The U.S. should NOT be helping tsunami victims

Bounty

Love
Veteran XX
The host from a local AM radio morning talk show mentioned this article on my way into work today, and it so accurately summarized my feelings on the issue of relief funds for the victims of the recent tsunami that I thought I would share it with you all.

U.S. Should Not Help Tsunami Victims

Thursday December 30, 2004
By: David Holcberg


Our money is not the government's to give.

As the death toll mounts in the areas hit by Sunday's tsunami in southern Asia, private organizations and individuals are scrambling to send out money and goods to help the victims. Such help may be entirely proper, especially considering that most of those affected by this tragedy are suffering through no fault of their own.

The United States government, however, should not give any money to help the tsunami victims. Why? Because the money is not the government's to give.

Every cent the government spends comes from taxation. Every dollar the government hands out as foreign aid has to be extorted from an American taxpayer first. Year after year, for decades, the government has forced American taxpayers to provide foreign aid to every type of natural or man-made disaster on the face of the earth: from the Marshall Plan to reconstruct a war-ravaged Europe to the $15 billion recently promised to fight AIDS in Africa to the countless amounts spent to help the victims of earthquakes, fires and floods--from South America to Asia. Even the enemies of the United States were given money extorted from American taxpayers: from the billions given away by Clinton to help the starving North Koreans to the billions given away by Bush to help the blood-thirsty Palestinians under Arafat's murderous regime.

The question no one asks about our politicians' "generosity" towards the world's needy is: By what right? By what right do they take our hard-earned money and give it away?

The reason politicians can get away with doling out money that they have no right to and that does not belong to them is that they have the morality of altruism on their side. According to altruism--the morality that most Americans accept and that politicians exploit for all it's worth--those who have more have the moral obligation to help those who have less. This is why Americans--the wealthiest people on earth--are expected to sacrifice (voluntarily or by force) the wealth they have earned to provide for the needs of those who did not earn it. It is Americans' acceptance of altruism that renders them morally impotent to protest against the confiscation and distribution of their wealth. It is past time to question--and to reject--such a vicious morality that demands that we sacrifice our values instead of holding on to them.

Next time a politician gives away money taken from you to show what a good, compassionate altruist he is, ask yourself: By what right?

David Holcberg is a research associate at the Ayn Rand Institute in Irvine, Calif. The Institute promotes the philosophy of Ayn Rand, author of Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead.
 
agreed .. but communists like ZooL will not agree as he thinks its the 'governments' money .. fucking socialist faggot
 
So you'd be happier if it was individual donations to a concerted cause instead of a grant by our government?
 
does someone need to take down more buildings in new york yet?
american ignorance now reaching maximum capacity
 
Soulginder_X said:
its not your money once the govt takes it as tax..
..?

i guess when a thief like zool breaks into my house and 'takes' (steals) my tv its no longer mine ???
 
While I agree with the concept of not allowing our country to willy nilly give money away like its candy...I don't have any problems with it in this case :p

One of my best friends was here in the states for the past 5 years and finally got to go back home to sri lanka 3 weeks ago.

What horrible fucking timing. I have absolutely no idea if hes alive or not yet. I donated what I could already, but am glad the U.S. is taking such an active role in this.
 
Timmain42 said:
So you'd be happier if it was individual donations to a concerted cause instead of a grant by our government?
I would be. Charity is a great and wonderful thing... when its voluntary.
 
we did vote them into office.. i mean if we didn't want them to do that, why not vote for somebody else? :shrug:
 
...
uicon13.gif

:bountydan
 
Back
Top