3 ms·

I advocated that the family should resume the role of caretakers What do you think should happen to those who are unable to reproduce, or who choose not to, or

• kiba 16y ago
  What do you think should happen to those who are unable to reproduce, or who choose not to, or whose children die before them, or whose children are just jerks who won't help their parents out? So this is saying that we should need a government to help out all these old people that do not have anybody to help them. That's nice, but government aid have crowding out effect on mutual aid societies and the like, and that's assuming that government aid are actually better than family based, charity based, mutual aid societies and other voluntary assistance. Beside, the increasing wealth of society and technological development should eventually help those old folks out. Charity would eventually be able to buy more food and shelter per dollars. Look, my suggestion isn't perfect and won't cover all the case scenario. But government is a tradeoff. You might be paying it through taxes, increased bureaucracy, less innovations amongst charity, etc. All things being equal, I think I consider a voluntary effort to support the old people to be more ethical than coercing people to support these people.
  • natrius 16y ago
    Private, voluntary solutions that achieve the same goals as government programs at equal or lower cost are always superior. However, I don't think your proposed solutions would achieve the same goals. There would likely be more impoverished seniors.