Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!floyd!vax135!ariel!houti!trc From: trc@houti.UUCP Newsgroups: net.politics Subject: subsidies and morality Message-ID: <306@houti.UUCP> Date: Thu, 16-Jun-83 18:12:40 EDT Article-I.D.: houti.306 Posted: Thu Jun 16 18:12:40 1983 Date-Received: Sat, 18-Jun-83 17:28:33 EDT Lines: 24 Response to JD Myers: I agree with you that subsidies for fallow land are wrong - but not for the same reason. I just think any government interference is wrong. However, you seem to imply that such land should be farmed, and the excess grain given away on the basis of need to other countries. I disagree. Who pays for the grain? Will you make the farmer take the burden of your brand of morality? Or will you choose to spread the pain over all taxpayers? Does the fact that the government would steal less from many rather than much from few make it any better? And it would be theft - just because a government does it, does not change its nature. If people really want their money to go for such purposes, they will give it directly. Do you think that need is the correct basis for distribution of "consumer goods"? Who is to determine what is needed for whom? Who is to determine who is to pay? Who determines what to do about those who refuse to work? Who do you feel is qualified to give away other people's money? You? The UN? What if I disagree - should I be forced to go along, and pay "my share"? Why am I not qualified make the determination for my own money? Tom Craver houti!trc