> Dana wrote: > I think you should have a safety net. > The question is where does "safety net" end and enablement being?
Just about anyone would agree that Welfare, in its 80s form, was a failure: it actually financially encouraged people to jump into the net because, hey, the net is comfy. We see this time and again: when you make bad decisions financially costly, and good decisions financially encouraging, you get good behavior. The trick is tweaking each end of that spectrum: too much help ---------------> swelling of those that need "help" -------------------- Goldilocks ----------------------------------------------------> Just right too little help ---------------> swelling of those that need help The problem is that when you get the "just right" policy it necessarily means that the government won't be helping someone. This is when people complain and we swing back to too much help. So how to fix that problem? By agreeing that government's role only goes so far that that the rest needs to covered by charity - which we can incent via taxes! Example: This past weekend I helped raise $30k for a little girl. None of my time or donations can be deducted because I donated to an individual. BOTTOM LINE: The best solution is a public-private partnership that incents people to work, but provides them a stiff net to catch them when they fall - cause a stiff net will bounce them back out. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| CF 8 â Scorpio beta now available, easily build great internet experiences â Try it now on Labs http://www.adobe.com/cfusion/entitlement/index.cfm?e=labs_adobecf8_beta Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:237489 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
