You might not know Matthew Lesko‘s name, but there’s a good chance you’ve seen or heard one of his ads. He claims to have been researching government grants for more than two decades and he claims to be the expert on “free money for everybody.”
I’ve always found his ads offensive, because there’s something horribly distasteful to me in the idea of “free money.” There’s no such thing as free money. There’s only money that’s been taken from one group of people and given to another group of people — and that’s always seemed very wrong to me.
But I’ve been thinking lately about this issue, and I’m not sure the case is as simple as I’d like it to be. It’s not that I’ve suddenly started approving of governments coercively taking money from people. But the question of what it’s OK for us to accept from government is more complicated — at least for those of us who believe it’s wrong for the money to be available in the first place.
I know a couple who are having a difficult time financially right now. She’s working full-time while he finishes his college degree. They have a young child, and it’s a struggle to make it financially. But he’s a libertarian who hasn’t been willing to take any government assistance. His in-laws watch them struggle and seem disapproving that he won’t apply for any kind of government aid. Is he a principled man who we should admire? Or is he a fool for not taking the help that’s available?

Advice to fast food restaurant execs: stop ‘innovating,’ do the basics right
Flawed bricks can build our lives, because perfection never arrives
Jesus’ face on a Walmart receipt? People see what they want to see
Noise of culture isn’t evil, but it drowns out what really matters
What if repairing my worst flaw meant losing my greatest power?
Doing it for the children? No, they’re doing it for the TV cameras
Eviction moratorium is pure theft; it’s a sign of creeping socialism
I’ve lost all interest in begging anyone to fix the political system
Hug awakens realization of how much I’ve missed human touch