In your latest issue of Imprimis, William Voegeli asks a puzzler: What would constitute enough for welfare statists? Indeed, those inclined to believe such a thing as political mischief exists, will argue the rhetoric about compassion is intended to stir emotion to generate votes and transfer power to the party in question. Bureaucrats also have a reputation for selfishly defending and extending their turf by stirring up need.
Assuming good intentions, Voegeli concludes the push toward increasing levels of coercive transfers is based on short-sightedness, only looking at patching needs without consideration for parties damaged, sometimes marginally, by charitable confiscations. The author doesn’t say so, but in today’s mindset, all transfers are good because damaged people are like broken windows in their potential for job creation with economic multipliers.
