You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

5
7

[–] Marble68 5 points 7 points (+12|-5) ago  (edited ago)

Not exactly.tax credits are not welfare since it is in relation to money the government wants to take, not give; and second because a tax break \ credit are mechanisms to stimulate activity that is empirically proven to have a benefit to economic activity holistically, and this vehicle of encouragement is more effective and efficient than if the government tried to do it itself.

Since the government produces nothing, it must take from someone to facilitate an action.

It's not the government's money.

Conflating temporary social assistance provided through seizure of property (in this case money) for non earners with highly effective taxation vehicles (none seizure) used to encourage specific activity, isn't rational.

It implies a sense of scarcity and the incorrect presumption that wealth is finite and that money is the property of the state. It completely forgets the idea of private property.

It's like that lunacy Warren spews about roads and companies. There is no 'rest of us', quite the opposite. The employees also pay for roads, especially the wealthy business owner who actually pays more for the road than a consumer. Never mind that property developers pay to build the roads and improvements in many cases in exchange for permits and approvals.

Some things, when boiled down into simple, sound bite taking points, become so removed from reality that they sound alien and insulated; devoid of critical thought or practicality.

Pardon the typos, written on phone

0
1

[–] whatthehelldamnguy 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago  (edited ago)

It doesn't matter if it is finite if you have no access to a means of production of wealth.

0
0

[–] Marble68 ago 

Everyone, absolutely everyone, has access to wealth creation. This is the realm of choices, not conspiracy. An example of someone denied access to schools, teachers, books, a library perhaps?

If this were true, the people who achieved success despite coming from impoverished background wouldn't exist.

I consider it idiocy when someone who has chosen to get facial tatoos complains about their 'access to wealth creation.'

Someone once told me they couldn't work because daycare wasssnt affordable, just like numerous others she knew. The thought of starting a daycare service to earn money was unacceptable to her because she wanted a different type of job.

The benefits provided to people are not meant to be considerable, merely adequate. We provide our citizens access to education so they are functional on their own. If citizens choose not to take full advantage of the access to educators and materials, that's no one's fault but theirs.

Show me a barista with a masters and I'll show you someone who chose to be there. Show me someone crushed by student loans and I'll show you someone who will sign a contract that's bad for them instead of working two jobs to pay their way through a small college.

Successful people are almost always merely more willing to be successful. Willing to cancel cable tv, not go to clubs, not to spend money frivolously, to save, to study, to sacrifice. They're more willing to do what someone else won't.

Too many people want to keep their social circles and circumstance yet achieve financial success. They want to be who their unsuccessful selves are with success.

Wrong. It doesn't work that way except in the rarest of occasions for most of us.

If you know how to read, leverage your public library. The information printed on a page is of the same value as information online.