Value. We have to talk about manufacturing workers. Theres this recognition of the Service Sector just in terms of the question earlier about employers, a lot of what ive been doing lately has been talking to public agencies about enforcement and one of the things that comes up when i make the argument for the Broker Community organizations they havent been given a formal role in the law and we have to start thing in about the enforcement as the government does over here thats what we do together. One of the flashbacks i get from the local agencies, what do i say to the local business you all come and lets recognize that markets are always better off when employers are organiz organized. That is an argument that weekend the can win. When his employers awhether hise local level in the sectors, we have somebody that we can deal with. And without that, we just have chaos. Theres a common interest and we know this obviously through lots of labor history but its no less true today who would lead the movement. To go back to the food issue whether you are talking restaurant workers, food workers, we are talking women and one of the great models of organizing thats out there and in this room carrying across the generational model where there is a role for all stakeholders, consumers, practitioners, people receiving the service of care we talk about building a caring economy, and you talked about how the 15 the fight for 15 Movement Many were longterm caregivers and we are longterm care showers. We have to have a better idea of how to connect and keep the conversation going on how to take this implausible demand to the next level. But does anybody want to weigh in on this question . He and his colleagues are adopting a stakeholder approach so its gone from the workers to organizing Restaurant Owners and consumers to understand what they consume and the implications of what they are paying. How people are treated behind the kitchen door and in front, etc. And it extends and maybe this is where the question is coming from who picked the crops and processed food. One of the things im hearing tonight is we need to be savvy about the popular culture. Think about lets say various high points of the Movement Including the Second World War there is such an association between manufacturing jobs and the war effort. Manufacturing decent work which is pulling more women into the workforce and people of color and then pushing them out. Very mixed, but an association of work with a National Effort and its a cultural power. Its so relatable. Im not being naive about the range of interest on industrial food. It is in the complicated and trench interest for the treatment of workers. Its a long way to go but there is a tremendous power in this and i appreciate the question. I cant help but say it may be a power. David, last comment and then we will put some closing thoughts. Just to respond to some of the questions, seattle is the kind of city where there are not exactly as many farmers markets as there are mcdonalds which is a great thing. Thats really true. That being said, i wouldnt say the role of food itself was front and center in the strugg struggle. Its about the lowwage work and then expanding outwards to the gas stations and airport workers and sort of the whole we now live in a world where 15 of the fastest 20 p. 11,520 an hour and dont require any education past high school and 43. 8 of the work jobs under 15 an hour. So we are rapidly becoming a lowwage nation and that was the height issu of the issue in seae that we addressed. Washington state did away with its penalty legislation in 1988. So on a single day in 1989, january 1 from every restaurant worker in the state got a 300 raise. Guess what, we still have restaurants, despite what is it, nearly 30 years of the Restaurant Association putting out a december newsletter predicting how many thousands of jobs will be lost. Its clear that the arguments dont have Economic Resilience once you test them because the places like San Francisco and seattle have among the highest per capita number of jobs and restaurants in the united stat states. So its clear that you dont need that stuff to maintain the Restaurant Business climate. It only tipped the farm workers and Domestic Workers who were excluded and it was independent contractors and healthcare workers. Four of those groups continue to be excluded except occasionally the state legislation, eight states dont have the credit, one has collective bargaining for farm workers etc. They went on strike in the 60s and 70s and when the they wouldt go on unions and went on strike anyway thats how the watching. We are going to remain. This was a great panel. Thank you for writing this book. I have to say i cant renumber exactly what she said about the book that i know that it was really great. And i actually did read the book and it reminded me a lot of marriage, the good, the bad, the ugly for better and worse, rich and poor. It was a great read and very inspiring. I want to thank the foundation for your support of this amazing work to fight for 15 is the most important fight for Economic Justice in America Today. I know from our own experiences at the Foundation Supports that work and i also want to give a shout out to a few other significant victories in the Ford Foundation and others in the room has been a part of and it goes to the point that in addition to needing organizing and new forms of Building Worker power, we need Good Government and that this is a shout out the best Labor Department that we have had some 1938. [applause] all of you know that we have had in overtime rule and we are fighting to keep the congress from stealing wages that they finally won. I have to say we had an amazing surprising decision of the Supreme Court on the abortion restrictions and that was fantastic. But yesterday the court decided not to grant the review that the Ford Foundation supported other organizations in 20, 30 years. Finally the home care workers are guaranteed the right to a federal fair minimum wage and overtime pay. 2 million workers went to bed last night knowing that for the first time they get the same rights that most other americans take for granted. We wouldnt have this if we didnt have the Good Government supporting the work that the unions and people in the group have been doing to take advantage of this moment. I am discouraged when i look around and think of whats happening with respect to the Labor Movement but i am also super excited about what weve been able to accomplish as a community in the last several years and have to admit we are among those that thought we wanted to work in the fight for 15 of the did that report on how many people earn less than 15 and im happy to say because of the fight for 15, today one in five American Workers lives in a jurisdiction that has a 15dollar minimum wage. Over the course of two or three years that is pretty amazing. [applause] the great andrew cuomo, god bless him. Shoot for the stars. After this, mingling and have another drink. The foundation is giving away copies of davids book that we o encourage people to go online to howls powles bookstore in order copies for your family and friends and david will sign it for you. Thanks very much. [applause] conversation between the author of a newly released Nonfiction Book and the interviewer who is a journalist from a public policymaker or familiar with the topic into the opposing viewpoint. After words airs at 10 p. M. Eastern and we will take you across the country visiting book festivals from author events and parties where authors talk about the latest works. Booktv is the only network devoted exclusively to Nonfiction Books. Booktv on cspan2. Television for serious readers. The cspan radio app makes it easy to continue to follow the 2016 the election wherever you are. Its free to download from the store or google play. Get audio coverage and uptotheminute Schedule Information for cspan radio and television and podcasts times for the popular Public Affairs book and history programs. Stay up to date on all of the coverage. Cspan radio app means you always have cspan on the go. Booktv recently visited capitol hill to ask members of congress what they are reading this summer. I am a multiple reader so i read a lot of books at the same time so sometimes i will finish a book at one sitting but more often then not i read different parts of a book that one book that i finished reading relatively short time ago is this great book that i understand you did a whole segment on the millionaire and the bard. Im a big fan of shakespeare and when i saw this book i immediately picked it up and its a terrific book about a soldier that went on a spree to buy shakespeare folios and amassed a huge collection of enough materials that he created the library and its a fascinating story that ended up in washington, d. C. But im also reading the righteous mind. Its a book about communicating in a more effective way. The elephant is making all the decisions go right, left, back, forward. The writer explains what the elephant is doing and a lot of times you talk to the rider that isnt making the decisions we ought to be talking to and its a good way to remember you should be talking to the elephant making the decisions and i think in the time of the political situation arena, its important to keep in mind who we ought to be talking to. We picked up a book at the gallery and its called the accidental masterpiece. Because im a great lover of art you can see beauty in art and everyday objects and everywhere you look this is another interesting book that i just picked up. As you can see i like color and art and i do my own art and ceramics although i keep my day job. English isnt my first language and i credit a librarian when i was in Elementary School who awakened my level of reading and i remember the books she read of little kids to sit at he that wt her feet in the library and she read to us mary poppins and that brought out the level of reading which as i said is foundational. I think basically to be a good writer, you should be a reader. And im a pretty voracious reader. Is there anything else that you are reading this summer . I picked up a chase for hawk. I also read in the confederations of the stories i have on my ipad of those are things i can read when i have time. And as i said, i have a number of those on my ipad. A lightbulb went off when i read that book and i decided that maybe my life wasnt going to consist of getting married and having children and living that kind of life that i should be thinking about taking care of myself and standing in my own horizons. A fellow at the institute is the coauthor of the book equal is unfair to fight against income inequality. On afte after words he talket the book and argues that efforts to correct income inequality caused more problems than any quality itself. He is interviewed by diana of the Manhattan Institute in this hourlong program. Host i have enjoyed reading your book on equal is unfair americas misguided and its so thoughtprovoking to read from someone that says any quality isnt a problem. Could you start out by telling us why any qualit inequality isa problem . Lets start with what is economic inequality with the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer. It means a gap because some people are getting rich and others are getting poorer but its also the gap because people are getting rich at different rates and inequality can also rise or fall for a different reason. One reason might be people are being really productive. They are employing thousands of people that are creating tons of value by pioneering the new inventions of people get richer than me and she is i think a great teacher but is only providing economic value to a few dozen people at the time. On the other hand there are things that can increase inequality that are bad and are unjust and take advantage of people. So, bernie made madoff. The reason i say any inequality could get it through something that was fair or process that was unfair to. That is something we are challenging and saying. The hear from a middleclass stagnating what do you say about that to these people . Why is it that