I can see we're just going to get into the old "capitalism vs socialism" argument again, and I'm really not in the mood to go there, given the last one took so long.
Flat-rate tax is fair. I see no reason to punish the rich, when they have earned their money like everyone else. Even if some of them are getting inheritance, it won't last forever on it's own. A flat-tax rate benefits everyone, since everyone is giving the same proportion of their wealth. Rich give more, poor give less (as actual values). The rich are the main people paying for the services provided by the government, whilst in socialism you'd have no rich people (why would anyone want to earn so much they get most of it taken from them) and so less money going towards public services.
On education, in the current system the poor kids end up in poorer schools. State schools have to accept all children, regardless of their abilities. You want to talk about the gap between the poor and the rich, why not talk about the gap between the intelligent and the less-intelligent in state schools. Everyone learns at the same rate, and the intelligent kids are the ones who are being held back (rich and poor alike). A private system gives more classroom flexibility, and the competition generated by the various services means that more people get to use them. On graduates, I thought I made it clear that money would be diverted from government spending to help create new jobs in the private sector.
If you are interested in the welfare plan, the Lbertarian Party (American) has a nice short essay on it: http://www.lp.org/issues/poverty-and-welfare. The aim is to pass the safety net over the charitable organisations and community rather than have it as a government issue. The money saved is used to create more jobs in the private sector, as well as scrap barriers / paperwork that prevent people from creating jobs for themselves.
Libertarians are against wars of most kinds unless they are carried out in response to threats / attacks on homeland. We would minimize the military spending and shift it to job sector + police.
Oh, and as for the "closing the gap", there is no reason to close the gap if the poorest people are able to work and feed their families. As long as we can make sure that there are enough jobs to go around, we can solve the poverty issue.
Flat-rate tax is fair. I see no reason to punish the rich, when they have earned their money like everyone else. Even if some of them are getting inheritance, it won't last forever on it's own. A flat-tax rate benefits everyone, since everyone is giving the same proportion of their wealth. Rich give more, poor give less (as actual values). The rich are the main people paying for the services provided by the government, whilst in socialism you'd have no rich people (why would anyone want to earn so much they get most of it taken from them) and so less money going towards public services.
On education, in the current system the poor kids end up in poorer schools. State schools have to accept all children, regardless of their abilities. You want to talk about the gap between the poor and the rich, why not talk about the gap between the intelligent and the less-intelligent in state schools. Everyone learns at the same rate, and the intelligent kids are the ones who are being held back (rich and poor alike). A private system gives more classroom flexibility, and the competition generated by the various services means that more people get to use them. On graduates, I thought I made it clear that money would be diverted from government spending to help create new jobs in the private sector.
If you are interested in the welfare plan, the Lbertarian Party (American) has a nice short essay on it: http://www.lp.org/issues/poverty-and-welfare. The aim is to pass the safety net over the charitable organisations and community rather than have it as a government issue. The money saved is used to create more jobs in the private sector, as well as scrap barriers / paperwork that prevent people from creating jobs for themselves.
Libertarians are against wars of most kinds unless they are carried out in response to threats / attacks on homeland. We would minimize the military spending and shift it to job sector + police.
Oh, and as for the "closing the gap", there is no reason to close the gap if the poorest people are able to work and feed their families. As long as we can make sure that there are enough jobs to go around, we can solve the poverty issue.
