It's fairly clear in this thread how various folks might answer (at least in concept) Oliver Twist's plea:
"Please, sir, I want some more"
One only needs to look at Dickens' own politics or the many other iterations of Scrooge in his works to understand Scrooge's leanings... It's not as if Scrooge is really a one-off character; Dickens portrayed the free market capitalist and businessman as greedy exploitative villain again and again. Try Hard Times. The Chimes. Oliver Twist.
Dickens was a staunch advocate of rights for and public support of the poor, the working class, artists. He believed education was a right that everyone should be afforded, he believed the poor should be provided with proper healthcare (yes, government-provided healthcare), was highly critical of capitalism, industrialists and of Parliament's Laissez-faire policies. He was a vocal critic of the Poor Law reforms because they didn't do much to help the poor, but rather exploited them. He supported worker's rights. All of this is Dickens 101. His views are known; he was very outspoken and active regarding social reform. He was a Social liberal and he was a radical. In his own time, he was criticized by many as being a socialist.
But to assign Scrooge as being a modern day liberal or conservative is absurdly simplistic, and in my opinion, surely undermines the true message in A Christmas Carol; ultimately, it's a humanist message, as most of Dickens' messages were. He took issue with society as a whole more than he did with either government or individuals.
If one really wants to jam Scrooge into their own particular modern belief system, so be it, but to point fingers saying "They [liberals or conservatives] are Scrooge!!" seems a complete waste of a wonderful story and discards a profound moral.
Scrooge was a "liberal": A Classical Liberal. Nothing like the modern liberal. Absolutely more aligned with the modern day conservative. The same? No. Different times. Also, Dickens was a liberal: A social liberal. Far more in-line with the modern liberal. The same? No. Different times. I'm certain he'd both align with and take issue with aspects of both sides of our modern political spectrum. Personally, I don't believe conservatives would care for him much.
He was a Unitarian. He accepted Darwin's Theory of evolution. He gave voice to the poor and he villainized businessmen and the comfortable (fat) middle class who exploited the poor and working class for greed. He gave hearts to prostitutes, allowed sympathy to thieves.
I believe his overall message was "do unto others..." whether that pertained to a government, a business, an organization, an individual.
Consider his statement when he started the radical paper The Daily News: "The principles advocated in The Daily News will be principles of progress and improvement; of education, civil and religious liberty, and equal legislation."
