Under a laissez-faire system of private charity:

1. The productive rich are richer, so they have more to contribute to charity.
2. The productive poor are richer, so they are less reliant on charity, thus leaving more charitable help for the involuntarily non-productive poor.
3. All productive individuals, being able to keep all the fruits of their labour and thus feeling that their liberty and dignity is genuinely respected, have not only the means, but, more importantly, also a genuine incentive to contribute to charity.
4. The voluntarily non-productive poor, knowing that they have no right to live at the expense of others, have a strong incentive to become productive, thus leaving more charitable help for the involuntarily non-productive poor.

In sum, under the system in question there is less poverty, both involuntary and voluntary, and more means to eliminate it.

Under a statist system of “public welfare”:

1. The productive rich are poorer, so they have less to contribute to the “welfare fund”, let alone to private charity.
2. The productive poor are poorer, so they are more reliant on “public welfare”, thus leaving less “welfare aid” for the involuntarily non-productive poor.
3. All productive individuals, being regularly expropriated of a large part of the fruits of their labour and thus feeling that they are treated like slaves or milking cows, have not only hardly any means, but, more importantly, also hardly any incentive to contribute to the “welfare fund”, let alone to private charity, or even to continue being productive.
4. The voluntarily non-productive poor, believing that they have a right to live at the expense of others, have a strong incentive to remain non-productive, thus leaving less “welfare aid” for the involuntarily non-productive poor.

In sum, under the system in question there is more poverty, both involuntary and voluntary, and less means to eliminate it.

Make your choice wisely.