web analytics
February 12, 2016 / 3 Adar I, 5776
Blogs
Sponsored Post


How the Free Market Redistributes Wealth Vs. How the Government Does

Allowing private actors to produce and act selfishly redistributes wealth better and more fairly than the government ever can.
free market

Money wasted: 0.

Say it with me. Let it roll of your tongue…Redistributive.

Visit Settlers of Samaria.

About the Author: Rafi Farber blogs at SettlersofSamaria.org.

The author's opinion does not necessarily reflect the opinion of The Jewish Press.

If you don't see your comment after publishing it, refresh the page.

Our comments section is intended for meaningful responses and debates in a civilized manner. We ask that you respect the fact that we are a religious Jewish website and avoid inappropriate language at all cost.

If you promote any foreign religions, gods or messiahs, lies about Israel, anti-Semitism, or advocate violence (except against terrorists), your permission to comment may be revoked.

6 Responses to “How the Free Market Redistributes Wealth Vs. How the Government Does”

  1. Charlie Hall says:

    A Samaria settler complaining about government redistribution? Why just about every settlement in Judea and Samaria was established as the result of government subsidies, with tax money taken from citizens of Israel within the Green Line!

  2. Stephen Leavitt says:

    I normally don't respond on the site, but this needs a response….

    Settlers don't pay their share of taxes? Settlers don't run businesses, employ people and bring in tax revenue to the state? Because settlers don't do more than their share of the security burden?

    Charlie, I read all your comments, and while I don't agree with you a lot in general, I respect your position.

    But what you wrote above is a sham argument and a disgusting parroting of a false proposition, and not worthy of the other comments you've written.

    If we Jews didn't live in settlements, we'd be living in some other community where the same schools, roads, medical centers and infrastructure would still need to be built to accommodate the needs of so many people. Whether that be in Jerusalem, Gush Dan, the Negev or the Galil.

    The reality is that housing in settlements helps lower prices in high demand areas such as Jerusalem and Gush Dan, by providing a nearby alternative. If only we were allowed to build more, the pressure on those areas would be reduced even more, creating more affordable housing all around.

    Until it was destroyed, the 1700 settlers of Gush Katif were responsible for 15% of Israel's agricultural export, 60% of Israel's herb and cherry tomato export, and 70% of Israel's organic vegetables and fruits. The state got far more back then it put in – until they destroyed that golden goose.

    And next we can move on to the settler's award winning wines, exported to all over the world.

    Settler and settlement communities are doing far more than their share for the state of Israel, so when you make statements about money being taken away from citizens within the Green Line to build settlement, as if Settlers are parasites, that's just false and ugly.

  3. Charlie Hall says:

    "The reality is that housing in settlements helps lower prices in high demand areas such as Jerusalem and Gush Dan, by providing a nearby alternative."

    You've just destroyed Bennett's argument. Government subsidies DO lower housing prices! He just won't admit it.

    "The state got far more back then it put in – until they destroyed that golden goose."

    Correct. GK was an economic success, unlike the settlements in Y & S. But this is an inadmissible argument according to Bennett.

    " Settlers are parasites, that's just false and ugly. "

    I've never said that and don't believe it. I'm just calling out Bennett for his hypocrisy. The settlements required big subsidies to start, many remain uneconomic, and the ones beyond the Security Fence are a drain on IDF resources. It is perfectly legitimate for government to favor one segment of the nation over another, and Bennett even would agree. I'd just like him to stop being disingenuous.

  4. Charlie Hall says:

    I'm reminded of the Republicans in the US Congress who are voting against Sandy aid but were quite aggressive in getting aid to their own regions after earlier natural disasters.

  5. The analogy with Sandy does not follow. There's a lot of pork in the Sandy aid bill that was just passed, and a lot of aid was in CDBGs, which are eminently abusable.

  6. Charlie Hall says:

    All government programs are abusable, and all appropriations have pork. That is the way we want it. The public doesn't really care about abuse of government programs; the biggest abuser in history is now Governor of Florida.

Comments are closed.

Current Top Story
Obama Boycotts Israel
White House: Obama Will Sign Trade Bill Begrudgingly, Hates Anti-BDS Part

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/blogs/settlers-of-samaria/how-the-free-market-redistributes-wealth-vs-how-the-government-does/2013/01/14/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: