Quote:
Originally Posted by shinerbock
A) Still don't see the irony about the approach.
B) Ok.
C) I asked for your opinion, I think. If you don't want to give it, that's fine too. "Wealthfare" is a broad topic which is obviously subjective. I view entitlement programs a lot differently than I do tax breaks for people paying at 38%. Perhaps they're more comparable to government contracts, but I think that is a tenuous argument at best, which again, is extremely subjective.
|
A) Cool. I'll touch on that at the end of "C."
B)
C) "Wealthfare" actually isn't a subjective and broad topic. And it isn't opinion-based, as far as I'm concerned. This is a capitalist nation and the government is very active in keeping it that way, as well as keeping the haves and have nots distributed a certain way (regardless of who is in Presidential office and regardless of whether there is money allocated for social welfare programs). That's what many Conservatives are in favor of regardless of anything else.
I only mentioned this because you mentioned Conservatives not wanting to help those who may be irresponsibile and have a sense of entitlement. I find that ironic (not because of you but because a lot of Conservatives share this sentiment) because it ignores the fact that government assistance given to maintain the class distribution of society also results in irresponsibility and a sense of entitlement for some of the upper class. Being wealthy isn't the issue. Celebrating the social class divide and acting like only the recipients of welfare assistance can become irresponsible and feel unjustly entitled is the issue.