I don't think providing welfare should outweigh a citizen's freedom to exercise his or her own judgement. If it's between those two, don't give welfare. You may

I don't think providing welfare should outweigh a citizen's freedom to exercise his or her own judgement. If it's between those two, don't give welfare. You may disagree, but this is a valid point of view. > you know who pays? Literally everyone. They end up on the social safety net collecting on our taxes. That is an imaginary scenario, not a real societal problem. I don't know of anyone collecting welfare because they lost their money in a crypto scheme, or a ponzi scheme, or bad investments. But I know of lots of people on welfare for other reasons. > Seems like a fair place to draw the line. This kind of language is just fluff to make your argument seem more appealing. I don't think it's a fair place to draw the line. > Now if your company is established enough to provide the required quarterly disclosures by SEC regulations, sweet. Anyone can invest their last penny. That is not accurate, the SEC blocks tons of legitimate stuff even from accredited investors, such as bitcoin ETFs. > Literally because not having them caused the great depression. As far as I am aware, this claim is 100% unsubstantiated. There are some good and bad theories about the great depression, but this isn't one I've heard before.