<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Collectivism Isn&#8217;t in Our Genes</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.cato-unbound.org/2007/03/22/brink-lindsey/collectivism-isnt-in-our-genes/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.cato-unbound.org/2007/03/22/brink-lindsey/collectivism-isnt-in-our-genes/</link>
	<description>Big Ideas for a Better World</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 04 Feb 2012 12:01:59 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cato Unbound &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Oddballs vs. Scholars, For Negative Liberty, Against the Welfare State</title>
		<link>http://www.cato-unbound.org/2007/03/22/brink-lindsey/collectivism-isnt-in-our-genes/comment-page-1/#comment-367624</link>
		<dc:creator>Cato Unbound &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Oddballs vs. Scholars, For Negative Liberty, Against the Welfare State</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Jun 2010 14:34:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cato-unbound.org/?p=437#comment-367624</guid>
		<description>[...] Brink’s response to Tyler makes some good points, but I think he’s missing the hardest problem here: Tyler says that “the welfare state is here to stay, whether we like it or not.” I agree. But the question is: what kind of welfare state are we going to have? Is the status quo – in which the welfare state is dominated by universal entitlement programs that mostly shuffle money from one cohort of the middle class to another – really the best we can hope to achieve? Or is it possible to restructure the welfare state so that its primary focus is on the poor and temporarily distressed? [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Brink’s response to Tyler makes some good points, but I think he’s missing the hardest problem here: Tyler says that “the welfare state is here to stay, whether we like it or not.” I agree. But the question is: what kind of welfare state are we going to have? Is the status quo – in which the welfare state is dominated by universal entitlement programs that mostly shuffle money from one cohort of the middle class to another – really the best we can hope to achieve? Or is it possible to restructure the welfare state so that its primary focus is on the poor and temporarily distressed? [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic page generated in 0.234 seconds. -->
<!-- Cached page generated by WP-Super-Cache on 2012-02-09 23:45:26 -->
<!-- Compression = gzip -->
