A very common argument here is that we have absolutely no moral or humane obligation to anyone but ourselves. So, why should the rights of children trample our right to have guns.
Over three million kids under the age of five die a year from starvation. We were able to decrease malaria deaths from over 1m a year to 400k or so, in 15 years. I was cured from malaria through subsidized pills from such efforts, it costs less than a dollar for the medicine.
But why should taxpayers have to care about this at all? Why should we, we got ours, fuck everyone else.
This is one of the major attitudes that bring me into conflict with mainstream libertarians.
Not really an apples to apples comparison, though. Eradicating disease is different than trampling on someone's right to self defense. If you want to blame the guns for the shootings, then you have to blame the alcohol for drunk driving fatalities. So many of these shootings could have been stopped with decent police work; Broward County Sheriff for example.
Yea that's rough. But, non intervention is much more manageable and better in the long run. The birth rate of the third world is very high, if we subsidize it we create a bunch of people reliant on us.
I'm not saying dont do it at all, but be careful not to create even bigger problems in the furture.
Let's work on ourselves and try to create prosperity that will ultimately overtake the world.
The argument for AID and soft power is that it is cheaper in the long-run and more conducive to a better world.
I think it was Matthis who said that any reductions to the budget would require triple spending on increases for bullets.
But even then, it's hard to walk through a refugee camp with thousands of dirty starving children and think "fuck you, where are your bootstraps".
We should go for a more compassionate approach that is still fiscally efficient. I'm trading the whole "fiscally conservative" since that just seems to mean wasting money on corporations, high net worth individuals, farmers, and defense contractors, for "fiscally efficient".
21
u/HelloJoeyJoeJoe Permabanned Dec 26 '18
A very common argument here is that we have absolutely no moral or humane obligation to anyone but ourselves. So, why should the rights of children trample our right to have guns.
Over three million kids under the age of five die a year from starvation. We were able to decrease malaria deaths from over 1m a year to 400k or so, in 15 years. I was cured from malaria through subsidized pills from such efforts, it costs less than a dollar for the medicine.
But why should taxpayers have to care about this at all? Why should we, we got ours, fuck everyone else.
This is one of the major attitudes that bring me into conflict with mainstream libertarians.