[Logophile]

Generally this is true, but in some cases it isn't. For example, the hundreds of mentally ill homeless we have wandering the streets of some of our big cities. The cost of maintaining these folks in an institution goes beyond the budget of the average church and voluntary association. Government is the only entity that has the millions of $ it costs to do it.

Not so. Private charities and religious groups can and do operate extensive charitable organizations, including hospitals and universities. For instance, I just heard a radio ad touting the Shriners' hospitals. They claim to spend a million dollars a day on burn care, at no charge to the patients. That is just one organization out of many.

Besides, government has so much money only because it has taken it at the point of a gun from productive citizens. Reduce the enormous burden of taxation, and these same citizens would be able to support all sorts of charitable efforts.

[A Ruckus of Dogs]

Some can certainly afford to do so, but there are not enough of them. There would not be a homeless problem otherwise. The mentally ill need to live in hospitals - they must be maintained by others permanently. It's not the same as helping someone who is temporarily on hard times get back on their feet.

The core problem is that medical care and maintenance (psychiatric, nursing home, etc) are astronomically expensive. Once this issue is resolved, you'll see the private sector do more.