02-24-2017, 12:34 PM
Quote:Your declaration and fact do not have to coexist.
Could you rewrite this in English, please?
Quote:Yes, there are many who do poorly on subsidies, and others who take advantage and excel.
What would "excel" mean in the context of a hypothesized situation where there was no work to be had? Etsy?
Quote:Then there are those who know the system and how to use it. Why are any of these variants unusual? Oh yeah, they aren't.
Who are you arguing with?
Quote:FWIW, my wife works in a Federally funded healthcare clinic, and the scammers are in evidence daily. So are the ones working hard to do well. The ones just hanging around waiting to die ... them too.
Again, this is almost a complete non sequiter. I never argued for or against the existence of "scammers", I pointed out that our existing social safety net has been evolving into something similar to what you have been proposing and the outcomes are not particularly good, as demonstrated by numerous articles linked to/posted in this thread. This whole question of whether or not someone of those people "should" be on disability or what have you is beside the point. The point is that they are, and that far from being a solution it seems to be part of the present problem, in the sense that it is not really improving their condition, not that they are "taking advantage" of the system.