Notice that Larry makes the same mistake that most non-Libertarians (including myself when I was a far-Left Liberal) make: He thinks of the government as some monolithic entity rather than it being made up of human beings. He doesn't understand that if he and millions of others are concerned about the less fortunate, it would be much more efficient for himself and those others to start their own voluntary charitable services rather than leaving it up to the inefficient forced monopoly of government to perform those services. He also believes the lie (which I did too) that there's a difference when a group of people calling themselves 'the government' forcibly takes money from you (through taxation) than when an individual (i.e., a robber) forcibly takes money from you. Trying to justify this difference with, "But the government is doing it for a good purpose, unlike a robber" doesn't work. It's not up to some other person(s) to decide what is "a good purpose"—and then force you to give your own money to it. It's your decision to determine what is "a good purpose" for which you want to donate your money. Of course, as I always like to concede, if you feel you want the government to take care of your charitable giving—fine, but I don't want the government to take care of my charitable giving. Please grant me the same concession.

[Thanks to Travis Holte]