreliable, since they depend on people's good will. If, for some reason, there is a decrease in public good will, charities fail. -- Mihnea Tudoreanu 22:12, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)