Friday, March 21, 2008

Prometheus Institute: Doling for Columbine- Five Reasons Why Welfare Should Be a Libertarian Cause

Prometheus Institute: Doling for Columbine- Five Reasons Why Welfare Should Be a Libertarian Cause

A very good article from the Prometheus Institute arguing for the compatibility of social security and libertarianism. I would have liked to have seen some mention of housing as a distinct issue, but the author might not see eye to eye with me on that.

This article was published by the Prometheus Institute, an American think tank promoting Libertarianism. I am too much of a pragmatist to endorse Libertarianism as an ideology and too much of a Neo-Con to agree with them on foreign policy. However, there are some great ideas here.

What impresses me about the Prometheus Institute is that their Libertarianism is very balanced and moderate. They allow for some limited regulation of market forces and are in favour of a state assistance in health care. They are not advocates of Anarcho-Capitalism or Social Darwinism. They do not support the Libertarian Party either.

They have an interesting article on healtcare in the USA:
Avoiding Dr. Leviathan- Five Ways to Solve America’s Health Care Crisis Without Accruing Massive Debt

I cannot say whether or not I agree; I know little about healthcare in America.

12 comments:

Palm boy said...

Isn't Prometheus the man in greek mythology whom the gods gave the gift of fire?

Interesting name for a think tank. I'm going to read this. :D

Dyspraxic Fundamentalist said...

You evidently know your Greek mythology.

Palm boy said...

Actually, Lex Luthor taught me that in Superman Returns. :D

Dyspraxic Fundamentalist said...

Oh well.

Palm boy said...

Interesting thoughts in the column, I just think its to accepting of a liberal status quo.

Dyspraxic Fundamentalist said...

The liberal status quo does not seem too bad.

It would be even more liberal if I was the president of the United States.

Ryan S. said...

I hate Social Security. I wish they would abolish it in the US, and let workers invest that 15% of their gross pay in individual retirement accounts where the funds are titled in their name, instead of having that ponzi intergenerational pyramid scheme.

Dyspraxic Fundamentalist said...

Ryan, so would you have a individual insurance scheme for unemployment with state funding?

Or just private unemployment insurance only?

Palm boy said...

I think Ryan is pegging for private only.
And I'd agree with him. The private sector is far more efficient then a state mandated monopoly is.

Dyspraxic Fundamentalist said...

Would contributions be voluntary?

And would claimants need to be working for a certain period of time before they were able to claim unempolyment cover?

Palm boy said...

If you would want unemployment insurance, then you would make your terms with the provider.
If you don't want it, use your money elsewhere.

Dyspraxic Fundamentalist said...

That makes a lot of sense.

However, it seems very likely that a large proportion of people would not take up unemployment insurance, either because they wanted the money or they simply did not earn enough to meet the terms of the cover.

Hence you would potentially have large numbers of unemployed people with no means of support, some of them with families.

I find that idea very scary.

Every Blessing in Christ

Matthew