There is no reason why, in a society which has reached the general level of wealth ours has, (the certainty of a given minimum of sustenance) should not be guaranteed to all without endangering general freedom; that is: some minimum of food, shelter and clothing, sufficient to preserve health. Nor is there any reason why the state should not help to organize a comprehensive system of social insurance in providing for those common hazards of life against which few can make adequate provision.Ohhhhhhhhhh Megaaaaaaaaaaan.
Heeheeheheheheheheeeee.
(source)
Hmmm, actually, it seems as if the sacred Hayek was talking out of both sides of his mouth on this one, if this post is any indication.
Has a libertarian ever been consistent and coherent?
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment