[amundsentb]

This article decries people the necessity of people banding together in tough times and want's more "humanity" meaning that expenses are automatically taken care of in bad times. The author knows nothing about humanity and what it entails. Humanity is not a robotic system where ants are ordered.

Societies are built by people interacting and building trust and taking care of each other in bad times for their own self interest. Not by forcing people to act against their own judgment.

[mola]

The problem is that without the greed of a few most of these charity acts wouldn't need to exist. Healthcare is extremely expansive and inefficient in the US because of the greed of a few. This false dichotomy between a freedom crunching social regime against the freedom saving forces of market is a lie. Social democratic countries exist, the populus are not subjugadeted to an opressing regime nor are they left for the mercy of strangers for basic survival. On top of that, most systems there, even governmental ones are much more efficient than in the US. And still, there's a free economy, with plenty of chances for a decent life.

On the other hand the US is controlled by the greed of a few huge corporation, the people are much less free. As I see it, human society tends to create hubs of power. The civilian powers are not less prone to oppression than the power of the state. In a democracy you at least have the moral grounds to fight corruption. But in a society obsessed with free markets and small government this power still ends up concentrated in places. But now you as opressed don't have a moral ground to fight abuses of power. This false dichotomy of freedom vs welfare means that standing up against the opressors is considerred bad morally, because it means you are against freedome. Anyway, because it seems that power have a tendency to concentrate. I'de rather have a moral system where abuses of power of any kind can be considered morally wrong.