Kill the poor

A libertarian government would abolish state welfare. State-sanctioned coercion would be phased out, and the provision of welfare would become the exclusive domain of voluntary charity.

This policy always meets the same objection, expressed here by Commie Mutant Traitor.

And what happens to the genuinely needy if the voluntary charity of you and your fellow selfless wealthy isn't sufficient to meet even the bare minimum of their needs for food, shelter, and healthcare? Plenty of people are happy to ignore their moral obligations, or disagree that such obligations even exist, so the burden placed on such paragons of virtue as yourself in the absence of state intervention would be quite large.

I might as well state the obvious, and answer Commie Mutant Traitor's rhetorical question. If voluntary charity isn't sufficient to meet even the bare minimum of their needs for food, shelter, and healthcare, then the genuinely needy will die - just as they do now. But the question is hypothetical. In New Zealand, the number of genuinely needy is small, and public largesse is large. In New Freeland, everyone's bare minimum needs for food, shelter, and healthcare will be met.

Still, wouldn't it be nice if those pesky poor people were someone else's problem? Here's an idea. New Zealand could secede from South Auckland. Our commitment to the welfare of South Auckland's poor and needy would then come under "foreign aid" - resulting in a 97% cost saving to the tax-payer.