yondyr
01-15-2008, 02:30 PM
Libertarian minded people tend to prefer less govt involvement in private lives. Socialised health care is now the subject of a thread with many crying out for some sort of widespread coverage to be paid for by various means, the cost spread amongst all.
I would suggest that if all did not have to pay for other peoples childrens education, the roads if they did not drive, the provision of services they never expect or intend to use, then it would free up their monies for those services they would use. The pregnant male has yet to appear.
The poor could not afford children, perhaps they should not have them or is this an inalienable right? Or does the child have an inalienable right to a safe nutritious life?
I realise I'm venturing into an area that could bring about draconian conditions to some minds, and a degree of suffering to the improvident.
I would suggest that if all did not have to pay for other peoples childrens education, the roads if they did not drive, the provision of services they never expect or intend to use, then it would free up their monies for those services they would use. The pregnant male has yet to appear.
The poor could not afford children, perhaps they should not have them or is this an inalienable right? Or does the child have an inalienable right to a safe nutritious life?
I realise I'm venturing into an area that could bring about draconian conditions to some minds, and a degree of suffering to the improvident.