Libertarians often get criticized for not describing a system or society with an explicit social safety net. People argue that it is the state’s job to provide this apparently necessary service. Even most “small government” types agree with this. What constitutes the social safety net and what programs should be included is often up for debate. But for the purposes of this, let’s mostly consider those who need help with disabilities.
These disabilities exist at birth or occur later on in life. Most people don’t plan to become disabled and nearly all cases are quite unfortunate, so are libertarians mean or heartless for their lack of support of government programs? We sure don’t think so. In fact, we can make the case that the government programs can create harm to the people who use them (not to mention the obvious moral hazard) and that private alternatives would be better for everyone.
Disability insurance is one of the answers. To our great fortune, it already exists! If it were expanded and allowed to actually always function as insurance, the call to install some sort of state social safety net would more than likely cease to exist. Private insurance is actually profitable unlike the state that attempts to operate similar programs. The state uses Ponzi schemes and taxation. Private insurance uses real products with real results.
Keep in touch with us everywhere you are
Like us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter: @RolloMcFloogle @Slappy_Jones_2
Follow us on Gab.ai
Follow us on our Steemit page
Check us out on Patreon
Check us out on Hatreon
Like what you’re reading? Let us keep in touch and subscribe to us!