Regarding Mary Kay Nafaa’s letter “Health care, socialism & capitalism” (April 6, TribLIVE): I can’t address all of her confusions, but we can start with this thought experiment.
Suppose you or your family or friends or political party wanted or needed something your neighbor had. You have three choices:
1. You could go to your neighbor and ask him to share.
2. You could offer your neighbor something you have in exchange for what you want.
3. You could put a gun in your neighbor’s face and take what you want.
The first choice is known as charity. The second is known as business. The third is known as armed robbery, and it also describes government-imposed socialism.
I assume that as an individual, you would understand that No. 3 is evil. Why would you think putting a few layers of government functionaries between you and the theft makes it any less of a crime? Contrary to what Bernie Sanders says, all socialism is authoritarian, by definition. Democratic socialism is mob rule authoritarianism.
That is the ethics of the situation. Chew on that, and then we might discuss the sociological and economic horrors of appropriating other people’s property.
Arthur Moeller
New Florence