I don't think there is anybody in America—liberal or conservative, atheist or Christian—who thinks that poverty is a good thing or wouldn't like to see poverty vanquished. Differences of opinion emerge when the talk turns to strategies. Liberals tend to favor government programs that use tax dollars—monies that are taken by compulsion—to fund various government antipoverty programs. Libertarians favor, and most conservatives tend to favor, private-sector initiatives that are funded by voluntary contributions. Liberals are happy to give money to this, that, and the other cause, as long as it is other people's money. I call this "the liberal temptation." Conservatives and libertarians are more likely to acknowledge that they have a personal responsibility to freely contribute time or money to work toward the desired goal. There's a huge difference between compelling others to perform work you think is important and doing good deeds yourself.

Christians who happen to be political liberals are fond of citing scriptural verses exhorting believers to perform charitable deeds. Indeed, there are many such verses, and they mean what they say. But what the liberals invariably fail to see is that the Bible never indicates that it is the Christian's duty to compel others to do charitable works; rather, Christians themselves are expected to do those works. There is no charity by proxy in the Bible. True charity comes from an inner, spiritual impulsion, not from outward political compulsion. That is the essential difference between Caesar and Christ.

The liberal approach to poverty is also rendered problematical by their anti-capitalist, anti-business mentality. Liberals regard themselves as the good guys for initiating government programs to help Americans of modest means, while disdaining businessmen as selfish, less-than-moral beings who are engaged in the selfish and morally inferior pursuit of profits. This is an unduly harsh assessment of businessmen; in fact, it is spectacularly ignorant and perversely unfair. A person may not like the daily tussle of business or individual businesspersons who behave abusively, and they are fully justified in being repulsed by illegal conduct. However, there is a vital historical fact that anti-business liberals generally overlook: business' role in reducing poverty.

Throughout most of human history, the masses of human beings were wretchedly poor. Only in the last few centuries have large numbers of people climbed out of poverty. What has been the agent of such a fundamental change? Profit-seeking business. Since the dawn of the Industrial Revolution, business has lifted more people out of poverty than all the churches, charities, and government programs (national or multilateral—like the World Bank) combined. Look at the history of Great Britain, the United States, Japan, Hong Kong, Singapore, Chile, South Korea, and now China and India. Wherever you look, standards of living rise where business is allowed to flourish.