Results 31 to 33 of 33
Re: SiCKOA welfarist wouldn't have to believe in the state appropriation of the means of production and distribution of resources to believe that a graduated system of taxation is the most appropriate way of achieving their personal vision of social justice or a working welfare system.They would disagree with me however if I were to argue, as I do, that the most efficient way of providing state services is through low taxation to enourage individual aspiration and achievment that would reduce welfare dependency. They would definitely flatly reject any notion of a flat taxation system and the option of private sector service provision with rebates, which I have come more and more to consider as being suitable for a modern democracy with a large welfare system.My own feeling is that Michael Moore can be controversial for the sake of it but then that might be the best way of drawing attention to causes he believes need it.
"Before the gates of excellence the high gods have placed sweat; long is the road thereto and rough and steep at first; but when the heights are reached, then there is ease, though grievously hard in the winning." --- Hesiod
Why HUb didn't know you cared
Still can't equate welfarism with marxism and a one-party state in view, but it's left of centre.
Thing about Moore I guess, is that he's one of those guys, who, love him or loath him at least challenges exisiting assumptions. Even if his pieces fail to achieve anything concrete, perhaps all he does is to shift the boundaries of the argument a little. To be honest, that's no bad thing.
After the furore this has caused though, I might get it on DvD.
On a similar subject, did you catch the Wolf Blitzer vs. Michael Moore tiff on CNN. That's when you truly know you're the far left when even CNN takes a swipe at you.