Without coercive methods of enforcing economic equality, who would take care of the poor, pay for public education and healthcare?

Within this question are the number one, two, and three concerns which are brought up in conversation. I will address them one by one.

Who would care for the poor?

Since this concern is most commonly expressed, there is no doubt that the less fortunate will be taken care of by private charity or local organizations. Just the fact that these organizations exist right now in our current world, despite the (failed) coercive means by which we try to solve this tragedy, gives me great hope that people can be convinced to not use coercion to achieve this important goal.

It is also through government meddling in the economy and workforce which has caused a loss of opportunity for the less skilled and less advantaged people in this world. We can see this evidenced with The New Deal, nearing one hundred years since its passing, has not only failed to eliminate poverty, but has created a completely new class of citizen; one which is nearly entirely dependent on the state for sustenance in the “welfare cycle.”

Who would pay for education?


What about the rich? Won’t they continue to get richer if we don’t force them to give the rest of society their extra money?


How would we take care of the environment in the absence of coercive methods of governance?