[lit-ideas] Re: Ye Olde Dialectic
- From: "Phil Enns" <phil.enns@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2005 08:59:11 -0400
Eric Yost wrote:
"If you give to charity, you are essentially doing the government's work for
it. You are letting the government off the hook. ... But if nobody gave, that
would force the government to take care of everything."
It seems to me that there is, to some degree, a division of labour.
Governments are good for doing things small groups can't. Small groups are
good at doing things big government can't. The homeless people in my
neighbourhood are largely off the radar of virtually all levels of government.
However, there are several different charity groups that offer services to
these individuals, including hot chocolate and sleeping bags in the winter,
doctors that do 'house calls', and so on. Even though Mike Geary eschews the
philosophical discussion regarding division of labour, he offers a brilliant
example of it in practice. Individuals who know people in need can offer help
in ways bureaucracies cannot, and perhaps should not.
I expect government to do the things governments can do and I would hope that
individuals, either singly or through charities, would do what can be done
individually. In this regard I think I am something of an old-fashioned
conservative. I don't think government can solve most or even many of the
problems individuals face. Rather, it is up to individuals to take
responsibility for their own well-being along with the well-being of their
neighbour. It is the strength of being religious that allows one to extend the
notion of the neighbour to include all human beings.
Sincerely,
Phil Enns
Toronto, ON
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
