[valenzuela]

Nate, consider the following hypothetical discussion

A: How about goverment programs for hot meals for children on school?
B: No, because to fund that program you need to force others to pay for it
C: No, because if you fund that program you will have to tax people and that will result in market inneffeciencies and in the long run those kids will be worse off.
D: Wah, wah why cant I be free? Its not my fault poor people have sex.
E: I think a voluntary solution to the problem its better, the community will be aware those children need help and since they will care they will feed the kids themselves, if you put a goverment porgram those people that were going to help wont help and the children will be worse off.

Person B is giving more importance to absolute property rights than to a natural state problem
Person C is overestimating the effect a slight tax will have on the incentives and is underestimating the irreversible damage that is produced because the kids wont get proper nutrition when theyre still kids.
Person D is being a douchebag
Person E is being extremely naive and is just HOPING the community will care enough to take the time to do voluntary solution.

I hope that clarifies my position.