Oddbean new post about login | logout Some good conversations about “progressive” on here again recently. My biggest hang up with any full libertarian or bitcoin only etc etc arguments are how the vulnerable in society will fair *today*. So folks with disabilities (millions in US), single moms raising kids, the homeless, elderly poor folks, etc. Now, I’ve worked my whole career in nonprofits working with these types of populations. I’m less focused on where the money is coming from, and more on how we organize support. Most nonprofits in the U.S. are heavily funded via government grants and state/federal line items. Should we move away from this, I’d be 100% ok with this as long as there is still stable funding for folks to access resources they need! I’m a big fan of direct cash support. P.S - my roles recently have been focused on development efforts for nonprofits. So fundraising and building healthy and sustainable nonprofit organizations. Anyway, hopefully that clarifies for some folks as well that want to argue/discuss states role. For me that’s less important/interesting, but we still will need avenues for people to get help/have support when they need. What does that look like?
Check out the Free Haven Community Initiative! It is in Zambia and co-located near @bitcoinvictoriafalls. I recently joined the board.
Many of those “disabilities” aren’t, single moms made a choice; build a safety net and all of a sudden no one bothers to buy a parachute. Government doesn’t care about those people, or they would at least attempt to solve the problem. No, it’s just another mafia style shakedown to extract maximum wealth from the remaining slaves. If you want to support single mothers and disabled, no one is stopping you. Use your spare bedroom and give them an allowance. Stealing is always wrong. It is akin to murder, just over time. Time is being stolen and it makes me feel disgust.
Most non-profits are taxed differently, but many rely heavily on corporate and private individual donors. You don’t need a large government in order to have a successful non-profit.
Not at all. Just saying if you look at share of revenue across nonprofits it’s very heavily government funded, with still even greater need. Who will make up the government pie should the government not exist (or money printer not exist) Btw, I think money printer shouldn’t exist but will for our generation and further I actually believe
There’s an argument to be made that nobody has to fill the government’s pie. It’s more nuanced than this of course. And the government and printer aren’t going anywhere as you’ve aptly state. Non-profits are just a tax designation and they are not all equal, some do great work, others not so much. Segmenting out scientific and clinical research non-profits in terms of government funding is a whole other discussion as well. Should foundations created by billionaire benefactors living or dead receive government funding? Again, when we talk about non-profits we’re also talking about a 501(c) tax designation that is applied to everything from Harvard University to The Church of Kanye (although the latter was revoked this year.)
I do think where the money is coming from to support vulnerable populations and how we define them is actually the key question for progressive policy. Right now we have mostly centralized authorities determining who is vulnerable (which is often arbitrary to some degree) and because there is no transparency in how people's taxes (let alone how their inflation) is spent, people are naturally suspicious of what is going on. To give a concrete example, as someone who has worked in the environmental regulatory space for over 20 years, I have seen this play out in my work. Environmental resources that should be protected often are not, typically because someone with a lot of money bulldozes their way through the regulations. On the other hand, perfectly reasonable and low impact projects are delayed and small developers stonewalled by endless red tape. I've also seen the environmental space be co-opted by certain favored actors to focus on funneling money to those causes, sometimes at the detriment of other environmental resources that are equally or even more deserving (in my opinion). The problem in short is that some person or entity is deciding how the money is redistributed and there is a lack of transparency as well as a lack of say from the people who provide that money. Hence, many people (not just libertarians) see this as unfair in some way and rightly so. In the olden days you had local communities that collected the funds and distributed them to the people to help the young, the old, and the disabled. There was still nepotism but the communities had much more input and your social standing mattered. Today the redistribution is at a national and even global level and the people's will is not observed. Therefore, I think it is of the utmost importance that any progressive policies address this key issue and I think that while Bitcoin addresses the Cantillon effect to some degree, we need to seek better cypherpunk ways of allowing the People to decide who and what causes they wish to help .
Any transition will be rough, but we ought to be prepared for it. The current fiscal situation will force Western governments eventually to cut welfare programs. The existence of this government funding has distorted the non-profit sector , crowded out private charity and distorted norms around supporting extended family members in need. I’m convinced that mutual aid societies like the ones that proliferated a 100 years ago, private charities, local communities and extended families would do a much better job.