He's a libertarian. A real libertarian argument would be something like this: "People should not expect to receive unconditional support in the event of losing their job or suffering financial hardship. People should factor such risks into their financial planning. Any unconditional support structures will weaken the incentives to prudent financial planning and lead to massive and society-wide problems of systemic dependency and economic maladjustment."

Unfortunately the logic behind this argument is poorly understood and widely resisted. People who advance such arguments are typically perceived as arrogant, callous, and entitled. So I think Marc is indeed dodging the bullet by trying to softly suggest alternative ways to perceiving these issues, as well as trying to encourage a change in perspective to notoriously-oblivious Americans on how their polity actually stacks up in global terms.

>> People should factor such risks into their financial planning.

Easy for us to say, with our six-figure salaries and hot job market. How the heck is someone working a minimum wage job supposed to do any financial planning? How does a child without the sort of supportive environment I had escape the cycle of poverty?

Libertarianism is great if everyone is equally powerful. I'd be all for it if all people were equally educated, equally wealthy, and equally willing to respect others' property rights.

I work a minimum wage job. Save, save, and save some more. The only people I could reasonably blame for my position in life would be my parents, not wider society.

Maybe people should blame their parents more instead of vague shadowy corporations?