theyve made this such a central claim, the middleclass stagnation . Americans have a sense that we dont live in a zerosum world. This doesnt come from my expense. Amazon didnt make me worse off if need be better off if you want to convey to people w that live in this universe to live tt some up to bring others down which is what the Inequality Campaign is all about. In order to do that you have to be able to show something to the effect those at the top of care at your cost by disadvantaging and taking advantage of you and thats why this stagnation has become central. So the idea is the middleclass is stagnated to different start dates but 1979. I think that this is wildly implausible for common sense. Given all the advances in medicine in the internet and Computer Technology realm. Very few people would take that bet and the question has been what is this claim based on. Its a claim to look at the statistical aggregates. We are supposed to have this idea in our mind that i started working in 1979 and i havent gotten a raise for decades. But thats really not the scenario that we are talking about. We are talking about certain statistical categories. But statistical categories dont necessarily reflect whats happening to the individuals like you and me. Just a couple brie of brief exa. So, for instance to say it is stagnated over 40 years, the composition of food is being counted can change so we have different trends in immigration. We have seen an influx primarily from the poor countries and they come here to the United States and now they earn more than in their home country so they are better off. We are presumably unchanged. We are making whatever we were making before. And guess what is going to happen to the Median Income when you get this influx of people paying jobs its going to go down even though they are better off or you can take the fact that its household income. But the composition of household has changed over time in the 1970s we saw the rise of divorce rate. So if you are making 50,000 a year lets see who gets divorce and even if they get a raise to save 35,000 in your statistically that makes us look worse off. A lot of the factors lead to the statistics. If you look around this and take a careful look at the statistics i dont think you can justify that claim. Is there any role for taxation at all to help people at the bottom . Guest what do we need government for. There is no question about that. Im certainly not an anarchists. But the reason we need a government is to think about and go back before the Founding Fathers. The basic setup of the government was some people are born rulers and if you want to o rise up in life you have to get the favor of somebody that is one of the rulers. Before the Founding Fathers going back to those days do we . Guest thats the ultimate system when you have these entrenched politically unequal groups the insight is that each of us is equal and the government job isnt to rule us but to be the servant and protector of the rights. What happens when we protect the rights equally and your freedom and mine we are going to create different amounts of wealth. We want to go and become a teacher and that is what the successful life is. Thats what a successful life is and they want to be hedged Fund Managers and start new companies. Youre going to get inequality if we have equal freedom. Host do you think the government has a role taking the opportunity more equal by making sure they have a better education example . Guest i realize i skipped the important essence of the question which is what does the government will have to help out here but start with the quality of opportunity its been a mistake to talk about equality of opportunity because it could mean one of two things one is very good and one is very bad. That is what the political the quality we talked about moments aga momentago means the freedoms protected equally. The way that phrase has been used in the past 70 years or so is to mean any quality of initial chances of success. Is one egalitarian philosophers that if they did something so monstrous evil have unfair advantages. We have unequal opportunities. Its too keep in mind at all times and it doesnt come at anybodys expense. Malcolm gladwell wrote a popular book a few years ago in which we gave bill gates opus credit for succeeding but he went to school that had computers when nobody else is school had computers. Host hed caught up in the middle of the night and knock off to college. That is exactly right and it highlights two things. What we have been better off if bill gates didnt have access to the computers . Opportunities would have been more equal than everybody would have been a loser. Its what you do with the ones you have. A lot of the success in life is about turning things that dont look like opportunities into opportunities. One quick example. She had a business making these baby moccasins for little kids to wear and she started with this talent but she couldnt turn it into a business because she didnt have any money. She asked her brother who had a window business if she could keep the discarded window frames so shes following him around at the end of the summer term in the aluminum and thats how she started her business. If you asked if she had any opportunities you would say she doesnt have any money but because she did the responsibility for achieving it, she was able to see something that was an opportunity and then act to turn it into success and thats what you want to see. Look around at all the ones that are open to you. But then to highlight, no other reason you cant have the government promotes one persons opportunities is the only way you can do it is at other peoples expense. So the number one thing i would like to see is that the government stop taking away peoples opportunities which it does way too much of a. A. There is the occupational licensing laws. Its not that they havent gotten big enough handouts but handicapped by the government intervention. People cant get any jobs at all. Its trumping that this is spreading across the country. New york state might be the ne next. Guest one side creates unemployment and the other side says no if we look at the studies they dont. If i can find somebody willing to offer me 15 an hour to work the minimum wage says it is illegal for me to work. If i come at this from the issue of the philosophy and one of the things philosophy is very concerned with his justice and sthis justice andso i would saye true that 99 of the people get a higher wage and get stopped from working by Something Like the minimum wage that is unjust and you cant just prop up some people by upgrading the future of others who are unable to take that first step on the road to success. Academic economists concluded that it is just a young and unskilled or hurt by the increases in the minimum wage it is those that we are prevented from getting their foot on the first roun run of the career la. It is very troubling that in california and perhaps new york teenagers arent going to be able to get all the jobs. Theres the open road to success. Go back before the welfare state in the governmenand the governmg anything to lift people up. They build a successful lives for each other because here as opposed to their own countries but hes going to stop you from doing what is best in your life. That is what is going to allow anybody regardless of where they start to have the maximum opportunity. Host they prey on the uninformed. Is there any role for the government such as the federal trade commission to make sure what they are saying is true such as those that are 15 or 122 shouldnt be about to work to avoid exploitation . Guest the essence of the moral society when it comes right down to it is voluntary. Its a mutual agreement or we are free to go our separate ways. Nobody can do anything without our consent. The question is in cases where somebody sells you a product thats different than what they promised you that is where we need the government to step in and say thats not what that person consented to when he agreed to pay 20,000 for the car its a card thats going to operate in a certain way. But the regulatory bodies do is basically they dont prescribe to criminal behavior. They prescribe and proscribe productive behavior. Its not a regulation to tell carmakers when you sell something that would be what you said it was. The regulation when they say they get this kind of gas mileage and it has to do x. Y. And z. They have a right or responsibility to protect the rights of children. We are really concerned. Parents are so rich now they arent going to send their kids into a coal mine. The first thing they do once the achieving economic level of success they send their kids to school and thats why you see child labor going away. Its on its way out because of economic progress that they actually make it much harder for the kids who are excited instead of paying nintendo or whatever the videogame system is theyve put it like today in responsibility and yogainrespono suffers most from the law, for kids. The main thing that he didnt have the money to actually be himself so he could gain a foothold and Start Building a resume and achieving success. To do anything of a productive thing you want but one thing you cant do is be productive and i think that is not fair to younger people. Host dont you think there should be a law saying that under a certain age they have to be in school, what if i know it isnt very common but there were parents say look im going to send my children out because our children need the money or Something Like that, should be prohibited . Guest i think you need the government to find what do we consider that after that it has to be up to the parents judgment because that brings you down a very dangerous road for a number of reasons but the basic one of the government gets to decide what qualifies as an education and that is one of the worst things you can do. Putting them in charge of the ideas and values the children are taught, weve taken for granted for over 100 plus years. The biggest risk isnt that parents wont send their kids to school. I think the biggest risk is that schools are taken over b by the rockers the rather then opened up for choice and parents being free to decide what ideas their children should be taught in for innovators to find exciting effect of new ways to educate children. One of the topics is the president ial elections its interesting to see how much support Bernie Sanders has with his talk on inequality. Can you talk about why that is . Guest is it that Bernie Sanders has charisma and sex appeal or ideas that have a lot of power and i think it really is the power and the ideas. Number one, standing up for a moral ideal of economic inequality and someone that has on their side the moral narrative when you abide by the ideal youth mortgage and abandon the ideal and flounder. And then this unit would help her america reached its golden age in the postwar era when the government fought inequality and feel a bit better. Then what is equally good he abandoned that idea. The 1 took over and started reading the game. The result is we got all the games and they stagnated for thestagnated forthem the lessony fight things are great. So his message does have some traction. Its been getting a lot of traction. He says the texas should go up 80 or 90 . College students vote for him and feel the burn. I think its when you have morality on your side and appeared to have an idea on your site that is inspiring particularly to young people. They see him as authentic. How do we fight that messag thir address is . Guest whats going on as two aspects. One, he has this mortal idea. He is going to help people. But then it also appeals because the message that a lot of these kids take away is maybe i will get out of these college loans. When you combine the more ideal people they will crusade for something and the only way to oppose that is to challenge the idea so long as you grant that that makes you a good person you can come out and take a stand for it. I think what is tragic about this whole discussion is that the critics and people who dont want to see the government expanding how much wealth it takes for people expanding and how much control it has over peoples traces, people support Free Enterprise and free markets. Theyve not had much to say on this issue. How many have the opponents of the inequality critics put out at the time, zero. One of the biggest issu issues already since then theres been two books. One by a canadian professor even though his book was quite good and had some good elements but it only addresses the subcomponent of the debate. When we do see the debate addressed it focuses on challenging the statistics sa and inequality isnt as bad as you would think or challenging the solution saying we should minimize any quality but if you remember during the president ial debates, republicans will reduce better than democrat and the trouble with both of those conceded to the economic a quality as an ideal and the problem is if economic a quality is aas an ideal, then we are in trouble because Economic Freedom is a moral. We talk about the free market leading to nothing in economic inequality. It leads to progress for everybody that we have a lot of work to do. We have to challenge their idea and narrative and present a counter idea of and thats what we do in the book. I very much enjoyed reading it and everybody picking it up and adding it to the debate. What seems to confirm Many Americans is and inequality that mobility. We talk about people that start off slow and they just want to get better off. That seems to be more important than economic inequality. What do you say about that . Guest thats true. A lot of it comes to fairness isnt that gap. Its already able to rise by their own efforts even if they start out in the love of wealth on the affluent side of the scale i think theres a couple things that are important to keep in mind about mobility. First, mobility isnt declined. Most researchers agree its not really declined over the last 40 years even as the economic inequality has been rising. But we do have a mobility problem. The danger is thinking about mobility in a purely financial terms. A lot of times you see these charts. How many people move up from the bottom to top or until the middle . At the wrong way to think about it. The goal isnt to move up to a particular quintile. Its to find a career that you are happy at a selfsupporting and build a really fulfilling life. So i mentioned my friend jeremiah who started at the bottom and is now a teacher. I dont know exactly how much he makes that most teachers dont make enough to get into the top ten or 20 of earners. But isnt that a success, shouldnt we regret he didnt become an investment banker because that would have gotten into the top. There are people that say we need to pay teachers more and the level that they are giving back to society doesnt really square with the amount that we should be paying teachers for. There were proposals where the teachers would get paid more in exchange for giving up tenure. Guest thats funny. First wit. Chris cooper union wot that happen. Guest that is revealing. They should be paying as much as they can in the market. The problem is we dont have a market for Education Today so its not clear what they should be paying in the how much economic value are they adding. The basic question is then how should we think about mobility if he should think about it in these mobility tables . The way that you think about it are there barriers preventing a person from rising or stopping a person from rising and with that comes down to at the end of the day is the government intervening in the economy in a way that prevents a person from rising by productive achievement and productive merit . Host the licensing is in your book. Guest theres a million examples and maybe theres some that annoy you and heres one that annoys me. If you cant find anybody to employ me so im going to go out on my own and each or perform hairraising because it is a skill im good at. Lets say i know a bunch of people that want to pay me to do it. Its illegal for me to do that and i want to get a license in the state. As a job come as a trade, i have to go and spend 100, sometimes thousands of hours getting a license and sometimes hundreds of thousands of dollars. Who are the people most likely to become hair breeders and least likely to be able to afford to go through a process like that. Its the poorest people who need every ounce of freedom to get on that step for success and that is just one of many examples. With what they were even closing down childrens Lemonade Stand is. Guest absolutely. A Lemonade Stand is about teaching the lessons of entrepreneurship which is that you need permission from the government to do almost anything. But it really is outrageous. But there are so many barriers particularly for people starting out at the bottom. We talked about the minimum wage and education. Heres one more area. Everything the government does that drives up cost if theres a huge barrier in opportunity because if i have to work that much harder just to make a living so when the Government FundAffordable Housing crusade, a lot of what its doing is driving up the cost of housing as more people are demanding housing. A lot of the restructurings that we see by the epa on Energy Production such as the whole ethanol scandal, such as it is, it drives up cost of energy. Who are the people most affected by that . To people who dont have a big budget and cant afford the cost. Host 25 of its income is on energy and gasoline and motor oil and then the top 4 . Guest one fourth of the tight budget, that is a big deal. So theres these ways its becoming harder. If we are concerned with peoples ability to rise by merit, its to stop making it harder for them. Host what do you say to people that need to have more Renewable Energy even though it drives up the cost of energy because that helps the planet, dont you want to help the planet . Guest this is a big question. What i want to do is help human beings and the way you do that fundamentally is to leave people free to use the best energy for their own lives. Let them decide whether it is oil, natural gas host so than other people are going to come and say that this is increasing Greenhouse Gas emissions and closing Global Warming or climate change. Would you say that . Guest how do we sum that up in a few sentences. If we actually look at the big picture pluses and minus, it is i think without a question hugely beneficial to human beings. If we want to understand how they went from living 40 to 88th in precisely because we have had abundant cheap energy and i dont think that the arguments we hear against fossil fuels actually hold up and getting us hooked on something else. I think they can certainly cause pollution and thats why you need the law to protect us from pollution but you dont need to outlaw the more than 80 of the time thats making it possible. Its a more complex issue. I dont think we are headed for the climate catastrophe. I think the planet has been warming and on that of fossil fuels do is give us the ability to cope with any climate. One of the major things we are told if we need to expand the power of government to equalize people economically independent we need to expand the power of government to prevent the plan for fossil fuel. But its always take away freedom and wealth from individuals and give more power to the government. These have become the argument expanded today. We are tackling the argument here. I should just add a close friend of mine wrote a book tackling the case for fossil fuel. I would say weve got the Problem Solved now. Two books, one on each issue. Host we just have to make sure people read them and take them to heart. A lot of people talk about scandinavia as the idea and say we should be more like scandinavia because its more equal. What do you say about that . Guest when i started writing this the kind of a little about scandinavia but not a lot and i worked wit with colleagues from sweden and one of the surprising things i found was that if you look at the history, what you find is that it supports the opposite conclusion from what we are taught to. We hear comparisons between sweden and America Today and i think those are dangerous. Theres a bunch of different just the political policy easy to cherry pick the policies you want to see characterizes sweden versus america. We are often told that the socialist country and its a crazy capitalist country. In fact we are pretty much comparable in the amount of government control and involvement. Its just different. Much higher taxes and Wealth Distribution is actually much less damaging. But its all bee comparable in t sense. This is what is fascinating. Sweden started out as one of the poorest countries in europe if you go back a few hundred years ago. One of the poorest countries in europe if then quickly became one of the richest and it was because it became one freemarket countries. I think you could make the argument that it was more free market fofreemarket for many yn the United States. Became very rich, very unequal in the 1960s is when you start to get sweden moved i in the direction of dramatically increasing taxes and Wealth Distribution and is never a socialist country that there was a pretty it went very far in the direction of the democratic redistribution state. The result was the economy basically flat line. Things got really bad. You didnt see the Economic Growth or the companies coming out all the time. What happened in the economic inequality shrank. It got the lowest its ever gotten. They said this isnt working and they started kind of liberating the economy and theyve seen good economic outcomes. But then its starting to grow again. If you look at the perspective of their history you see the testament to the kind of case we are making in economic progress. Its not economic redistribution but economic liberation. Hispanic we do want some redistribution. We need somethin some things do. For example, we need streetlights and some things only the government can pay for because we need to have taxes. Host we need to pay for the things the government does that protect all of our freedoms particularly in the military and the police. There is no question about that. You can debate what are the best ways to raise the revenue but i dont call that redistribution. Redistribution is instead of raising funds to protect everybodys freedom and property, it takes some peoples property to give them to other people and there i think there is never a justification for that. Host so there shouldnt be any Government Social safety net for food stamp or unemployment insurance, no medicaid . Guest they get paid a portion of it that goes to the social safety net so if they get in trouble they have that safety net to fall back on. On. What it really amounts to i went to work and somebody wanted to pay me for my service is entitled to get to decide what to do with that money. It goes to another cause i may not agree with or want it in that amount. Im not against safety net if you want to call it that. Bad things can happen in life and you have to be prepared for them. And. I could join a health slides and pay an amount that i agreed to than have a contractual right to Health Care Benefits or a place to stay if i was elderly and could not support myself. Why should we make a social safety net voluntary rather than coercive . These things probably work for some people some of the time people were standing in line for suit that this tip kitchen. And then not to have food stamps . Bid but that was a deal. The fact is the economist debate the details but added no question was made possible by government control of the economy when people are left free you dont have widespread depression spinet they could say the and there ebs Regulation Without at the same time that they dont think dont have to go together. So that Wealth Distribution is immoral and destructive but i say history shows we dont need it the bad tajo is far from the example that this account because the great depression, is precisely be did have all of the government interventions in the economy. It is always more abundant in this way lessen vague concern. Sidles that as a problem. Two o respect