Search the Community

Not sure if this has been asked before, but with Sandy around, it brought up a question I've been trying to solve for a while. In true laissez faire capitalism, to what extent should the government be involved. One example is Sandy. To what extent should the government be involved. Should it send the military and the police to help with recovery efforts, should emergency funds be released to help with recovery (then where do those funds come from). What if it was a bigger disaster, something that shook up the whole country, like the Earthquake in Japan. Is there room for a keynesian stimulus to provide a cash flow for recovery. What about an epidemic, should the government be providing emergency medical support. Whenever trying to answer these, I end up with a dichotomy I haven't been able to resolve. Some of what I mentioned above does not sound like it would interfere with individual rights. However in each case there is a need to expand the government (e.g. some minimal public health care, or for a small role remaining for the central bank. Each one of these will lead to a bigger government eventually resulting in what we have today. So I'm interested in what should be the extent of government involvement in a natural disaster, and more important from a philosophical why?