>>>>>In Zimbabwe the people are impoverished due to crushing government's policies. In America people have freedom and the ability to make due for themselves. The difference lies in the circumstances of their poverty.
>>>>>
>>>>>No comparison will make their lives better, just like no argument will make their lives better. The betterment of their lives is their responsibility.
>>>>
>>>>And how does a hungry 3-year-old do that?
>>>>
>>>>Tamar
>>>
>>>The parents are responsible and need to feed their child.
>>
>>I agree with you, but what if they don't for whatever reasons. I believe that one of the functions of forming a society is to ensure that children don't go hungry (or naked or uneducated).
>
>We agree on the principal. It's the method where i believe we differ. For instance I am all for tax money being spent on education. However, I despise the current system because the state and big unions have complete control. Local districts have far too little say in the educational process, let alone the parents or students themselves. I'm all for some form of a voucher system from pre-school through college. I believe an educated citizen has a much greater chance of being a productive and self-sustained member of society. In addition, I believe similar programs could be developed to address food, clothing and shelter as well. The problem I have is that the current solutions disregard the market completely and impose mandates from the state.
>
>Full disclosure : My mother is a retired 1st grade teacher and a member of the CTA
>
>>If you think about it, rather a lot of what government is for is what happens when people don't do the right things. (Not all of it, of course--stuff like trash collection and road building is for the common good, in another way.)
>
>Of course "right" is a very subjective term in this context. I think the government should be minimalist in its approach and I have a big problem with legislating behavior. I'm not speaking of crimes against others but of the nanny laws controlling individual choice, such as helmet laws, banning cell-phones while driving and smoking ordinances on private property. To me free includes the freedom to make choices, good or bad.
>
>>Tamar

At the very least take the cell phone objection out. People kill other people when they don't pay attention to their driving. you might just as well abolish all the other traffic laws. The cell phone law is not a nanny law, it falls into the 'crimes against others' category.

Even the helmet law is there not only to protect the rider from himself, but to protect the rest of us from the costs of his stupidity as well.

I agree about smoking laws. Mostly I find them repugnant. In the interest of full disclosure, I'm a non-smoker.