undefined | Better HN

0 pointsburnished4y ago0 comments

> The problem is when policy transfers wealth from people who do work to people who don't.

Why is it that this line is brought up when it might be a poor person getting a hand out but never when it is a rich person being given a hand out? You'd think the focus would be on stopping the ultra-wealthy from draining the rest of society with their out-sized influence, not weighing the hearts of the poor against a feather.

0 comments

2 comments · 1 top-level

epicureanideal4y ago· 1 in thread

Oh I'm all for the rich not getting handouts either. I'm equally or more bothered by that.

Both have the effect of harming the professional, responsible, hard working, broader middle class.

And even hurting the professional, responsible, hard working, working poor. Because if you're working really hard for $10/hr and someone else is getting a handout, that means you have nothing extra to show for your efforts except exhaustion at the end of your day.

burnishedOP4y ago

Its clear to me that you don't really have an idea about the scales involved here, one, because you seem ambivalent about which group bothers you more (hint, it should be the people causing the most harm, no this isn't the poor people on assistance), and two because you seem to think that the working poor are typically making as much as $10/hr. Got some real "how much does a banana cost" vibes here.

To be less acrimonious and more specific, when the people that Jimmy Johns employs require public assistance to make ends meet, who do you accuse of accepting hand outs? If it is the people in poverty I think you've gotten tricked into forgetting the people with the power to change things.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse