Posts in "Charity"

The Tragedy of Rainbow Fish

Ethan Papaserge
Oct 14, 2012 at 12:03 PM
By Ethan Papaserge

The 1992 short children’s story The Rainbow Fish, by Marcus Pfister, was read to nearly everyone in my age-group as they were growing up. The Rainbow Fish was “the most beautiful fish in the entire ocean” because of the sparkling poly-chromatic scales that covered his body. The other fish revered the Rainbow Fish for his beauty and longed for his attention. Rainbow Fish, being a pompous jerk, would simply swim on by when the other fish would call out to him.

When another fish asks Rainbow Fish for one of his scales, scales being a part of his essential being, RF responds “You want me to give you one of my special scales? Who do you think you are?” Now a simple “no” would have done the trick, but RF didn’t want to rip off a piece of his awesome skin and give it to someone else.

After this event and RF’s heinous desire to keep his own skin, the other fish no longer revered him and would no longer call out to him to play.  (Keep in mind that RF didn’t play with the other fish in the first place because he was a pompous jerk.)

Saddened by the new nature of his loneliness, RF consulted the expertise of the Wise Octopus. Wise Octupus decrees that RF should “give a glittering scale to each of the other fish.” After a silly bit of “how dare I give away a piece of being and get nothing in return,” RF complied and started to give his scales away.

At the end, every fish has one shiny scale and everyone was happy.

Keep the Love in R 3VOL UTION

Eric Sharp
Jul 2, 2012 at 8:12 PM
By Eric Sharp

We tout "The R3VOLUTION" -- a revolution of love. But let us remember what that means.
revolution

When we offer our solutions to the problems of society, we must first state our opposition to the status quo. If we don't do that then we have no credibility.

Libertarianism is not and should never be an endorsement of the system that exists now.

That means that if people are suffering under the current system, we must acknowledge that suffering. Only once we have done that will they listen.

For someone who is starving, or is sick and dying from lack of proper health care it does not matter how they get food or care -- especially if their suffering is not acknowledged first.

If libertarianism is not an answer to suffering then it is meaningless. Fortunately, it is an answer, but we as a movement often forget to stress this point.

Live for Yourself

Brian Underwood
Jun 26, 2012 at 11:49 AM
By Brian Underwood

Rodin's "The Thinker"

Throughout our lives, we are told many things about how to live our lives. "You should live for your country!" say some. Others say, "Your goal in live is to serve the 'common good'!" And the examples merely continue from there.

But these things fly in the face of all rationality. They man that his life is not really his own, but instead he is born indebted to some other entity. The individuals supporting such doctrines treat man's life as a blank check for anyone and everyone else to fill except himself.

This is not how man should live. Man should live for himself.<--break->

Does this mean that by living for oneself that compassion or good will towards others is prohibited? By no means! In fact, it is only by living for oneself that there can be any true compassion at all.

An Alternative to the Public Welfare State

Benjamin Levine
Oct 28, 2011 at 12:07 PM
By Benjamin Levine

Libertarians and the left find common ground on quite a lot of issues; however, when it comes to helping out the poor (something both sides want to do but disagree on policy) there is a definite split, as those on the left wish to use government programs to help those in need.  The problem is that theWhat welfare through taxation really is government does not have any money of its own; therefore, it has to take it from individuals through taxation.  Additionally, the government is just flat out horrible at fixing things, let alone a massive problem such as poverty.

Libertarians, on the other hand, wish to see a privatization of the welfare state.  This does not mean the government contracting taxpayers' dollars out to private organizations, though; that simply isn't enough change.  It means real privatization:  letting individuals keep their money and decide for themselves how to use it and where to donate it.  This is the way a free society works, rather than by stealing from some people and redistributing it to others.  Of course, liberals say that this isn't possible; there is no way, they argue, that private individuals and organizations can take care of the nation's poor.  But is this necessarily true?

Anonymous Goes after Orlando

John McKenna
Jun 29, 2011 at 11:34 AM
By John McKenna

imageEarlier this month, we reported the story of the Orlando-based organization Food Not Bombs being forced to cease feeding homeless people on city land after some of its members were arrested for violating a city ordinance regarding large gatherings in public parks. As that case makes its way through the court system, the renegade samaritans are now receiving help from an unlikely source: computer hackers who made Orlando their next target.

This week, it has been reported that the mysterious computer hacking troop Anonymous is coming to the aid of the beleaguered group through a web campaign called "Operation Orlando". The purpose of this mission is to attack "city web assets" as well as Orlando tourism sites on the internet in revenge for the arrests. Also, the group is promoting a boycott of the city of Orlando until the city repents on its treatment of the organization. Calling Orlando city officials "human rights abusers," as well as deeming the arrest for Food Not Bombs president Keith McHenry a "declaration of war," the attacks will be aimed at disrupting city communications and Internet accounts in an effort to get the men released and let them go on serving free lunches to needy residents. Yesterday they launched their first attack of their "war" by disabling the website orlandofloridaguide.com for much of the day, and will be continuing their hack attacks until the men are released.  More at www.silverunderground.com.

Feeding the Homeless? Got a permit?

Cody London
Jan 17, 2011 at 12:18 AM
By Cody London

Yes, it's true. If you want to feed the needy, you need a permit and a professional preparer to do so in the city of Houston. A couple's charity organization, called "Feed a Friend," was basically shut down when the city randomly decided to enforce a law requiring people who want to feed the homeless to have the food prepared in a "certified kitchen" with a "certified food manager."

If you recall back in 2007, there was a story similar to this, except it was in Orlando. These laws are enforced in many different major cities.

Apparently it is believed that these ordinances are designed to "help the public" because poor people are the most vulnerable to food borne illness because they have the least access to healthcare. Unfortunately, such concepts are  rooted in pure nanny state nonsense.

To sum up the logic: Yes, apparently the same people who dig through trash and beg for meals care whether or not the fresh home cooked meals prepared by caring individuals are made in a "certified kitchen" under the supervision of a "certified food manager" with a permit through the city. 

This makes me wonder whether or not charities support such laws. 

Controlled charity? What's next, panhandling permits?

Cheap on Charity?

Adam Fowler
Apr 19, 2010 at 5:19 PM
By Adam Fowler

With the release of both President Obama's and Vice President Biden's 2009 tax returns last week comes some revealing information. Though the Obama's reported that less than 6 percent of their $5.5 million income went to charity, the most interesting tidbit is that the Bidens gave less than 2 percent of their $333,000 income to charity. Even the standard church tithe -- considered a charitable donation -- is supposed to be 10 percent.

Far be it from me to criticize anyone for the amount of their charitable donations. Under normal circumstances, a person's private giving wouldn't be a point of criticism; it is, after all, a matter of personal conscience. However, these low levels of charitable donations, particularly on the part of the Bidens, stand out because of  earlier statements from Obama and Biden asserting that we need to "spread the wealth around" and that paying more taxes was the "patriotic" thing to do.

Here's Obama: