Response to the NGT August 19/20 pg 4 “Taxman” The writer indicated the propriety of various levels of government “assisting” the broader economy with “bailouts”, with the question “at times like this don’t we want all levels of government to step in and protect citizens from financial disaster”? In my view, the bailouts were the “moral responsibility” of the government, since it was they who shut down the ability of the citizenry to produce their own “living”, regardless of the governments’ grounds. Few voluntarily shut down their businesses and dismissed staff. In fact, business and staff were waiting in anticipation of “re-opening” and adjusting their business operations to operate during COVID 19. That is called “responsibility” and “creativity”. However, anyone on “social assistance” experienced no interruption of their benefit payments.
Subsequently, the author writes “Sadly, not everyone wants their hard earned money to go the undeserving” (paraphrased). The article concluded with a musing regarding Minimum Basic Income. Assisting those who are “forced” out of their income producing endeavors by the government seems to have no correspondence to the MBI in which the government assists those who may have limited or no income by their own choices. Please read the article by the Fraser Institute “The Causes of Poverty” at www.fraserinstitute.org/sites/default/files/causes-of-poverty.pdf.
In conclusion, there is a vast gulf between those who exercise their “responsibility” and talents to produce goods and services in the economy and those who exercise their “rights” to obtain a share in the value that others have produced.
Willem Van Dam